Mongols Legal Nightmare Continues

October 16, 2015

All Posts, News

Mongols Legal Nightmare Continues

Yesterday afternoon, just under the 30-day legal deadline, Assistant United States Attorney Christopher Brunwin gave notice that he was going to appeal the dismissal of a case called United States versus Mongols Nation.

A month ago, Federal District Judge David O. Carter dismissed the October 2013 indictment that was the basis for the Mongols Nation case and Brunwin is appealing that decision. Brunwin hasn’t yet filed a brief in the appeal. He is simply announcing that he thinks Carter’s 23 page ruling contains reversible legal errors. Notice of appeal in a federal court is usually made within ten days of a ruling.

The appeal will be made to the Ninth Circuit Court. Appeals to the Ninth Circuit are the slowest in the federal system. The average time between notice of appeal and a judgment is about 18 months. About 75 percent of all appeals to the Ninth are decided solely on the basis of briefs submitted by the opposing lawyers without legal argument. The Mongols are represented by Los Angeles attorneys Joe Yanny and Elliot H. Min. For the last seven years, Brunwin’s co-counsel in the crusade against the Mongols has been Stephen R. Welk. Welk is the head of the asset forfeiture division of the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Central District of California.

Appeals are expensive and the decision to appeal Carter’s dismissal would not have been made by either Brunwin or Welk. The decision to appeal would have been made by either Central District of California U.S. Attorney Eileen Decker or someone higher in the chain of command in the Justice Department. Decker is a former Los Angeles Deputy Mayor who assumed her current job three and a half months ago.

The Clothes Police

The most recent racketeering case against the Mongols began with a case called U.S. versus Cavazos et al. in October 2008. Brunwin indicted 79 members of the Mongols Motorcycle Club and the press release that announced the indictment contained this astounding passage:

“The racketeering indictment seeks the forfeiture of the trademarked ‘Mongols’ name, which is part of the ‘patch’ members wear on their motorcycle jackets.

“‘In addition to pursuing the criminal charges set forth in the indictment, for the first time ever, we are seeking to forfeit the intellectual property of a gang,’ said United States Attorney Thomas P. O’Brien. ‘The name “Mongols,” which is part of the gang’s “patch” that members wear on their motorcycle jackets, was trademarked by the gang. The indictment alleges that this trademark is subject to forfeiture. We have filed papers seeking a court order that will prevent gang members from using or displaying the name “Mongols.” If the court grants our request for this order, then if any law enforcement officer sees a Mongol wearing his patch, he will be authorized to stop that gang member and literally take the jacket right off his back.’”

Taking the jacket right off the backs of Mongols has become a quest for the Department of Justice. As has harassing the Mongols with legal proceedings.

Not Constitutional Issue

The constitutional issue of seizing the Mongols’ name and symbols seems well resolved. Unless the name and symbols pose a real threat to somebody other than Brunwin, Welk and Decker they are legal expressions of opinion. Brunwin, Welk and Decker know it so the government has been playing cute games around that issue for years.

The point of the recent, Mongols Nation case has always been to seize the Mongols patch and, in turn, the patches of every other motorcycle club. It is a recurring theme in the global war on motorcycle clubs. Various states in Australia, depending heavily on the coaching of “motorcycle gang experts” from the American Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives have actually banned the display of motorcycle club insignia. In Waco, Texas, a local prosecutor named Abel Reyna ordered the arrest of scores of people on the basis of the symbols they wore even though there was absolutely no proof that any of them had committed any crime.

In the Mongols Nation case, Brunwin and Welk sought a trial to prove that the Mongols Motorcycle Club was a criminal enterprise that used its insignia for criminal purposes. The government’s plan was to first, convict the club as a whole for racketeering and then start forfeiture proceedings to seize the club’s name and patch. At the risk of oversimplification, Carter didn’t allow the case to proceed because “nobody was going to jail.” He ruled that the government couldn’t indict the Mongols as an “enterprise” for racketeering without also indicting a group who can be actually punished. He wrote that the government had made “no meaningful distinction between the association Mongol Nation and the enterprise of the Mongols Gang,” So with nobody to punish, there could be no case. It was as if the government had indicted the stars or the sea.

But, after eight years, the government still won’t give up. The quest continues.

Sometime in the next month or so, Brunwin will write a brief that explains the errors in Judge Carter’s reasoning. Until then, the only thing that is certain is that the government does not intend to stop until some judge somewhere rules that police can actually detain you for your fashion choices and if the police don’t approve of them they can literally rip your clothes off.


55 Responses to “Mongols Legal Nightmare Continues”

  1. FF Says:

    In other news, Lois Lerner walks Scot free.


  2. Mad Dog Says:

    Shoe, arguing whether the Mongols are hypocritical or not misses the point. Whatever the merits of the Mongol’s territorial claims, the issue in this case is the conduct of the government. Are we going to sanction a government that tries to deny constitutional rights to its citizens? How are we going to conduct ourselves as a nation? On what principles do we allow our government to operate? Expediency? Ad hoc justice? That’s what we’re seeing in Waco and what we’ve increasingly been seeing around the country, and it makes me sick.

  3. Jim666 Says:

    Really ??? why would any of us think any different wast more tax dollars fighting our constitutional rights in federal court ???
    this goes for any and all organizations,
    fuck the lousy fucks

  4. Fuck off shoeless Says:

    Hey shoe fuck punk bitch!!.Soinds like a Mongol took your lady,that club is always themselves you either like it or try and do something about it!.To bad your brain is as small as your the balls u have.Cause if u have had more of both u would realize this has nothing to do with them but everything to do with our constitutional rights as citizens,today its there patch tommorow its your rainbow flag you and Ciccone and the iron order are so proud of!..Think about it dipshit

  5. Concho Says:

    Thought a lot about this but my first thought when I read rebel’s article was the Lisa Ling thing was shown too early or should not have been shown. Feds don’t like it when they feel they have been embarrassed. Same thing happened with Gotti, not to compare the club against the Gambinos.Feds could not stand losing and have them look bad in the media.just kept coming til they got what they wanted.Eight Damn years is a royal ass fucking. If the Fed’s lose this appeal can they just keep appealing? Following this since the beginning.Makes me sick.I am over six decades old grew up in Chicago. Used to crooked govt. This whole thing is disgusting. Not a PH just a long time solo rider.Respects to the Mongols for not giving up.


Leave a Reply