Forfeiture Games

April 26, 2019

All Posts, News

Forfeiture Games

The United States government, specifically an Assistant United States Attorney in Los Angeles named Steven R. Welk, continues to try to torture the rule of law in general and the Mongols Motorcycle Club in general.

Welk is the esteemed Chief of the Asset Forfeiture Section for the judicial Central District of California which includes San Luis Obispo. Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles and Orange Counties: Everything, excluding San Diego, that most people in all the world think of as Southern California; the places where Ross MacDonald set his world weary mysteries. It is a shame MacDonald never met Welk. It would be fun to read his descriptions. Welk is special. He is what Paulie Cicero  in Goodfellas would call “an earner.”

There is a lot of money out here on the fault line. Last year, according to a mass-mailed press release dated March 19, Welk shook $317,453,521 out of people’s pockets. Savor that number.

Oh Boy!

“Last year’s collections also include over $235 million worth of assets forfeited to the United States for crimes committed both here and abroad, including more than $100 million recovered as part of the ongoing 1MDB international kleptocracy investigation.” the release explains. “Prosecutors in the Asset Forfeiture Section also collected millions of dollars – including cash, numerous high-end and collectible vehicles, and residential properties – from a parking lot operator who defrauded the Veterans Administration. Forfeited assets – money and the proceeds of property that will be sold – are deposited into the Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Fund, and that money is used to compensate crime victims and fund a variety of law enforcement activities, including federal task forces and education initiatives.”

Oh boy! More task forces!

The bottom line is that Welk gets to do just about anything he wants. And yesterday he filed a document with Judge David O. Carter’s court titled GOVERNMENT’S SECOND AMENDED APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY ORDER OF FORFEITURE AGAINST DEFENDANT MONGOL NATION (COLLECTIVE MEMBERSHIP MARKS ONLY). Just like that. All capital letters.


Briefly, what this is all about, is Welk’s decade-long, ever evolving crusade to strip the Mongols Motorcycle Club of ownership of its insignia – the name and cartoonish emblem they use to tell the world – America, Mexico, Europe, Australia, Asia – who they are. There have been three court cases so far and Welk has lost them all but he still thinks he can diminish the Mongols and, by extension, all motorcycle clubs by diminishing their symbols. He thinks he can. He thinks he can so he keeps trying. The latest permutation of this restless fiasco is called United States versus Mongol Nation.

You don’t want to hear but I am going to tell you anyway.

Every Rico case must have a RICO enterprise and a RICO person. The RICO enterprise is something like the Gambino Family or the so-called Merlino Criminal Enterprise. And the RICO person is somebody like Salvatore “Sammy the Bull” Gravano. At least, it works like that in a world that has not been driven mad by pettifoggers.

But in this instance the RICO enterprise is the Mongols Motorcycle Club and the RICO person is “Mongol Nation.” You know like the RICO enterprise might be the Lakers and then the RICO person would be Laker Nation.

My Dog, My Sandwich

In December, a jury of misled layman decided there is a “distinctive” difference between the two names; that Mongol Nation is a real thing, not an abstraction; that it is guilty of crimes for which real, other people have previously been convicted; and that the best way to punish Mongol Nation is to take the Mongols Motorcycle Club’s patches away from the club’s members.

You’re right. That is stupid and unconstitutional. My dog knew that right off. When I told my dog about this she went “Rarf, rarf, harf, har, har, har. Arf roof, keefing me? Tharks the tuperdest farking fing hever! Now give me your sandwich.”

The jury was dumber than my dog. That’s how the law works. That’s the secret to most prosecutors’ success.”

The judge, on the other hand, may even be smarter than my dog. In January, Judge Carter said that stealing the Mongols insignia violated the Mongols Motorcycle Club members’ constitutional rights.

Never Say Die

Then came yesterday’s 28-page refusal by Welk to take no for an answer.

Here. You figure this out.

“By this application, the government requests that the Court enter the proposed Preliminary Order of Forfeiture (Collective Membership Marks) (“POF(Marks)”) lodged contemporaneously herewith, against defendant Mongol Nation (“Defendant”), prior to the sentencing hearing scheduled for May 17, 2019, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2 (“Rule 32.2”); 18 U.S.C. § 1963; the guilty verdict entered against Defendant on December 13, 2018 on Counts One and Two of the First Superseding Indictment (“FSI”); and the jury’s Special Verdict re Forfeiture against Defendant, entered on January 11, 2019. This is the government’s third request for a preliminary order of forfeiture (“POF”) in this case, but only the second such request relating to the three collective membership marks found by the jury to be subject to forfeiture.1 The second and instant requests follow the Court’s granting in part and denial in part of the government’s first such request (DN 354) in an order of February 28, 2019. DN 389 (the “February 28 Order”)

“The proposed POF(Marks) is narrowly tailored to carry into effect the mandatory forfeiture required by 18 U.S.C. § 1963 and the jury’s forfeiture verdict, while accommodating concerns articulated in the February 28 Order. The proposed order limits the forfeiture of Defendant’s rights and interests in the Marks to the very specific statutory and common law rights that grant Defendant the ability to exercise and enforce exclusive use of and control over the Marks. The POF(Marks) places no restraints or limitations on the display or use of the Marks by Defendant or its individual members. The effect of the POF(Marks), if entered, will simply extinguish Defendant’s statutory and common law rights to prevent others from using or displaying the Marks through legal process.

“The entry of the proposed POF(Marks) is requested pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1963(a) and (e), and Rule 32.2(b)(2)(A). This application is supported by Defendant’s conviction, the jury’s findings in the Special Verdict re Forfeiture that the Marks are subject to forfeiture, the matters set forth in the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, and any argument the Court may entertain in any hearing on this application.”

“In its first application (DN 354), the government sought a preliminary order of forfeiture applicable to any and all rights and interests associated with or appurtenant to three collective membership marks identified herein and in the POF(Marks) as the ‘Word Mark,’ the ‘Center Patch Image,’ and the ‘Combined Mark’ (collectively, the “Marks”). In its February 28 Order, this Court found that the forfeiture requested by the government would violate the First and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution.

“This amended request is designed to mitigate those constitutional concerns. Specifically, it is calculated to avoid any restriction or limitation on the rights of Defendant or its individual members to express their views or beliefs, or associate freely, as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. At the same time, the forfeiture requested here will deny Defendant the statutory and common law protections afforded to holders of collective membership marks who have not been convicted of using their marks in furtherance of a criminal racketeering offense. If the proposed POF(Marks) is entered, Defendant and its individual members will continue to enjoy their right to use and display the Marks in whatever lawful manner they choose, but will forfeit the privilege of being allowed to invoke the laws and judicial authority of the United States to prevent others from using and displaying the Marks. That is: they will lose only the legally enforceable rights conferred to them as holders of intellectual property. The government will seize no tangible property, however, and Defendant’s rights of expression will be unaffected.

“Neither Defendant, in its opposition to the government’s original application for preliminary order of forfeiture (DN 362), nor the Court, in its February 28 Order, suggested that the government had failed to establish the forfeitability of the Marks pursuant to Rule 32.2 or § 1963. Indeed, this Court’s March 29 entry of the POF (Tangible Property), without objection from Defendant, confirms that the government established its entitlement to the forfeiture ordered by the jury on statutory grounds. For the reasons explained below, the narrowly tailored forfeiture order requested by this application serves the important government interests sought to be secured by Congress in enacting the criminal forfeiture provisions of § 1963, while protecting the First and Eighth Amendment rights of Defendant and its individual members in the continued use and display of the Marks, and should be entered as part of Defendant’s sentence.”

Who Knows

It is not clear what is going to happen on May 17. Throughout most the Mongol Nation case, the club has been represented by Century City attorney Joseph Yanny. Last month, after Carter denied Welk’s last motion for forfeiture, Mongols Club Council Stephen P. “Bowtie” Stubbs sent Yanny a notice of his termination from the case. Attempts to reach Yanny by phone today were unsuccessful.

It is also not immediately apparent what Welk hopes to accomplish by gaining legal ownership of the Mongols’ marks. The goal all along has been to enable police to “rip the patches” off members backs. But Welk probably has something in mind. And this is a guy who earned his judicial district more than $300 million last year. So he can probably play this anyway he wants.



14 Responses to “Forfeiture Games”

  1. Pyrate Says:

    “The effect of the POF(Marks), if entered, will simply extinguish Defendant’s statutory and common law rights to prevent others from using or displaying the Marks through legal process.”

    It will eliminate the club’s control of the logos. ANYONE can then manufacture and wear the patchs, members or not, and the club cant stop them (through legal means). This is not incompatible with the jury’s verdict and the judges ruling about the 1st amendment right to assemble and identify with the patch.

  2. Phuquehed Says:

    Shove it up your cunt, Welk, you whiny, metrosexual panty-waist. Grow a pair of balls and learn to take it like a man and admit you lost and leave the people alone. You seem too fucking stupid to reaqlize you’re nothing but a government bully with deep pockets and no care for the Bill of Rights of this nation or any nation apparently.

    You’re a pussy of the sloppiest, most diseased nature. You wouldn’t know honor if it was bigfoot biting your fucking face off. You’re fucking pathetic loser and really should go test the warning label on a lawn and leaf bag.

  3. Shovel Says:

    It’s all about racism. Does anyone know why the original 13 started the Mongols? Because the Hells Angels didn’t want Mexicans. Does anyone know why the government wants to destroy the Mongols; the individual American citizens who patched in, their old ladies and kids, and the club itself? RACISM. Why can’t anyone else say it?

  4. Stoney Says:

    its obvious the prosecutors are going to keep coming for the Mongol patch until they can no longer afford to fight it. They hope that with endless money and time they will be able beat the Mongols into submission. Then they will go after everyone else’s patch after setting the predicate in case law.

    Fight on brothers

  5. Mark Says:

    Is there no stopping point to any of this by the government’s attorney as ordered by the court/s? I get this matter is more along the lines of a civil court matter, but is there a point where the deep pockets of the DOJ get shut down. Is there not, Equal Protection, under the law, Civil or Criminal? Take a criminal case, the DOJ attorney spends 1, 2 or even 3 million on the case, where the defendant has a court appointed lawyer and the lawyer has little in the way of funds to investigate and put on a defense. Why if we, The People have Equal Protection under the law, why can’t we see a running cost (spread sheet) of the government’s case and full cost involvement, all cost. Some poor soul gets $28,000 for their defense and the government is spending with all the government’s resources $750,000. Equal Justice, not.

  6. Stevo Says:

    In my country a welk is a sea snail that the poor of Londons East End used to have to eat when times were hard. They are slimy, rubbery and have little or no taste.


  7. anon Says:

    I swear to fucking Christ. In the era of “Me Too”- you’d think Welk would have learned- NO MEANS NO. Is this hound David O. Carter until he gives up on it like ol’ Otis Wright, so Welk can get a sweetheart to give him the answer he wants ?
    I read every sentence he wrote, and I swear to Christ… I’ve been to colletch with the colletch boys, I got me some sheepskin tiles(not condoms, condoms would be useful), I got me some credentials from colletch) I rode with a so called RICO PERSON, I wore out a few Evolution engine H-D’s. I might have even inhaled. I definitely did have sex with that woman, irregardless of what the definition of “IS”: “IS”. My problems with my throat occurred the same way Michael Douglas’s did, or at least that is what I maintain, even though when I sobered up- she definitely did not look like Catherine Zeta Jones- but it’s like a motorcycle, when you go down, all you can do is get back up again and try not to do it again.

    That said; all those things above considered: I probably got 3 good working brain cells and 4 bad ‘uns.

    And even with that ratio of working brain cells and firing synapses, I couldn’t draft anything that goddamn dumb as Welk did and expect Carter to react in any way other than he has before.

    So I assume this is like vexatious litigation, harass Carter until he passes the ball, and you keep harassing until you get the answer you want.

    I guess the Mongols MC RICO PERSON is being raped in this case- in the legal sense.

    So would it be unfair to say that Mr. Brunwin is a wannabe rapist ?

    Hmmm ?

    I guess Brunwin took the part where “Not everything repugnant is unconstitutional” a little too far… Rape is pretty repugnant.

    Cause he’s raping the Mongols MC, he’s raping the tax payer, and he’s raping our constitution.

    The endgame is to bankrupt the club and then every other MC.

    I wish it were as simple as changing the collective membership mark- it’s not. Either way, Welk or whoever comes up from being his street boss under him, that prick is gonna keep this up until the Supreme Court either stops it or the MC dies. When the MC dies, that’s the last of the “wee free men”. Just a heads up, though I’m just saying what anybody who’s ridden knows.

  8. Shovel Says:

    The Mongol Infantry Support hopes Welk puts on a Mongols patch.

  9. Mad Midget Says:

    Is it true that while he was in kindergarten Welk’s mother ran off with a Mongol?

  10. JustBob Says:

    Yes, Welk IS a cunt.

  11. Ipsick Says:

    This guy has more than a 4 hour hard on for the Mongols. His blue pill has given him visions of grandeur.

  12. gordo Says:

    Here we go again

    Persecution not prosecution

    Another sad day for the US constitution

  13. Paladin Says:

    So, Welk is getting even by filing an application that if granted will allow anyone to use or wear the Mongol’s marks without the fear of being sued. I hope that Judge Carter denies Welk’s application, based on the fact that Welk is a cunt.


  14. jrino Says:

    $300 + million extorsion. If I was a Mongol I would add a beard to the logo let this cock sucker take the ole logo and ride the new patch. However the constitutionality supports the free speech of all persons so this should not become precedent. Steven R, Welk is a tremendous example of government gone insane.

Leave a Reply