Ladies and gentlemen, Fred Heebe is your docent for this tour of the River Birch office building

Maybe next time, Unslabbed, but Fred had his people write the tour guide and it’s only right that he give this tour of the River Birch office building.  Sorry.

“After entering through the glass front door, there is an open doorway straight ahead and a stairwell on the left…”

 

“The plaintiffs would then suggest that the Court enter the elevator room and take the elevator to the third floor, again noting the building directory…On the third floor, outside the elevator, is a waiting area with two chairs and a small table.”

“From the reception desk, one can turn right and walk into an office, can turn down a long hallway to the left…

“There are also a number of black file cabinets in that office.”

“The plaintiffs suggest that the Court next walk back past the reception desk and turn down the hallway to the right. The Court will walk past a lunch room, and next to the lunch room door is a table with a stamp machine and several green folders…Further down that hallway is an area with three work cubicles. The first cubicle on the immediate left contains a copy and fax machine…”

“After leaving this office, the plaintiffs suggest the Court walk back down the hall towards the reception desk, past the lunchroom, and into the office straight ahead. This office contains the computer servers seized by the Government.”

Anyone see a directory? Stay tuned.

8 thoughts on “Ladies and gentlemen, Fred Heebe is your docent for this tour of the River Birch office building”

  1. well looking at the picture they have monitor switchers and the rest so one person has access to all servers and storage from a central point.

    If access is shared on the computers then all of the records are shared- I sure as hell don’t see any labels on the computers claiming that they are owned and operated by different business
    enterprises.

    It looks like they are all plugged into one Ethernet switch – so all information and network is shared.

    Just shows you what a lousey Attorney Greg Kennedy is an how crooked this investigastion has become.

    Kennedy is so stupid that he can not write a brief following the Justice Departments own procedures and manuals.

    http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/ssmanual/ssmanual2009.pdf

    (

  2. Very informative, “fifthcircuitjoke”. I also think that The SLABBED Nation should take a look at cases like United States v. Mittleman, 999 F.2d 440 (9th Cir. 1993) and cases cited therein. Certain “general rules” can be gleaned from Mittleman: (1) If the Government’s search and seizure of evidence exceeds the scope of the warrant, then evidence seized in violation of the warrant may be suppressed. (2) In cases where there is a “flagrant disregard” by the Government for the terms of the warrant, a District Court (that’s Berrigan) may suppress ALL of the evidence, including evidence that was not tainted by the violation. (3) While a law office is not immune from search, I don’t believe that any law office was included within the scope of the warrant in this case, although all I have to go on is what is in the pleadings and rulings posted on SLABBED. (4) “Thus, while we agree that special care should be taken when conducting a search of law offices, separate legal rules are not necessary for remedying such searches when they exceed the scope of the warrant.” I reiterate my belief that, while we cannot get inside Berrigan’s head, what I’m “seeing” does not bode well for the Government. I hope I’m wrong. Ashton O’Dwyer a/k/a “The WHITE Henry Glover”.

  3. I think I am safe in saying our legal observers think Kennedy did a shitty job with this whole search warrant affair, especially the brief he wrote after suit was filed but before Berrigan ruled. Then again he also is tasked in the matter of the political persecution of Ashton O’Dwyer, which may be taking too much of his time as evidenced by the weakness of his first brief.

    sop

  4. Here’s the Order: “IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Government immediately return all seized property of tenants other than River Birch, Inc. In the case of property shared between River Birch, Inc. and other tenants, the Government shall provide to petitioners copies of all documents it intends to retain by Monday, December 27, 2010. Likewise, the Government shall complete its

  5. This whole process smells and looks like both parties are insuring that the Case gets thrown out on appeal 5 years from now if anyone is convicted.

    Based on Heebe Senior being a Federal judge and still maintaining an office at the Court house. Every Judge in the Easter District should have recused themselves for potential conflict.

    You have to wonder how much Letten and company and the Relatives of Letten and his employees are getting paid under the table to make this legal mess.

    The Public is not stupid and they do not want their Judges looking like they fixed cases-
    If you think that anyone is going to believe the “FIX” was not in when the son of a Federal Judge and his politically corrected cronies are involved in public corruption and the son and his company have evidence thrown out on technicalities – then Berrigan and Letten
    are 2 of the biggest Legal whores in the Country.

  6. Tele, please check your most informative comment and see if my edit needs correction ( a couple of typos and taking the “not” out re: privileged documents).

    fifthcircuit makes some good points elsewhere about the need for all district judges, Berrigan included, to recuse. Any thoughts on that?

    It seems to me that the government has what it needs to defend the scope of the search. A while back State Farm tried to “bluff” the north MS court into allowing the company to search the documents taken in a similar raid on Dick Scruggs’ law firm. It didn’t work because the “standard procedure” is tight. That seems to be the case here as well.

    As I recall, the government search was based on a “tip” that records were being destroyed or spoiled – which indicates RB may have been expecting a visit – as do the pink sticky notes on the servers IMO.

  7. Nowdy, thanks for the correction. Yes, it’s right now and I again apologize for the sloppy self-proofreading on my part.

    As to the point about recusal, I’ve seen that noted before once or twice and have thought about it. I wasn’t sure if Judge Heebe was still truly on the bench, whether “senior status” meant he was retired, not at the court, or something else.

    He doesn’t have a courtroom, he doesn’t have a chambers…. but he does have a listed USDC-EDLA number and he is listed amongst their judges.

    http://www.laed.uscourts.gov/directories/judges.htm

    So yes I think the suggestion they all be recused is indeed a good one. How can there not be a conflict of interest, or the appearance of one, concerning the son of a fellow judge having the status of a party before them? Much less one with senior status whom they all likely know?

    What’s funny is what would have happened if Heebe Jr. had become USA? There would have been recusal motions and appeals all over the place based on that and those defendants would have had a good argument I think.

    There is definitely sympathy for Heebe amongst those who know the father and have fond feelings for him (and his family).

    As for the search, at first it seemed like Berrigan’s ruling was a disaster. But look at what the feds actually did pursuant to the order. Basically if it dealt with RB they kept it. Given that it seems really hard for the non-RB complainants to come back and say they had nothing to do with RB and somehow argue they were really distinct and indpendent entities. Three boxes out of 25 returned sounds like a pretty high responsiveness rate (presuming it’s true, but if it were not it would be simple enough for RB to ask for an in camera inspection…. which they have not).

    Also the whole argument about looking at the building index befuddles me. The feds attached a picture of the same index in their support. I look at it and all I see is 7 ro so entitities who apparently are just lodged together in one big office space, with no division, no separation of information, no use of separate servers or filing areas in separate rooms.

    Sorry, Birchers, no, putting a sticky note on a server and writing “Not Mine” on a file cabinet label does not win the day for you.
    It’s not like a wreath of garlic that wards off a vampire. [Pun intended].

    Hopefully Berrigan agrees, but who knows.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *