No Venue in DC
The esteemed non-profit, non-partisan National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers has filed an amicus brief in the Raven 23 appeal in support of overturning the Raven 23 convictions. In its brief, the NACDL argues that the manufactured Washington, D.C. venue "contravenes" the law and "subverts" the United States Constitution.
Yet, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals found no reversible error, and the Supreme Court of the United States refused to take up the case.
In order for the government to have the case tried on their home field (I dare say, near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue), they had to establish "venue". To do that, they needed to ARREST "a co-conspirator" in D.C. That Co-Conspirator was the Fifth Man.
The other 4 defendants actually self-surrendered in Utah. See the document, below, which would turn out to be a GLARING red light warning regarding the pattern of coercion tactics exercised by this DOJ. You will see that the DOJ was pushing for these defendants to be detained (incarcerated) in Utah. HOWEVER, IF they agreed to WAIVE their right to VENUE, and agreed to surrender in DC, the DOJ would NOT ask that they be detained. Threat and intimidation - it was the hallmark of this case over and over again.
For anyone who is curious about the actual law, the brief, below, was filed by the defense, arguing against venue being established in the District of Columbia. A key element was the "arrest" of the Fifth Man.
Below, however, are the trial transcript pages relating to the "arrest" of the Fifth Man. The first page was his Direct examination by the DOJ. Note the use of "formally placed under arrest". The remaining pages are a portion of the cross, by the defense. You decide - was he "formally placed under arrest" or did he simply, willingly "appear"?