My Twitter Feed

March 29, 2024

Headlines:

No Time for Tuckerman -

Thursday, August 3, 2023

The Quitter Returns! -

Monday, March 21, 2022

Putting the goober in gubernatorial -

Friday, January 28, 2022

Militia Trial – The Verdicts are In

 

Schaeffer Cox in Fairbanks (2011)

After six weeks of listening to testimony, and weighing the evidence, the jury in the case of the United States v. Schaeffer Cox, Coleman Barney, and Lonnie Vernon has reached a decision in all but one of the charges against the three.

I entered the courtroom, after almost two weeks out of state. I’d been following the reports of the trial closely, and was glad to be able to be here for this important day. Schaeffer Cox looks ashen, and is wearing a charcoal grey suit jacket and white shirt, open at the collar. Coleman Barney’s brow is deeply furrowed, and he looks very nervous. Lonnie Vernon has a hang-dog look, and rests his head on his hand.

It is strange sitting in my seat and watching this moment. Other days in court have seemed either routine, or exciting. There were cases to be made, arguments, evidence… People had things to do. But today it is only the jury that has something to do. The rest of the court room just waits.

“It is Mr. Cox’s preference that the jury continues to deliberate,” says Nelson Traverso, Cox’s attorney. The jury had a question for the judge – saying that they were deadlocked on one charge, and didn’t know what to do.

Lonnie Vernon is still looking down, head in hand and somber. MJ Haden, his attorney is in the exact same position with the same expression, I notice.

Tim Dooley is leaning back in his chair. He looks tired. Much of Coleman Barney’s family is absent, but his parents are there.

After Traverso’s request that the jury continue to deliberate, there is a very long period of silence, lasting longer than a minute. Finally, Judge Robert Bryan speaks in his usual slow, thoughtful, gravelly tone.

“Well, it’s perhaps an art form to know when a jury is deadlocked. This jury has been out for basically 2 full days, and a little more. I have commented to people that this jury has been one of the most engaged, in a complex trial, that I’ve seen. They appear to have taken their job seriously and have worked hard during the trial. They have worked hard to understand the instructions, and the evidence. They appeared to me in the answers given in our short court appearance to be pretty firm in their conclusion that further deliberations would not be productive, and they appear to have only one charge that they have not agreed on. I have indicated privately to staff that it would not surprise me if they were hung on some counts, and it appears that is the case. It doesn’t come as a big surprise to me, in light of the events of the trial…

“I believe the best practice at this point, based on those considerations is to accept the verdicts that they have reached, and declare a mistrial on whatever it is they can’t agree on. That is my judgment.”

Then he asks that the jury be instructed to complete the verdict form as far as they are able. Until then, we will take a recess. The judge leaves the courtroom. The three defendants stay, as do most of those there to observe.

Coleman Barney looks at Schaeffer Cox, his lips pressed together, and raises his eyebrows, as if to say, “Well, this is it.” They talk quietly back and forth for a few moments.

There are lots of people here I don’t know. As the minutes wear on, the court room gets more and more full. Groups are chatting amongst themselves – some in serious tones, some in light-hearted chatter. All the while, the area behind the bar was solemn.

I realize how long I’ve been gone because in the almost two weeks I wasn’t here, all the attorneys, and most of the regulars all look like they have gotten some sun.

Cox sits looking down, the fingertips of one hand pressed against his forehead. His wife has just entered the room and stands in the second row, but he doesn’t know she is there. She speaks to someone, and he recognizes the sound of her voice and looks up. He looks glassy-eyed and they meet each others gaze. He smiles a sad, grateful smile at her, and she sends one back. They hold each others’ gaze for a long time.

Finally, the judge returns. And the jury files in. Normally, they look fairly happy and relaxed when they come back in to the court room, but today many of them look stoic, or downright sullen. Only a couple seem in good spirits.

The judge asks if he understands correctly that they have reached a verdict on all except one charge.

“Yes, Your Honor.”

“Will you hand the verdict form to the bailiff, please?”

A paper is handed to the bailiff, who in turn hands it to the judge.

Cox continues to stare at his wife.

“There are 21 verdicts here,” he announced, and proceeded to read through them one by one. Always the same tone and inflection – over and over.

“We the jury find Francis Schaeffer Cox guilty of conspiracy to possess unregistered silencers and/or destructive devices.”

“We the jury find Coleman Barney guilty of conspiracy to possess unregistered silencers and/or destructive devices.”

“We the jury find Lonnie Vernon guilty of conspiracy to possess unregistered silencers and/or destructive devices.”

And on he went.

Cox was found guilty of possession of unregistered destructive devices, but Coleman Barney was found not guilty of that charge.

Cox was found guilty on a string of charges that followed – possession of an unregistered silencer, possession of an unregistered machine gun, illegal possession of a machine gun, and making a silencer.

Cox and Barney were then found not guilty of carrying firearms during a crime of violence.

Then the same two were found guilty of possession of unregistered destructive devices in the form of a hornet’s nest round (rubber pellets) in conjunction with a 37mm launcher. Barney alone was found not guilty of another similar charge involving hornets’ nest rounds and 37mm launchers.

Then, the big one.

“We the jury find Francis Schaeffer Cox guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.”

In the passage of an instant, Cox went from ashen grey to fire engine red. His eyes grew wide, his chin went slack, and he began breathing shallow and fast. He looked completely stunned and bewildered. His eyes began frantically darting around the room as if expecting some kind of explanation, or answer for what had just been said to appear somewhere. He didn’t snap out of it for some time, and began to look more and more distraught.

Judge Bryan had continued on. Coleman Barney’s charge of conspiracy to commit murder was the charge that the jury could not decide. Lonnie Vernon was charged with the same, and found guilty.

The rest of the charges were read, but the room was busy absorbing the gravity and surprise of what had just happened. During the trial, it was noted by many in attendance that conspiracy law is “muddy” or “squishy” – that there was a lot of room for interpretation, that it was hard to convict. And yet, two of the three were charged with just that.

Then all three were found not guilty of carrying firearms during a crime of violence (conspiracy to commit murder).

And finally Cox was found guilty of solicitation to commit a crime of violence – the murder of an officer of the United States. This one hit him hard as well, although he had not even recovered from the previous news. He looks at his wife, and appears panicked and trapped – almost like someone who is about to run. He looks from face to face at each of the jurors with laser focus, and a look demanding some kind of answer.

Then the judge polls the jury one by one, asking them if what he has just read represents their findings, and if it represents the finding of the jury as a whole. He asks each one, and in turn they respond in the affirmative – some with confidence, some dispassionate, some who were obviously choked up with wet eyes. Cox licks his lips, and swallows hard staring at the jurors. None of them meet his gaze.

Lonnie Vernon is pushed back in his chair all the way against the wall, lips tight. Throughout the trial, he has been the most fatalistic about how his story would end. He looks sad, and the gravity of what has happened washes over him, but he is not shocked.

Cox still looks like he can’t believe this is happening. He pulls the microphone down to his mouth. A few seconds go by, and then he addresses the jury, “The prosecutors withheld evidence from you guys.” He sounds defeated, but like he wants to just say something.

“Mr. Cox… please,” the Judge said. And Cox never spoke again.

The judge then went on to talk about setting a day for sentencing, and Cox pressed his fingertips together and looked almost like he was in prayer. His wife in the gallery had made a hand gesture with elbows almost touching and palms pointed upward and out with fingers cupped.

It must wait 90 days, the judge explained, so sentencing was set for September 14.

Then Judge Bryan addresses the jury. “I’ve been at this a long time, as you know, and I communicated this to counsel. I do not recall a jury in a complicated case like this as engaged and involved, and paying attention, and trying to understand everything as the evidence came in. I have the highest regard for American juries and I want you to know that you have done your duties, and have done them well. Jury duty is one of the highest forms of citizenship, and you have served your country well by doing this job over the past many weeks.”

Cox listens to the judge, and continues to go through waves of disbelief, his chin quivering, his mouth contorted, and eyes getting red. At one point he looks pleadingly at his wife, and appears to mouth the words, “I don’t know.” He takes a Kleenex. Coleman Barney gives his attorney Tim Dooley a hug. The jury leaves the room for the final time, and three times the metallic zip of handcuffs is heard as the defendants are escorted from the courtroom.

After they are gone, Scheaffer Cox’s wife Marti, hugs Mae Barney, Coleman’s mother. They hug for a long time, each woman crying and wiping tears away.

I meander out of the courtroom, after all but a small group including Marti Cox, and Coleman Barney’s parents had gone.

A tired and somewhat dejected Tim Dooley stops ton talk to a small group of reporters. He is surprised that the conspiracy to commit murder charges stuck for two of the three defendants. “I didn’t see that winning,” he said. “It was a last-minute charge. They did it after we refused to take a deal. And they can do that… the state guys can’t do that.” All state charges against the defendants had been dropped due to the privacy clause in the Alaska Constitution. The methods used in surveillance and evidence collection were permitted under federal law, but not under state law.

The government had offered Barney a plea deal of 5-10 years to be decided by a judge, or a straight 7 years. He refused the deal, and only after that did the government levy the conspiracy to commit murder charge, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. Dooley says he doesn’t regret the decision to reject the plea. He also said that he will be appealing the charge that Barney was found guilty of possession of unregistered destructive devices in the form of a hornet’s nest round (rubber pellets) in conjunction with a 37mm launcher. “That’s for sure,” he said, “but I can’t say anything else.” That charge carries a sentence of up to 10 years.

The combination of the 37mm launcher and a hornets’ nest are illegal, though each is legal separately. Dooley pointed out that the primary customers for those items in combination are the Department of Fish & Game, and the prison system. “They aren’t convicting them for that,” he said. “And they are not exempt, so they should be prosecuting every one of those guys.”

He indicated that he thought both Lonnie Vernon’s counsel and he himself had done as much as they could do. He was glad Barney took the stand in his own defense, and called him an “impressive witness.” The verdicts had left him “pretty devastated,” Dooley went on. “He thinks about letting other people down, not about himself.”

Rachel Barney, Coleman’s wife who was not in court today is in Fairbanks taking care of the kids, Dooley explained. The attorneys will also request that the three be sent back to Fairbanks while they await sentencing. All three have been in Anchorage since Christmas.

“I don’t think I’ve ever been as blue about a verdict as I am about this one,” Dooley said quietly.

Barney didn’t know what was going on with Mr. Cox, he told the reporters. Much of what Cox was up to, Barney only learned about when they were both in jail. “You never really know who you’re friends with. Think of your own kids – you think you know them.”

Much of the case is just accusations, he asserted, and many of the things that were said, like wanting judges to be hanged, came from Bill Fulton, the FBI informant. JR Olson, the other informant didn’t escape Dooley’s consternation either. Both of them made claims that were unsubstantiated, and made accusations that weren’t proved, he said.

A reporter asked Dooley, in light of the way this case went, if you are someone like the defendants, how do you keep from getting in trouble? Dooley thought for a moment. “Shut up and don’t express your opinion. About anything. Ever… In some ways, these guys are right. The government has gone too far… If this is what we’re doing, we’ve got a lot of people to lock up in Alaska.”

Federal Prosecutor Steve Skrocki came around the corner. Dooley had picked up his papers and looked ready to move on. “We’ll have to chat about our next trial,” he said good-naturedly as he handed the reporters over to the prosecution.

He was asked in a few different ways if he was happy with the decision, and paused an equal number of times before explaining that he didn’t feel that was the way to look at it. He was measured, and took the whole thing seriously. It didn’t appear to be a high-five moment of victory. “The jury had 900 exhibits, and 75 witnesses, and 6 weeks of trial. And they returned a verdict that, to them, fit the evidence,” he said. “We certainly accept their verdict.”

When asked about the two semi-notorious informants, and how they were used, he explained, “That’s been part of the investigative process for a long time, but in an investigation setting like this, you never just walk someone in without triangulating, and firmly asserting the things they say are true.” The informants’ testimony was backed up by audio, video, or witness corroboration, he said.

On the issue of whether informant Bill Fulton will get paid (which was a complaint of his when he took the witness stand), Skrocki said, “You’ll have to ask the FBI.”

It was a fairly universal opinion that the prosecution had done a good job in their presentation. The convictions certainly supported the assessment. “You do have to give the jury an idea of the context about what they’re talking about,” Skrocki said. You’ve got to take a step back and look at it from a juror’s perspective. It’s one thing to have a machine gun, but why? It’s one thing to have a bunch of people show up at KJNP, but another to ask why.”

Will Coleman Barney be retried on conspiracy to commit murder, since this jury was unable to reach a decision? The US Attorney will be looking at that, along with the management staff over the next couple of days, Skrocki said.

And although Barney was a strong witness in his own defense, his character witnesses spoke well of him, and he has a reputation in his community as a good businessman, a church goer, a father, and husband, “the double life aspect comes into play,” said Skrocki.

Marti Cox, with Bill and Mae Barney finally come out of the courtroom and walk past the reporters. They didn’t want to talk. “Not now,” said Bill Barney. It was still too new.

Schaeffer Cox is different than your typical Fairbanks survivalist, libertarian type because of his political beliefs, and the very clear pressure Cox was putting on the judicial system in Fairbanks, Skrocki explained. He was seeking an upwelling of support, and it was not a question of IF something was going to happen, but rather when the militia would be strong enough to make it happen. “We’re not ready to do this, but when we are… we will,” he characterized the militia’s plan.

“I don’t think strong anti-government beliefs are a new comment on the radar screen,” he went on, talking about the militia’s take on events. “But the concern of a collapse of government is something that is also not new – The Great Depression, the dust bowl, Viet Nam. Right now there seems to be an uptake in that sentiment.”

So what’s the point at which the government begins to investigate? Skrocki said he can’t comment on future investigations.

“People think of it as a first amendment issue,” Skrocki said, reflecting the feelings of Dooley just a few minutes before. “But it’s deterrence. That’s of primary importance, so nobody gets killed. The Vernons wrote goodbye letters.”

And so there will be at least one appeal, and the sentencing has yet to happen. But, for the most part, the trial has come to an end. It leaves us to wonder many things. When does a first amendment right cross the line, and become a legitimate threat? When does bluster and bravado become a predictor of things to come? When is a plan really a plan?

And what of the role of government informants? When are they a legitimate resource by which future criminals are coaxed out from the shadows and stopped before they can do real harm, and when are the informants themselves the cause of the problem? When do they not only fan the flames, but actually create the spark? How long do we wait before intervening, and when is premature intervention no more than prosecuting someone for a crime we believe they will commit some time in the future?

As easy and appealing as it is to see this (or any) case in black and white terms, the reality is that it can’t be done. Time and place, for instance, factor heavily in how we treat these cases. Our founding fathers took up arms against their own government because they believed it to be tyrannical. They risked life and limb, and their families’ safety for an ideal that was no more than a vision in their own minds, regardless of how unlikely it seemed that it could be brought to fruition. If Schaeffer Cox did not live in 21st Century Alaska, but in 18th Century Pennsylvania, or Massachussetts, he might have fit right in. And if Samuel Adams were plucked from those days and put in North Pole, Alaska in 2012, he might be looking at life in prison right about now.

Charismatic leaders are not like the rest of us, and their brains operate in a different way – a dash of narcissism perhaps, some delusions of grandeur, paranoia… It’s all a pattern we’ve seen before if we study history. Many people glibly say they’re “whack jobs.” Others call them visionaries. Still others see things in shades of grey, in terms of time, place, culture, politics, philosophy, and how ripe and ready a society is to take a leap from their comfort zone, and risk safety and personal security for something different.

For these three men, those factors converged in what we saw today. A jury of their peers didn’t see the world the way they did, and after weighing their words and actions, came to the conclusion that deterrence was better than the risk of letting them go.

I wonder to myself what these three will think about all this while they are in prison.  They will certainly be surrounded by many people who have a bone to pick with the government. And I wonder how many sovereign citizens will emerge from the walls in which Schaeffer Cox is housed.

Comments

comments

Comments
30 Responses to “Militia Trial – The Verdicts are In”
  1. observer says:

    The Anchorage Daily News and Alaska Dispatch have just reported the following. The prosecution has submitted a motion to dismiss the Conspiracy to Murder charge for Coleman Barney. One ADN reader had this to say of Barney, “Coleman Barney clearly demonstrated during the trial that he was a restraining force on Schaeffer Cox, and was slowly trying to extricate himself from a militia which had gone in a different direction than he had originally anticipated. He should be sentenced to no more than time already served, plus a couple of years probation. Barney will be forever remembered as a standup guy who refused to roll over on his mates in exchange for a few scooby snacks from the prosecution.”

    Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2012/06/22/2516224/prosecutors-move-to-dismiss-murder.html#storylink=cpy

  2. Chelsea Barney says:

    Thank you so much Jeanne for making the courtroom proceedings available to those of us that are not able to be there in person. Is there any chance you will go back to courtroom documents to catch us up on the two weeks of defense testimony you were gone? Appreciate your taste and judgment and voice during this trial, especially the closing remarks describing Schaeffer.

  3. smithcorp says:

    Been following this with great interest from Australia, reading your trial reports – got a surprise that Cox looks like a 12-year old boy!

  4. Frank_Zappa says:

    What I can not get my mind around and would like to understand is why Schaeffer (boisterous “tough guy” wanna-be “revolutionary” on steroids) and Lonnie (soon to also be on trial along with his bride for decades of tax evasion) get handed a guilty verdict for the most serious offense of murder conspiracy and Coleman all around “hard working family man” according to his character witnesses does not?

    I think Coleman took the stand in his own defense as did Schaeffer and Lonnie did not.

    What does that tell us and what did the Jury “hear” and “see”? Did they “like” or empathize with Coleman but thought Schaffer was a wise ass and Lonnie goes the way of Schaeffer simply because he did not testify on his own behalf?

    The internal pecking order had the hierarchy with Schaeffer at the helm of their tree fort club, Coleman “second” in command and Lonnie as a “foot soldier” and from what I read they all were very aware of the “conspiracy” just talk or not.

    Everyone, including the judge is complimenting the jury for their judicious work even though they hung on the conspiracy to commit murder charge with Coleman.

    Is the federal conspiracy to commit murder statute that vague (I do believe this charge was added after this trio of misfits refused to accept a plea on the lesser charges and go to trial) as to seemingly have a subjective standard where all parties to a “conspiracy” are not only judged by their knowledge of the conspiracy but also the “speculation” as to whether they would actually carry through given the “opportunity”?

    I do not see how it is logically possible from what I have read (I was not at the trial) how Coleman walks on the most serious charge while his “comrades” go down on it, other than to speculate that the one or more of the jury members simply thought Coleman would not have pulled the “conspiracy trigger” even though he was aware of “2 for 1” while his fellow “comrades” would have in the juries mind?

    Is this conspiracy to commit murder statute that vague and if so are Schaffer and Lonnie going away for life while Coleman emerges in a decade or so for his convictions?

    The prosecutor says he and the Justice Department will contemplate bringing the conspiracy to commit murder charge again at a new trial against Coleman. If they do not I would have to speculate (unless I get some new information) that they feel “lucky” to have had it stick to Schaeffer and Lonnie. I find it beyond logical belief that the prosecutor if certain of the conspiracy to commit murder change in the first place would not have been more attainment in his press statements about bringing Coleman to trial on the hung charge against him again.

    And just to speculate, just because I can and will and these gentlemans view of God and Jesus seem to be a pillar of their belief systems, I wonder if the jury had a lone Mormon or two and no Baptists?

    These three foolish and angry souls certainly will have plenty of time to think about their grand paranoias and what could have and should have been a more productive use of their political grievances through more appropriate forums such as Schaeffer facing his “failure to notify” of carrying concealed before what I am sure would have been a sympathetic jury in Fairbanks and instead of seeing “G-men” behind every tree, perhaps writing more and speaking more. They could have even started a new sect of Christianity merging Mormon, Baptist, and “sovereign citizen”. Who knows where there imagination could have taken them if they did not fall down the rabbit hole of Guns and God.

    It might have also been a wise idea for their “recreational outlet and gun hobby” to just work a few extra hours overtime and “legally” obtain the machine gun and silencers and just pay the class three weapons tax and register their names on that list. Seems in their minds eye they on whatever that list is already.

    Please do post up the entire court transcript so us internet gallery gawkers can read about all the testimony that did not make it through the press filter while you were away and all that you were not able to keep up with.

    Would have been most intetesting to get the detail of your on the fly live transcript reporting while the defense presented their case.

    You all best be safe out there and don’t forget Don is our lone representative in the United States House of Representatives and our dear former Governor Sarah, would sincerely like to be Queen one day.

    Gary Johnson 2012!

    Give peace a chance and let the yahoos on the left and right stop trying to out-do themselves with the most “acceptable” and “polished” Plutocrate.

    We are all in this together. 😉

  5. Beaglemom says:

    Thank you, AKM, for covering these merged trials for all of us and for your detailed description of the reading of the verdicts. Good job, jury, your work shows that the system does work.

    i disagree, however, with the statement that Schaeffer Cox would have been a hero during the Revolution. I think the Revolutionary War leaders would have noticed how basically crazy he is and said, “hanks, but no thanks.” He really does not understand anything about government, local or national, or he understands are good guys/bad guys from video games. Anyone who disagrees with him is the bad guy. i would never want to be around him especially if he’s armed.

    The jury obviously took the whole matter seriously and came to their verdicts carefully. I’m glad that they were not fooled by the “good Christian men” approach of some of the witnesses, who should have known better.

  6. Motorhead says:

    Jeanne,
    This finale of your trial reportage was the most brilliant chapter. I read this post as if I were reading (and savoring) the final chapter of your best-selling novel… only this was a grand and gripping non-fiction. Please keep on with your writing … this is a gift to share with us all.
    I am so happy to have met you up at the Christmas soiree in D’s house at the top of the hill in E.R. year before last. It has been truly a pleasure to follow your reporting and analysis of events.

    By the way, during and after the Cox trial, I have been so irritated by the whiners on local talk radio about how the Gub’mit did poor Schaeffer wrong by investigating and taking him to trial… don’t we remember the nation-wide media hew and cry after 11 Sep 11: “Oh, why did the Government FAIL TO CONNECT THE DOTS?!!!” Here is an example of dilligent and timely puzzle-working, which may well have saved some lives, even young Cox’s.

  7. junoakliberal says:

    Thanks for the wrap up AKM and thanks to the jury for their hard work on a difficult, involved case!

  8. AKMagpie says:

    Once again, a great job of catching the sense of the courtroom. I don’t think that stick figures are needed, it was a somber moment. The trio that never grew out of the pre-adolescent game of “King of the Hill” and lived it as a video game in their heads, never realizing that it was real life they were living. Sad. There seems to be a lot of that going around the GOP/Romney camps what with Romney vowing that he would attack Iran. They all need to read history and send their own relatives into any war they start.

  9. slipstream says:

    Awww, zyx, c’mon over this weekend and I will take you to breakfast at Denny’s.

    Sausage! Bacon! Sausage wrapped in bacon covered with syrup! Pure genius on a plate!

    And a dash of tabasco!

    • zyxomma says:

      Of course, my dear friend slipstream knows I’ve been vegan for decades. Sausage wrapped in bacon covered with syrup, indeed. Topped by a poached egg, perhaps? Only the Tabasco sounds any good …

  10. mike from iowa says:

    since no one mentioned appeals for the three convicts,let me make a guess as to when their attorneys will start grumbling about prosecutorial misconduct,which always seems to be avenue for rwnj to escape justice. i’m guessing this will come up at the latest when sentences are handed down. i doubt if cox can keep his pie hole shut that long and will probably demand free air time to rouse the rabble. i wonder if any federal officials will be kidnapped while he is in jail?

  11. Insightful stuff, AKM, as usual. Congratulations on a fine body of reportage.

    By all indications, the jury worked very hard in these three cases. To me, that matters as much or more as anything else.

    /WC

  12. Joanne says:

    I wonder if it has occurred to Cox that “you reap what you sow”.

  13. John says:

    Excellent report.

  14. marlys says:

    Thank you Jury, thank you AKM!

  15. Wallflower says:

    Jeanne — your reporting on this has been fascinating on many levels. I used to work for child protective services and I got chills when I read the sections about their “concerns” over the CPS worker who was involved in the case. CPS workers are often targeted by people like this. There are so many concepts here — the idea that you can buy two perfectly legal items, but in combination they’re illegal; the use of informants, free speech versus terrorism… a very rich topic. Thank you for your work. I’m glad you went to Netroots but I’m sorry I didn’t get to read your take on the final two weeks of the trial.

  16. COalmostNative says:

    Thanks, also- too. Ditto.

    While dangerous conspiracy theorists and militia groups have existed since the beginnings of our country, the election of Obama- a black man and someone directly opposite of how they see themselves- has caused a toxic eruption of hate and bigotry. I think when they see offensive displays by the Republican Party, like the “Obama Library” at the Montana Convention, and there is little public condemnation by the GOP- they feel their beliefs and actions are justified.

    Scary and sad.

  17. avahome says:

    Thank you Jane…. We all must remember that the only person we can control is ourselves. God Bless America!

  18. Molly says:

    Thanks for the report, AKM.

    I think, much like a husband who hires an undercover police detective to murder his wife, and is caught in the conspiracy but there is no actual murder–the malice–the criminal intent; the disregard for human live that is demonstrated–must result in a loss of freedom for the protection of society (and for the wife in particular).

    I think the FBI/Dropzone Bill did a good thing here; they caught the seditious criminals in the act of conspiracy to commit violence, and nobody actually got hurt.

    Any buzz on possible sentence lengths?

  19. mike from iowa says:

    what no artistic rendition of sc stick figure facing a firing squad at dawn? no gallows humor? without stick figures your reporting is incomplete and i’m sorely disappointed in you must be jet lag.

    • Jeanne Devon says:

      This one didn’t seem to call for the stick figures. I can’t explain it. I thought about it, but I just didn’t have it in me.

    • human in training says:

      @ mike:
      i, too, have thoroughly enjoyed jeanne’s stick figures in the previous reports…..however, the addition of ‘gallows humor’ or ‘stick figures facing a firing squad at dawn’ to this article would’ve been in very poor taste, and i imagine she concurs — there’s nothing funny about families being torn apart, regardless of who and what caused it or whether or not it is justified…..

      though i agree with the verdicts and am not upset to see that this man (mr. cox) will spend a long time behind bars, i still feel sadness and sympathy for him and his loved ones when i read about how shocked and scared he seemed at hearing the conspiracy to murder verdict, how he looked to his wife and the jury — and obviously some of the teary-eyed jurors (the very ones that laid down said guilty verdict) felt this same way…..

      no, there’s nothing humorous here, mike — just a couple of torn up families and some young children that won’t grow up with their loving (if nutty and potentially dangerous) pop…..even if this is the best thing for them and us, it is still anything but funny.

      • MomForLiberty says:

        Thank you Human in Training. I’d say by your compassionate words you are more human than many other commenter’s to this and other related articles.

        While Mudflats has done wonderful in her reporting she still was not able to cover the defense and I know people would have had a more complete picture had she had that opportunity. While our justice system is better than many other places it is still based on who is better at getting the truth out or keeping the truth hidden and who can argue their point best in front of only 12 people. I’d like to know how the 12 would have ruled on some charges had they been privy to certain arguments the prosecution and defense had regarding definitions given to them.

  20. Leota2 says:

    Thanks for the wrap up AKM.

    In this time and place Cox became unhinged because it was easier to think the country was going to fall apart because the man in the WH did not look like him. Never mind that it was financially destroyed by a previous administration that Cox most likely supported. But in his and his enablers paranoia, the government was coming to take their beloved guns (some which the law forbade that they have), destroy their rights–which they claimed, but refused to accept the responsibilities and limitations of those rights. So— their out was plotting to kill judges and troopers?

    Militias have exploded in numbers since 2008. There is no math, just a sad ugly fact. I have no sympathy for Cox.
    And that he seemed shocked at his fate is testament to how far removed he is from a decent society.

  21. neo says:

    Thanks Jeanne, excellent write up. Have you rested up from your last trip?

  22. slipstream says:

    But . . . but . . . but in the trial at Denny’s they were found not guilty. And everybody enjoyed that Grand Slam breakfast. You gotta admit, that Grand Slam breakfast is really good.

    • zyxomma says:

      One can only conclude that at Denny’s they were found not guilty by a jury of their sycophants, not a jury of their peers. I do not have to admit that the Grand Slam breakfast is really good; I read the menu online and think it’s really awful.

      Thanks, AKM, for the reporting, with or without stick figures. I’m sure you’ll be back for sentencing day, and look forward to it.

    • bubbles says:

      i want a grand slam breakfast! i would find myself not guilty neither.

  23. Alaska Pi says:

    thank you AKM.
    I’m glad you were there today.