CA - Mongols Thought Experiment

OFF THE WIRE
agingrebel.com
Welk and Co. are many things, but it would be a mistake to believe them stupid. Welk and his crew are well aware of all that Kulik writes about in the article Rebel has linked to. Unless Yanny and Co. are working pro bono, the cost of this fiasco to the Mongols MC will be (if it already isn’t) absolutely staggering and that’s the government’s real goal here. This is a textbook example of what Rebel refers to as “extra Judicial punishment”.

PALADIN

The United States versus Mongol Nation case has quickly devolved into a kind of thought experiment for lawyers.

Over the last couple of weeks many distinguished trademark attorneys who have never gotten around to reading the indictment have weighed in on the subject and they have all missed the point. The importance of the case has never been about trademark law but, rather, the absurdity to which our government has stooped to create a phony problem (the motorcycle gang problem) and turn it into a make works project for public employees.

Nevertheless, some of the trademark lawyers’ comments are thought provoking and the best so far are in an article by Tom Kulik published today on the Above The Law newsite. Kulik is an intellectual property attorney and a partner in the Dallas law firm Scheef & Stone. The points he raises aren’t original except, possibly, to him and the general public. They have been raised by the previous Mongols attorneys George L. Steele and Bob Bernstein and by current lawyer Joe Yanny but they remain unheard except by people without some connection to the case.

Intellectual Property

Kulik is smart enough to notice that, “unlike tangible assets, intellectual property involves inchoate rights that are simply not conducive to” criminal forfeiture. (It may bear repeating that the Mongols marks are not trademarks but “collective membership marks.”)

One of his obvious points is that: “Taking the Trademark Will Not Take Out the Club. The underlying rationale proffered by the federal government here is that the forfeiture of this trademark will ultimately give the federal government the ability to dismantle the club by forcing removal of the logo from the club member’s jackets and other property and destroying their ‘identity.’” But, “what is to prevent them from rebranding?”

The rebranding doesn’t have to be major. In fact the long established Bandidos Motorcycle Club changed its logogram a few years ago to differentiate itself from Bandidos in Europe and Australia.

Secondly, Kulik argues, “If the federal government controls the trademark, it seems clear that they will not be licensing the trademark back to the Mongol Nation (or another motorcycle club or anyone else) anytime soon. Without use in commerce, the trademark will go abandoned and trademark rights will cease. Unlike real property or monies seized that can be sold or otherwise allocated to different uses, respectively, trademarks cannot be so easily converted in the present case because it requires the transfer of the goodwill behind the business as well. No matter the reasons proffered for the forfeiture, the net effect of the criminal forfeiture would be to seize a legal asset and destroy it in the process.”

Finally, “Taking the Trademark Creates an Enforcement Nightmare.”

Everybody doesn’t have to read Kulik’s article but if you are reading this now and you are a lawyer or a journalist you probably should. You can find it here.

NCOM Biker Newsbytes

OFF THE WIRE

THE AIM/NCOM MOTORCYCLE E-NEWS SERVICE is brought to you by Aid to Injured Motorcyclists (A.I.M.) and the National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM), and is sponsored by the Law Offices of Richard M. Lester. If you’ve been involved in any kind of accident, call us at 1-(800) ON-A-BIKE or visit www.ON-A-BIKE.com.

NCOM BIKER NEWSBYTES

Compiled & Edited by Bill Bish,

National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM)

U.S. SENATE TAKES A STAND AGAINST POLICE PROFILING OF MOTORCYCLISTS

The United States Senate has approved the Motorcycle Profiling Resolution (Senate Resolution 154) without amendment by unanimous consent on Dec 11, addressing concerns of motorcyclists across the country regarding law enforcement discriminating against bikers in traffic stops, citations and arrests.

This bipartisan and bicameral resolution (H.Res. 318 companion in the House) could provide a national solution to the discriminatory profiling of motorcyclists over mode of transportation or style of dress in enforcing the law.  Several states have considered bills to prohibit police from profiling motorcyclists, and Washington became the first state to pass such an anti-profiling law in 2011, followed by Maryland in 2016.

The two companion measures in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, which are nonbinding and do not have the force of law, seek to curb profiling of motorcycle riders at the federal level by “Promoting awareness of motorcycle profiling and encouraging collaboration and communication with the motorcycle community and law enforcement officials to prevent instances of profiling.”

S.Res. 154 and H.Res. 318 also “urges State law enforcement officials to include statements condemning motorcycle profiling in written policies and training materials.”

U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) spearheaded the measure in the Senate, and recently tweeted; “Pleased the Senate passed S.Res. 154 to encourage states to take steps to prevent profiling of #motorcycle riders. Hopefully this will lead to more efforts to raise awareness of and address motorcycle profiling.”

As defined by the Congressional resolutions, “motorcycle profiling” means “the illegal use of the fact that a person rides a motorcycle or wears motorcycle related apparel as a factor in deciding to stop and question, take enforcement action, arrest, or search a person or vehicle with or without legal basis under the Constitution of the United States.”

Concerned riders are now urged to contact their Congressional delegations in the U.S. House of Representatives and encourage them to join their Senate colleagues by likewise passing House Resolution 318.

GOVERNMENT WINS FIRST ROUND IN TRIAL TO SEIZE MONGOLS PATCH

For over a decade, federal law enforcement authorities have been testing a unique legal tactic to take down the Mongols Motorcycle Club by seizing their trademarked logo under asset forfeiture laws, and now a federal jury in Santa Ana, California has found the Mongols guilty of racketeering and conspiracy, setting up a second phase of the trial during which the government will seek to seize control of the club’s “intellectual property” and thereby ban members from wearing their unifying “colors” or patches.

Federal prosecutors will ask the judge to fine the Mongol Nation -- the West Covina, CA entity that legally owns the club trademark -- and order it to forfeit rights to the identifying logo worn on the bikers’ vests.

Since the case is focused on the Mongols organization, no specific individuals are facing jail or prison time, but the government’s attempt to defrock club members is aimed at dismantling the club by destroying their identity and thus its allure.

During the five-week trial that ended Thursday, December 13, 2018 prosecutors testified that the Mongols were a violent criminal enterprise.  According to the Associated Press, in finding the Mongols guilty of racketeering, jurors decided that the motorcycle club itself is a criminal organization.

The Mongols have denied that they are a criminal enterprise, arguing that the organization itself isn’t responsible for crimes committed by individual members or in self-defense.

Defense attorney Joseph A. Yanny argued that individual club members may have committed criminal acts but the club is blameless and kicks out members under a “zero-tolerance” policy for such activity.

“They won the battle, but they did not win the war,” said David Santillan, the current president of the Mongols, said of the government after the jury verdict.

In 2008, dozens of members were charged with racketeering based on an investigation in which agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives infiltrated the club, and a judge ruled that they should forfeit the Mongols trademark but later reversed the decision.  The new case was filed in 2013, and it was thrown out two years later by U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, but he was overruled on appeal.

Now, the same jury will return to court Jan. 8, as the focus of the trial shifts to potential seizures from the Mongols.  Judge Carter, who is presiding over the trial, will make the final ruling on exactly what will be seized.  If the judge ultimately approves the seizure of the trademark, he would also determine exactly what the government could do with it, including whether they could literally take the Mongols jackets off members' backs.

Motorcycle clubs across the country are watching this test case closely.  “They take our patch,” Santillan told the New York Times, “and then they take all the clubs’ patches.”

NCOM CONVENTION TO ADDRESS BIKERS’ RIGHTS ISSUES

Topics such as Motorcycle Profiling and “Save the Patch” will be among the many issues of concern to our nation’s motorcycle community that will be addressed during the upcoming 34th annual NCOM Convention, to be held Mother’s Day weekend, May 10-12, 2019 at the DoubleTree by Hilton in Orlando, Florida.  Hundreds of bikers’ rights activists from the ranks of motorcycle rights organizations (MROs) and Confederations of Clubs (COCs), as well as independents and other allied riders will gather to discuss the concerns of all riders.

Agenda items will cover various legal and legislative issues, with Special Meetings for Veterans Affairs, Women in Motorcycling, Clean & Sober Roundtable and World of Sport Bikes, as well as the Christian Unity Conference and Confederation of Clubs Patch Holders Meeting.  Additional seminars will be conducted regarding Restoration of Rights, Leadership 101 and "Share the Road" Motorcycle Safety.

All motorcyclists are welcome, and to pre-register for the 2019 NCOM Convention contact the National Coalition of Motorcyclists at (800) ON-A-BIKE or visit www.ON-A-BIKE.com.

CELL PHONE BANS ARE SAVING MOTORCYCLISTS’ LIVES

Laws to ban or curb drivers' use of cell phones and other handheld devices have greatly reduced the rate of fatalities for motorcyclists, according to a new study by faculty at Florida Atlantic University and the University of Miami.  The study's findings, recently published in Social Science & Medicine, show that states with moderate to strong bans have motorcycle fatality rates that differ by as much as 11% compared to states with no bans.

The study originally intended to focus on overall traffic fatality rates involving cell phone use while driving.  When it comes to car vs. car crashes, it's not clear that partial or total bans on phone use while driving has had any effect on fatalities, due largely to the high level of crash safety built into modern cars.  Such is not the case when it comes to motorcycles, however.  To the researchers' surprise, data from the study reflects that states that have either a partial or total ban on cell phone use while driving have a lower number of  motorcycle fatalities compared to states with no ban at all.

The researchers of this study argue that policymakers should consider strengthening texting and handheld cell phone bans, as well as enforcement, to improve safety and save motorcyclist lives.  According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, using a hand-held cell phone while driving is illegal in just sixteen states plus Washington, D.C.

"In the case of motorcycles, these laws seem to be effective," said study co-author Gulcin Gumus, Ph.D., an associate professor in health administration in the Department of Management Programs at FAU's College of Business. "While it's not clear that these laws have had an impact on reducing the overall number of traffic fatalities, when we focus specifically on motorcycles, we find that these laws are having a major impact in reducing deaths among motorcycle riders."

RECORD NUMBERS OF WOMEN ARE RIDING MOTORCYCLES

More and more women are moving from the back seat of a motorcycle to behind the handlebars, with the number of female riders doubling over the past decade from one in ten in 2009 to one in five today.

A study by the Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC) found that women now make up 19% of motorcycle owners, with even greater ownership among younger generations.  The survey found that among Millennials (Generation Y, born from 1985-2004), 26% of motorcycle owners were women.  Among Gen X (those born 1965-1984), 22% were women.

"As the number of Boomers and mature motorcyclists shrink and are replaced by newer riders, we could soon be looking at a solid 25% of motorcycle owners being female," said Andria Yu, MIC director of communications.

The MIC polled 2,472 adults nationwide for the 2018 Motorcycle/ATV Owner Survey.  For decades, the MIC says its surveys have served as the census of motorcycling, and have tracked a steady growth in the percentage of women who own bikes.

The MIC says the 2018 owner survey also found that women motorcycle owners spend, on average, $574 a year on tires, routine repairs, maintenance, replacement parts, and accessories and modifying equipment, compared with $497 by men.

Motorcycling has grown in popularity and acceptance in American culture in recent decades, which the MIC says is reflected in their survey.  It found that 66% of women motorcycle owners say their family and friends would have a positive attitude toward motorcycles and scooters.

However, total ridership is struggling according to USA Today, and overall new motorcycle sales have been stagnant in the U.S. since the Great Recession, with annual sales peaking in 2006.

LONDON MOTORCYCLISTS FACE SURCHARGES

In a bid to improve air quality, the ULEZ (Ultra Low Emission Zone) will launch April 8, 2019, and drivers or riders of older vehicles in London’s central congestion zone will thereon face a round-the-clock charge of £12.50 per day ($15.80 USD).

ULEZ has been described as the world’s most radical crackdown on vehicle emissions, and will apply to motorcycles that fail to meet “Euro 4” standards (those registered before 2007).

The rider group We Ride London is campaigning against this unfair and counter-intuitive tax, stating that “Motorcycles and scooters are part of the solution to reducing pollution, congestion and overcrowding but we continue to be ignored.”

The charge will apply 24/7 and in October 2021 will be extended to the area inside the North and South Circular roads – multiplying the charge zone by 28 times.

MAN CLAIMS DISCRIMINATION IN CANADA’S HELMET EXEMPTION LAW

Earlier this year, the province of Alberta in Canada became the third province to pass a law exempting the Sikh community from wearing motorcycle helmets -- north of the U.S. border, helmets are mandatory on a motorcycle. One Albertan, however, strongly believes the exemption is discriminatory and that if Sikhs don’t have to wear a helmet, neither should he.

Troy Fandrick from Medicine Hat, Alberta, believes that the exemption granted earlier this year is discriminatory.  As a non Sikh, he his forced by law to wear a helmet and his claim is that if a small percentage of the population is allowed to ride without a helmet, everyone else should be allowed as well.

Fandrick explains that his issue doesn’t lie in the fact that Sikhs have been granted the exemption: his main complaint is “why them and not me”?  He points a finger at Transport Canada for imposing a rule that doesn’t apply to everyone and that in this case, he is being denied equal rights.

“The sole distinction in the law is racial and ethnic in nature.  There’s no additional qualification,” Fandrick told Medicine Hat News, claiming that he has already been pulled over -- and fined -- three times because he wasn’t wearing a helmet.

“I just want equal rights,” says Fandrick, who is currently gathering funding via a GoFundMe page to enlist the services of a lawyer interested in taking on his cause.

QUOTABLE QUOTE: “Every man is guilty of all the good he didn't do.”

~ Voltaire (1694-1778), French historian and philosopher

MOTORCYCLE E-NEWS SERVICE: Profiling Resolution Passed Unanimously in U.S. Senate

OFF THE WIRE
PROFILING RESOLUTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY IN U.S. SENATE

The United States Senate has approved the Motorcycle Profiling Resolution (Senate Resolution 154) without amendment by unanimous consent on Dec 11, addressing concerns of motorcyclists across the country regarding law enforcement discriminating against bikers in traffic stops, citations and arrests.

This bipartisan and bicameral resolution (H.Res. 318 companion in the House) could provide a national solution to the discriminatory profiling of motorcyclists over mode of transportation or style of dress in enforcing the law.  Several states have considered bills to prohibit police from profiling motorcyclists, and Washington became the first state to pass such an anti-profiling law in 2011, followed by Maryland in 2016.

The two companion measures in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, which are nonbinding and do not have the force of law, seek to curb profiling of motorcycle riders at the federal level by “Promoting awareness of motorcycle profiling and encouraging collaboration and communication with the motorcycle community and law enforcement officials to prevent instances of profiling.”

S.Res. 154 and H.Res. 318 also “urges State law enforcement officials to include statements condemning motorcycle profiling in written policies and training materials.”
 
U.S. Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) spearheaded the measure in the Senate, and recently tweeted; “Pleased the Senate passed S.Res. 154 to encourage states to take steps to prevent profiling of #motorcycle riders. Hopefully this will lead to more efforts to raise awareness of and address motorcycle profiling.”

As defined by the Congressional resolutions, “motorcycle profiling” means “the illegal use of the fact that a person rides a motorcycle or wears motorcycle related apparel as a factor in deciding to stop and question, take enforcement action, arrest, or search a person or vehicle with or without legal basis under the Constitution of the United States.”

Concerned riders are now urged to contact their Congressional delegations in the U.S. House of Representatives and encourage them to join their Senate colleagues by likewise passing House Resolution 318.

Stubbs Explains the Mongol Nation RICO Conviction

OFF THE WIRE

1 Stubbs Explains the Mongol Nation RICO Conviction

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=tv_ijz2_Two&fbclid=IwAR08zrjSarWPC1LW9QtxebeTX9ALc40RO2gXJTLthXyIhxD8wVdlntkUd40&app=desktop


Article:


https://www.sgvtribune.com/2018/12/13/u-s-government-wins-round-1-in-trial-to-take-ownership-of-mongols-motorcycle-clubs-prized-patches/amp/?fbclid=IwAR3qFX6BpKrCGry4U3WSAJe5XYTYXzKmQUIwf4yZ1pUVqnSs2EnfAIbzfNw

MONGOLS

OFF THE WIRE

MOTORCYCLE PROFILING - DEADLINE DECEMBER 15, 2018 COC We need all club members in C A to take the survey

OFF THE WIRE
We need all club members in C A to take the survey we are way to short of people taking the survey gill

http://www.motorcycleprofilingproject.com/national-motorcy…/       
View this email in your browser

This is very important.  We need at least 500 people to complete the profile by this Saturday.  The statistics will be used as part of our California Anti-Profiling Legislation for 2019.  Even if you have completed this survey in the past, do it again.  Forward this to all your motorcycle groups, family, and friends.  Please make sure they understand the urgency of this request.  THE TIME TO DO THIS IS NOW!

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by email, text, or phone.

Nancy Nemecek
858-229-1943

STATEWIDE CALL TO ACTION !

What can you do right now to help end Motorcycle Profiling? Please take a few minutes out of your busy day and take the 2018 National Motorcycle Profiling Survey. The NMPS is the primary tool being used to lobby federal and state legislators coast-to-coast. The NMPS is the only attempt to statistically analyze and quantify the extent of motorcycle profiling incidents in America. Your participation will help pass legislation both at the federal level and in your own state. There are only days left before the survey ends on December 15th, 2018. Act Now!

The survey asks no personal information and takes less than 5 minutes to complete.
Go here to take the MPP’s 2018 National Motorcycle Profiling Survey.

http://www.motorcycleprofilingproject.com/national-motorcy…/

National Council of Clubs of the United States

OFF THE WIRE

By David "Double D" Devereaux Would you believe someone that said, “I support motorcycle clubs and champion the rights of mistreated riders. But my female Social Ambassador must refrain from promoting any association with motorcycle clubs or political issues relating to motorcycle rights.” Well that's exactly what Law Tigers has done. Law Tigers placing ad for an influencer contest, but prohibiting motorcycle club affiliations… [ 746 more words ]
https://councilofclubs.org/…/law-tigers-restricts-employee…/

Law Tigers Restricts Employee From Associating With Motorcycle Clubs.

By David “Double D” Devereaux

Would you believe someone that said, “I support motorcycle clubs and champion the rights of mistreated riders. But my female Social Ambassador must refrain from promoting any association with motorcycle clubs or political issues relating to motorcycle rights.” Well that’s exactly what Law Tigers has done.

Law Tigers placing ad for an influencer contest, but prohibiting motorcycle club affiliations

Law Tigers, a national franchise business of injury attorneys who market to motorcyclists, boasts on their website that they exist to help all riders. Beyond accidents, Law Tigers claims to stand for the rights of motorcyclists, including clubs. But in seeming direct contradiction to these statements of support, a requirement of a posted Law Tigers Social Ambassador position requires that the ambassador not promote any political or motorcycle club affiliations, a requirement that would be considered unconstitutional if Law Tigers were a state employer.

It’s difficult to square these two perspectives simultaneously. Motorcycle clubs are lucrative marketing ground and also influential among the broader biker community. Supporting attorneys that actually support motorcycle clubs and rights should be an important directive for all club members and rights advocates.

Motorcycle Rights and Accident Attorneys

The motorcycle rights movement has been primary marketing ground for motorcycle accident attorneys for decades. And the social contract can be mutually beneficial. It’s no secret that personal injury law is one of the most profitable forms of practice. It’s also no secret that motorcycle accidents are common, particularly among motorcycle clubs which represent the segment of the motorcycling community that rides the majority of miles ridden in America. Profits from this relationship can fund critical civil liberty lawsuits to fight discrimination against motorcyclists that would otherwise lack sufficient funding. Lawsuits can be very expensive.

The promise to pursue rights based claims can be very persuasive to motorcycle club members. The fact that a portion of profits from an accident settlement/judgement is re- dedicated to fight discrimination provides a mechanism to address issues that would otherwise go unchallenged.

But motorcycle club members realize the value of this relationship and are often skeptical that the attorneys obligations under the social contract are being fulfilled. Of course they have to say they support motorcycle rights and motorcycle clubs. But what if this same organization creates employment requirements that would be unconstitutional infringements on association and speech if imposed by a state employer?

Law Tigers Talks The Talk

The Law Tigers website describes the firm’s goals and background in a third person narrative. In the About section, Law Tigers is described as caring for all riders and even going so far as to say that Law Tigers is a champion of motorcycle rights, including clubs.

“Their passion for riding and marketing acumen have built Law Tigers into a nationally- recognized brand that serves every rider in the US.”

“Warren [Levenbaum’s] work championing the rights of mistreated riders continues to resonate as the soul of Law Tigers, and Ari [Levenbaum] has cultivated thousands of partnerships within the motorcycle world – clubs, vendors, manufacturers, and dealerships.”

Ok. So Law Tigers talks the talk. But what do they require of those representing their brand?

Law Tigers Contract Restricts Female Ambassor’s Association and Speech Rights

These “Biker” attorneys are promoting a contest where the winner becomes the contracted Social Ambassador to the Law Tigers brand. As a condition to the contract, the Social Ambassador “must refrain from promoting political, religious, illegal or motorcycle club affiliation on their personal social platforms.”

Law Tigers is not prohibited from discriminating because they are a private employer and motorcycle clubs are not a protected class. However, if Law Tigers were a government entity, then this contract requirement restricting fundamental speech and association rights would arguably be considered an unconstitutional violation of the 1st Amendment. ( See RONALD GODWIN v. ROGUE VALLEY YOUTH CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, (RVYCF et al.,) U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, No. 14-35042, AUGUST 10, 2016)

Law Tigers Rules for entry prohibit contest entrants from associating with motorcycle clubs

Final Thought

Motorcycle club members are a very valuable resource for motorcycle accident attorneys. Regardless of private entities such as Law Tigers legal right to restrict employees expression rights, motorcycle club members and motorcycle rights advocates have a choice when they are the unfortunate victims of an accident. All motorcycle accident attorneys will tell you they support clubs and rights. All accident attorneys say they are the “champion” of motorcycle rights when a victim is deciding whether to retain them for an accident. But not all all motorcycle attorneys walk the walk. Certainly, motorcycle club members and other motorcyclists concerned about civil liberties should be hesitant to hire an attorney that didn’t want their social ambassador to express association with clubs or political issues.
The post Law Tigers Restricts Employee From Associating With Motorcycle Clubs. appeared first on Motorcycle Profiling Project.
…read more
Via:: Motorcycle Profiling Project

This entry was posted in Motorcycle Profiling Project on January 19, 2018.        

Senate Profiling Resolution Passes Unanimously

OFF THE WIRE

For Immediate Release December 11, 2018 Senate Profiling Resolution Passes Unanimously  The Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) is proud to announce that the Motorcycle Profiling Resolution (S. Res. 154) passed the U.S. Senate with unanimous consent on Tuesday evening, December 11, 2018. Over the past few weeks, the MRF had many productive meetings on Capitol Hill to further our objective of promoting awareness of unfair profiling of motorcyclists across the country. Our resolution’s co-sponsor, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), has played an integral role in ensuring that the issues of motorcyclists in this country were addressed in the U.S. Senate. MRF President Kirk “Hardtail” Willard said upon learning of the adoption of the resolution, “Passage of Senate Resolution 154 has been the Motorcycle Riders Foundation’s number one legislative initiative in this current Congress. This act today by the Senate is very important, as it recognizes that the profiling of motorcyclists because of our mode of transportation or choice of attire is unacceptable. The personal relationships, the tens of thousands of contacts, the visits, and the highlighting of this issue as a top priority during the MRF’s Bikers Inside the Beltway speaks highly of our passion on this issue and demonstrates our ability as grassroots lobbyists to be effective on Capitol Hill.” Willard went on to say, “It is important to note that this cause united the Motorcycle Riders Foundation, our state motorcyclists’ rights organizations (SMROs), the National Council of Clubs (NCOC), the National Coalition of Motorcyclists (NCOM) and the Motorcycle Profiling Project (MPP), all of which brought even greater attention to this critical issue. The Motorcycle Riders Foundation would like to thank our 2018 MRF Legislative Champion, Senator Ron Johnson, and his staff for the significant efforts they put into passing S. Res. 154.” As you know, the MRF, along with the SMROs, the motorcycle club community, and with individual riders across this country have been advocating for a national solution to address motorcycle profiling. With the help of our champions on Capitol Hill, we have been able to advance our bipartisan and bicameral resolutions concerning the profiling of motorcyclists.  Russell Radke, MRF Sustaining Member Motorcycle Club Representative, said, “We are now one step closer to ending the attacks on our civil liberties from unconstitutional motorcyclist profiling.” The MRF is encouraged that we have begun to address the concerns of the motorcycling community, but we still have more work to do on this issue. We encourage the U.S. House of Representatives to join its colleagues in the U.S. Senate and pass H. Res 318. About Motorcycle Riders Foundation The Motorcycle Riders Foundation (MRF) provides leadership at the federal level for states’ motorcyclists’ rights organizations as well as motorcycle clubs and individual riders. The MRF is chiefly concerned with issues at the national and international levels that impact the freedom and safety of American street motorcyclists. The MRF is committed to being a national advocate for the advancement of motorcycling and its associated lifestyle and works in conjunction with its partners to help educate elected officials and policymakers in Washington and beyond.

URGENT CALL TO ACTION - MOTORCYCLE PROFILING - DEADLINE DECEMBER 15, 2018 L 20 C O C

OFF THE WIRE

This is very important.  We need at least 500 people to complete the profile by this Saturday.  The statistics will be used as part of our California Anti-Profiling Legislation for 2019.  Even if you have completed this survey in the past, do it again.  Forward this to all your motorcycle groups, family, and friends.  Please make sure they understand the urgency of this request.  THE TIME TO DO THIS IS NOW!

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by email, text, or phone.

Nancy Nemecek

858-229-1943

STATEWIDE CALL TO ACTION !

What can you do right now to help end Motorcycle Profiling? Please take a few minutes out of your busy day and take the 2018 National Motorcycle Profiling Survey. The NMPS is the primary tool being used to lobby federal and state legislators coast-to-coast. The NMPS is the only attempt to statistically analyze and quantify the extent of motorcycle profiling incidents in America. Your participation will help pass legislation both at the federal level and in your own state. There are only days left before the survey ends on December 15th, 2018. Act Now!

The survey asks no personal information and takes less than 5 minutes to complete.

Go here to take the MPP’s 2018 National Motorcycle Profiling Survey.

http://www.motorcycleprofilingproject.com/national-motorcy…/

NEW YORK FREEDOM RIDER NEWS- 12/6/18 - firearms related updates

OFF THE WIRE

CALIFORNIA- new

AB12: Firearms: gun violence and mental health

Status:

12/04/18: From printer. May be heard in committee January 3.

12/03/18: Read first time. To print.

Bill text: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB12

---

AB18: Firearms: excise tax

Status:

12/04/18: From printer. May be heard in committee January 3.

12/03/18: Read first time. To print.

Bill text: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB18

---

AB61: Gun violence restraining orders

Status:

12/04/18: From printer. May be heard in committee January 3.

12/03/18: Read first time. To print.

Bill text: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB61

The 85th Call to Action (Time Sensitive): NMA E-Newsletter #517

OFF THE WIRE

The 85th Call to Action (Time Sensitive): NMA E-Newsletter #517 The Fall 2018 issue of the NMA member magazine Driving Freedoms(“The Big Lie”) sounded a clarion call against the dismantling of established traffic engineering standards by the very agencies tasked with upholding those standards and protecting the public. Swept up in the Vision Zero dream of achieving zero road fatalities, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD), the National Transportation Safety Board and even the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) appear to be acquiescing to special interest groups. This shirking of public responsibility is rooted in the oversimplification that slower traffic is automatically safer. Generalized proclamations can be suspect, particularly so in the engineering world. Before dispelling the “slower is better” mantra a bit later in this newsletter, the first order of business is a critical, time-sensitive call to action to you if we are going to protect reasonable speed limits. As encouraged in The Big Lie, of which you can find an abridged pdf version here, as many people as possible need to write to key transportation officials about protecting proven engineering standards such as the 85th percentile rule of establishing safe, efficient speed limits. Tom McCarey, a Pennsylvania member who is among the most active in NMA ranks in fighting for drivers’ rights, took heed and used information from The Big Lie to write to each transportation official listed later in this newsletter. He received this formal response from Thomas Heydel who chairs a key committee with the NCUTCD, showing that letters can be an effective way to get the message across to the right people. Officials from the ITE and PennDOT also wrote back with similar messages.   Note that Mr. Heydel says that speed limits will be discussed at the January (9th to 11th) meetings of the NCUTCD. More letters like Tom’s are needed in order to force committee members to understand that there is a significant faction of people who are deeply concerned that practical speed limit considerations are being discarded in favor of a zero-death goal that, while noble, is unattainable no matter how many billions of taxpayer dollars are thrown at it. Tom’s letter is too lengthy to publish here but if you are planning to write to Heydel et al., contact us at nma@motorists.org and we’ll be happy to share some of Tom’s content with his blessing. We encourage you to borrow from The Big Lie as Tom did.   Write to these officials and do it well before Christmas. January 9th is not that far away, particularly with mail service entering its busiest period of the year: We promised earlier to poke holes in the default view of Vision Zero followers that “slower is automatically safer,” the corollary to “speed kills.” There are many ways to do this, not the least of which is to use hard data from traffic speed distribution surveys, comparing safety numbers before and after speed limit increases. But don’t take our word for it; let’s look at statistics published by the FHWA itself. From 1975, the year after the 55 mph National Maximum Speed Limit went fully into effect, to 1994, the year before the NMSL was fully repealed, the annual traffic fatality rate on U.S. roads averaged 2.60 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT). During the subsequent 20-year period of 1995 to 2014, as speed limits across the country rose 10, 20 and even 30 mph over the NMSL artificial limit, the fatality rate dropped more than 46 percent to an average of 1.39. And in 2017, the most recent data available from the government, that rate has fallen even further to 1.16 fatalities per 100 million VMT. To be sure, the dramatic drop of deaths on our nation’s highways in recent years is due to a number of factors including tremendous improvements in automobile safety technology, road design and emergency medical care. But it is willful ignorance to reject the notion that cars traveling more efficiently at optimum (85th percentile) speeds have also played a role in the dramatic decrease in road fatalities.  If you just have time to write to two people, make it James “Eric” Ferron of the FHWA and Thomas Heydel of the NCUTCD. Both have direct responsibilities with the Regulatory/Warning Signs Committee that in January will discuss speed limit guidelines going forward. It is critical they hear the collective voices of concerned drivers.

Use this link to share this NMA E-Newsletter with others:

OFF THE WIRE

Use this link to share this NMA E-Newsletter with others: https://www.motorists.org/alerts/the-85th-call-to-action-time-sensitive-nma-e-newsletter-517/ Read Driving News every chance you get: https://www.motorists.org/news/ Check out the latest motoring news in your state + your state’s Member Forum https://www.motorists.org/chapters/

Mongols’ Defense: A Club Can’t Conspire With Itself

OFF THE WIRE
DON DEBENEDICTIS
December 5, 2018
SANTA ANA, Calif. (CN) — A defense attorney for the Mongol Nation motorcycle club told a California jury Tuesday that federal prosecutors had not presented any evidence that the club ever violated racketeering laws or engaged in a conspiracy — indeed, he said, it could not be convicted of conspiracy because an entity cannot conspire with itself.
“There’s no evidence that the Mongol Nation conspired to do anything,” Joseph A. Yanny told the Orange County jury in his closing arguments.
“There are individual members” who have committed crimes, he acknowledged, but “there’s no evidence at all that the club joined in those activities.”
He said the club itself cannot be held liable for “isolated incidents committed by boneheads.”
Yanny described the prosecution of his client — which began with undercover investigations going back 20 years — as persecution of the largely Latino club by corrupt agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. He implored the jury to “send a message that this type of prosecution against these men has got to stop.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher M. Brunwin countered that the Mongol Nation as a body encourages and rewards crime. “They are a violent organization that attacks people, that kills people and that distributes drugs,” he said during rebuttal.
“This is what they do,” Brunwin said as he displayed a photo of a man beaten to death by Mongols. “This is what they brag about. This is what they’re proud of.”
He said the Mongol Nation even rewards members who kill people on its behalf with special patches to sew onto their biker vests, including one he called a “murder patch.” It shows a skull-and-crossbones with a capital “M” on the skull’s forehead.
He scoffed at Yanny’s explanation that the M merely stands for Mongols.
Brunwin and co-counsel Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven R. Welk charged the Mongol Nation, as an “unincorporated association,” with violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and conspiracy to commit racketeering.
They have not charged any individuals with crimes. As Yanny told the jury at the beginning of the trial, “No one is going to jail out of this trial.”
In a 2008 case, however, 79 Mongols and associates pleaded guilty to racketeering and other crimes.
A major goal of the current case is to seize, through criminal forfeiture, the gang’s trademark to its distinctive main patch, which full members wear on the back of their vests. The design shows the word “Mongols” in an arc above what has been described as “a cartoonish depiction of a Genghis Khan-like character” riding a motorcycle and waving a sword.
If the prosecutors succeed, “no member of the gang would be allowed to wear the trademark that we believe is synonymous with the group,” a representative of the U.S. Attorney’s Office has said.
Prosecutors are also seeking a fine and forfeiture of the club’s assets.
A significant but technical legal issue facing the jury is whether the Mongol Nation as an entity can be guilty of racketeering and conspiracy to engage in racketeering with itself.
Under the federal RICO Act, a “person,” including a corporation or association, can be charged with a crime only for engaging racketeering activities with an “enterprise.”
Brunwin and Welk say that criminal enterprise is the larger Mongol biker gang, of which the formal Mongol Nation is only a piece.
At one point in the case, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ruled that “there is no meaningful distinction” between the two, but he was reversed in July 2017 by the Ninth Circuit.
On Monday morning, Carter instructed the jury that prosecutors must prove the Mongol Nation and the Mongol gang are distinct entities. The Mongol Nation cannot be guilty of racketeering, the judge said, if there is only one entity.
Therefore, Yanny later told the jury, “If you find that there is no distinction, we can all go home. You just find the defendant not guilty.”
After all, he argued, “Where did you hear testimony that the Mongol Nation is separate from the Mongol gang? I don’t remember any testimony like that during the government’s case.”
In his closing argument Monday, Welk argued that only Mongols who have risen through the ranks to earn the right to wear the complete insignia patch on their vests are members of the Mongol Nation. Citing the group’s detailed, written constitution, he said that other associates, prospects and “hang-arounds” are only part of the gang but not “full-patch” Mongols.
Yanny scoffed at the distinction. “They’re all members; they’re just members with different degrees of rights and responsibilities,” he said. “They all pay dues,” and they all owe loyalty to the club.
Although they can’t vote on club business, men in the process of earning a patch do attend the group’s meetings to assist the full-patch members by guarding the motorcycles and running errands.
Brunwin countered that the Mongol Nation is a legal person because it can, and does, own property, specifically its trademarks in the patch design. Other members of the broader gang have no property interests in the trademarks, he said.
The prosecutor spent most of his rebuttal, however, recalling evidence of several violent crimes attributed to Mongols, including the murder of a Hells Angels leader in San Francisco, beatings and knifings of enemies or men they believed had insulted them, and a deadly brawl between a large number of Mongols and Hells Angels in Laughlin, Nev., in 2002.
“Is this an organization that conspires to commit murder?” Brunwin asked. “You bet it is, and you heard it over and over” from witnesses and from Mongols themselves in audio and video recordings played during the five-week trial.
He ended by recounting again for the jury the death of local police officer Shaun Diamond, allegedly killed when Mongol David Martinez fired a shotgun as police broke down Martinez’s door at 4 a.m. in October 2014 to serve a search warrant. A slug from the shotgun entered the back of Diamond’s head and came out through his mouth as his partner watched, Brunwin said.

The jury began deliberating early Tuesday afternoon.

California - Jury Has Mongols Case

OFF THE WIRE
agingrebal.com
A federal trial jury in Santa Ana, California began deliberating the racketeering case United States versus Mongol Nation, An Unincorporated Association today about 1:15 p.m. Pacific Time.

The case title is clumsy because it is a confusing case that tries to make the last 20 years of the motorcycle outlaw vision of America dance on the head of a thumbtack. The witness list had everybody but Sonny Barger and Charlie Hunnam. ATF author-heroes William Queen and Jay Dobyns testified about Operation Ivan and Operation Black Biscuit. The four undercover agents from Operation Black Rain – Gregory “Russo” Giaioni, Paul “Painter” D’Angelo, Darrin “Dirty Dan” Kozlowski and John Hollywood Carr testified – or testi-Lied as defense attorney Joe Yanny put it.

A score of alleged Mongols victims and police told their stories.

The mother and sister of a Mongol named David Martinez, whose home was invaded by Swat at four in the morning a little more than four years ago testified. Pomona Police Department SWAT Officer Shaun Diamond did not testify because he died in the raid but his photo literally hovered over hours of the trial like a wraith.

Christopher “Stonee” Ablett who killed Hells Angel Mark “Papa” Guardado in a brief, ferocious fist, knife and gun fight in San Francisco a little more than a decade ago testified.

A Mongol who was stabbed four times and shot four times in the so-called Laughlin riot in April 2002, who won a soc-called “murder patch” because somebody tried to murder him, and who later signed and renouced a coerced plea deal testified.

Al “The Suit” Cavazos who was expelled from the Mongols in 2008 testified and he raged against ATF case agent John Ciccone who sat at the prosecutors’ table.

Mony Robles, a sixty-something Mongol whose motorcycle shop was blown up in 1977, testified. Robles referenced a bouquet of red and white flowers that was sent to a funeral home; the site of another bombing. And, he did not miss a beat when he was asked who he thought has sent the flowers. “The ATF,” Robles replied without pausing to think about it.

Jesse Ventura who was last a Mongol in about 1972 testified and when he did the trial briefly caught the nation’s attention. TMZ picked up the story of the trial that day.

Even I testified, as the defense expert, and I was then vilified by a couple of Assistant U.S. Attorneys for the rest of the trial for my “infatuation” with bad guys; the heartless way I had referred to Shaun Diamond as a “Swat goon,” and the “paranoia” I demonstrated in asserting that the undercover agents of Black Rain were up to their necks in the murder of a Mongol named Manuel Vincent “Hitman” Martin and that Christopher Michael Brunwin, one of the two prosecutors in this case, was up to his sophistical neck in it, too. My paranoia and my disdain for the ATF undercover agents exemplified “the paranoia of this subculture” and the general contempt for authority the Mongols displayed.

Really all of this that you have just read about, and that took a little more than five weeks to unfold, was just gun smoke and bang-bang.As one of the jurors enthusiastically nodded along with Brunwin’s rebuttal to the defense’s closing argument,as I waited for him to raise his hands in the air and shout “Amen,” I scribbled down a note that read, ”ultimately what this case comes down is what the jurors thought before they heard a word of testimony.”

It would be impossible for anyone who knows anything about who and what was on trial in this case and not feel deeply cynical.
Distinctiveness

The jury heard its instructions yesterday morning at nine. Prosecutor Steven R. Welk started his closing argument at 10:30. Yanny finally got his chance to argue his case at 3:45. He had to stop at five. He picked up again this morning at 8:25. Brunwin got to make his rebuttal at 11;25.

Both Welk and Yanny spent a lot of time talking about “distinctiveness.” It is the core legal issue in the case. Virtually no one understands it – except you in another minute or two.

Every RICO case must have a “RICO person” dn a “RICO Enterprise.” The RICO person is the named defendant or defentdants. The RICO enterprise is the criminal organization for which they commit their crimes – like say the Gambinos or the Yakuza. What the government managed to do with this case, over the last five years, is persuade the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is that the “Mongols Gang” is a Criminal Enterprise comprised of all fully patched members of the Mongols Motorcycle Club. But the named defendant, the RICO person is a theoretical construct, a turn of phrase, an imgainary, invented category called “Mongol Nation an unincorporated association” which is comprised of patched members of the club, prospects, hang arounds, wives, girlfriends, possibly adolescent children and something called “associates” which is distinct from hang arounds. Associates are anybody who a Mongol might know who commits a crime. An actual example used by the prosecution in the trial was a man visiting a Mongol’s house who fired on a Deputy when he invaded the house. Under this legal concept, a drug dealer who attends a Mongol’s Christmas party makes the Mongol guilty of drug dealing.

Not only is it a specious concept but it is impossible for anyone, including journalists and jurors to understand. Yesterday Welk devoted hours to the difference he sees between hand arounds and associates. Today Brunwin joked that the jurors should all write term papers on the slippery concept of RICO distinctiveness. Nobody laughed at Brunwin’s jest.
Black And White

So at the long end of the trial the lawyers were reduced to expressing what the jurors and the public might be able to understand.

Yanny quoted Lincoln, St. Thomas and the Bible. He showed the jury the Gadsden Flag. He used many clever quips and turns of phrase. He showed the jury all the drug evidence in the case and grumbled in his gravelly voice “”I’ve see more in a frat house in the course of a month.” He questioned every accusation and told the jury “If you can’t burn in hell for the sin you can’t be put in prison for the offense.

Yanny told the panel, “It’s time to send a message to the ATF that they should not treat citizens that way” “The government wants you to apply the concept of collective guilt.” And, “Racketeering violations are how you abuse people. That’s what it (RICO) has become.”
Us And Them

Welk and Brunwin stubbornly clung to their own realities. Both of them emphasized the “otherness” of motorcycle outlaws in general and the Mongols in particular. Welk told the jury that “normal people” can’t understand the Mongols. He compared to the Mongols to vermin, to “rattlesnakes” with “pea-sized brains” who mindlessly attack everything that stumbles into their way. The club is a “beehive of pernicious criminal activity.” The evidence in the trial was a “lengthy parade of cruelty…against innocent civilians.” Their “twisted honor code is an affront to civilized society.”

The government hid its strangely subjective rainbow of accusations behind a f black and white curtain. The real issue in this trial was whether the “Mongol Nation” and the “Mongols Motorcycle Club” are the same thing or two different things. The prosecution wanted the jury to think the trial was about whether drug dealing and murder are right and wrong. What the jurors will debate in their room is which color wings means you had sex with a corpse.
What Means Fair

It probably wasn’t a fair trial. Trials rarely are. Judging by the juror who was virtually cheering for the prosecution while it was still going on, the Mongols probably won’t win an acquittal. That’s the bad news.

The good news is even if they don’t win an acquittal “Mongol Nation” doesn’t seem likely to be convicted either.

The other good news is “convicted of what.” And the other, other good news is that no matter how the verdict goes, nothing will change. The government will start forfeiture proceedings against the Mongols patches if it wins. But it will take more than a jury in Orange County, California to cancel the First Amendment.

Now we wait.