Mick Strider has some explaining to do.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, I have contacted CSM of the Ranger Training Brigade before, asking about phony claims before. I'll post again after he emails me back.

Also, do Micks friends here believe all the claims that he was a gungho paramilitary super duper secret pooper scooper agent? What will it take for you to believe the TRUTH? If Mick got a Purple Heart from the CIA as claimed, please have Mick sign a document to that extent, then we can turn it over to the Feds to research it and other claims under the STOLEN VALOR ACT. If Micks claims are true then he would have no problem signing statements to his FACTS. If not, then you have nothing further to back up your claims that he is Mr Secret Agent Man.

Paul

Paul,

Can you show this claim? Again, I am not interested if it is a third party claim, but where Mick himself made a claim to have a Purple heart from the CIA (link, scan, whatnot)?

There is enough bullshit flowing to fertilize a large field, I would like to see actual proof. Spark pulled a lot of things together, but none of what was posted dis-proved anything that Mick has said.

I do not know Mick, but I know some of what he does. So far that is speaking more of his character.

--Carl
 
A couple things.

These are guidelines, and are generally followed, but I still see cases where judges use creative sentencing. It happens less and less, but still does happen.

When were the guidelines fixed, and rolled out to the judges.

Last, could the prosecutor have lied to get where he wanted? I don't know, but the case you mentioned have just had the Dept of Homeland Security telling congress they lied when the documents the swore they had were not turned over. Again, proof one way or the other would be nice.

Again, this is not aimed at you, but I have watched a few cases the last couple of years, and the lawyers have been less than honest in a number of places (RIAA suites, SCO lawsuits, etc). There are a lot of good lawyers out there, but there are some real lowlifes in my opinion too.

--Carl

Departures from the Federal Sentencing Guidelines have to be justified by a judge in writing. There has to be a record to review on appeal. They are not suggestions, they are the law.

Federal judges in criminal matters cannot do "creative sentencing." Congress prescribes sentences through promulgation of the guidelines.

A prosecutor lying to get Mick to plead and do a standard plea sentence? One thinks a professional public defender would have cause to file a complaint.

Then again, it is not up to the critics to put substance in Mick's horseshit, it's his.

Civil lawyers, with a lower standard of proof, have more room for shady tactics.

Homeland Security didn't exist in the 1990s. The Federal Sentencing Guidelines certainly did.
 
for a place for blade talk, there ain't much of Occam's razor at work, it's so obvious lying prosecutors and narcoleptic defense attorneys were behind the Somalia debacle

aliens musta abducted Strider between getting out of the military and the start of the company. Maybe the key to their ship is inside a Mad Dog tang.
 
A couple things.

These are guidelines, and are generally followed, but I still see cases where judges use creative sentencing. It happens less and less, but still does happen.

When were the guidelines fixed, and rolled out to the judges.

Last, could the prosecutor have lied to get where he wanted? I don't know, but the case you mentioned have just had the Dept of Homeland Security telling congress they lied when the documents the swore they had were not turned over. Again, proof one way or the other would be nice.

Again, this is not aimed at you, but I have watched a few cases the last couple of years, and the lawyers have been less than honest in a number of places (RIAA suites, SCO lawsuits, etc). There are a lot of good lawyers out there, but there are some real lowlifes in my opinion too.

--Carl


Read the docketing statement posted- Strider plead guilty before trial and was sentenced by the judge. Believe what you want, but the real world is not tv and what reporters and bloggers say about the law seldom bears a resemblance to reality.

What creative sentences have you seen, specifically? Do you mean like kids wearing signs on street corners and stuff? Those happen because in many states juveniles are not tried in adult criminal courts but in special juvenile courts which are technically a civil proceeding and the judge has wider latitude.

This a a garden variety fed crime, he got busted, plead guilty and served time, there is no need to make up something about a AUSA lying when there is absolutely no evidence.

Sentencing guidelines were out long before Strider was arrested.

Have you read the BP agents report- not the stuff on right wing radio and blogs? I live in El Paso and I know some of the AUSA, the lawyers at CBP, and some of the law clerks in the fed courts here. Other BP agents testified against the agents in question and the agents themselves made multiple sworn statements contradicting themselves. Not to hijack the thread but the reality of that case is far different from what Lou Dobbs says.

I'm afraid that the arrest is exactly what it seems, he got busted, did time, and got out. I have no idea about the other ranger stuff or the combat stuff b/c I have never served, but the BS about going to Somalia in lieu of prison is just BS.
 
I read 2 threads this week that belong in the "Shame "forum that someone
proposed.
First "the Real way to make a silent kill" thread started by Eddo 36.This
is the Mall Ninja's wet dream.
Second,this thread about Mick Strider,started by Spark.If these 2 threads
are read by new people (not fimiliar with the forums) they must think we are
a bunch of idiots.
I read Blade magazine,and other knife mags and none has sunk this low.
I don't know Mick,i don't own any Striders;but i know people who help
behind their table.If you are judged by the company you keep,i am proud
to be associated with these people.Stop by their table at a show & see
for yourself.
Internet talk is cheap,go to shows,meet new friends,have fun.This is my
hobby,not life or death.Enjoy!
Norm
 
Strider Knives Rock Thankyou Mick,this has to be one of my personel favorite knives one solid piece of A2 tool steel and cocobolo scales. I havent seen anyone else make anything even close to this one since Case made the original during WWII :D Maybee Boss Hog will make one like this out of INFI :D it would be a definate must have:thumbup:

Strider knives may rock, I don't know. I will never own one because I won't support someone who makes his living by lying about his service record in order to make a living from the ones actually serving and doing it with pride. Not half assed stories and fabrications to sell more knives.
 
Wasn't there some public defenders that were just sanctioned for falling asleep during trials? Again, I am sure there are good ones, but I am also pretty sure the ones in Southern California are pretty well overworked, even if you do draw a good one.

--Carl

Well, wouldn't it have been a fantastic public defender that got Mick his fantasy plea agreement?
 
The documents at the start of this thread clearly indicate Mick had federal public defenders. Must have been rollin' with a hard luck crew.:p :p :p :p :p :p

Federal Defenders
defendant [term 12/11/98]
[term 03/01/94] (619)687-2666
[COR LD NTC pda]
Federal Defenders of San Diego
225 Broadway
Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92101-5008
(619)234-8467

Knut S Johnson
[COR LD NTC cja]
Law Offices of Knut S Johnson
1010 Second Avenue
Suite 1850
San Diego, CA 92101-4905
(619)232-7080


Federal Defender and Private Attorney are listed.
 
Can someone answer this:

Is the apology and alleged "I am not a Ranger" letter written to the Plaintiff part of the record?
And, Has the Plaintiff ever sought injunctive relief at Mick's alleged failure to abide by the Settlement conditions?
How do I get the case file out of the Court? I know It's public record what I need to know is whether my request can be Telephonic, via E-mail, via certified mail or do I have to go there in person to make said request?

And finally, what phone number did you use to call the Pentagon? I have tried and gotten nowhere but of course it's Sunday!!!

To those here who have been in a firefight and have heard others who were not there or who ran away claim heroics I know exactly how you feel. But take comfort in the knowledge that the Posers die a little each day. Cowardice is like Cancer.

To those that stood their ground and performed their duty, I applaud you. Take comfort in being able to look in the mirror every day and see a hero.

I have got to get out of this thread, this is just too frustrating!!!!
 
Strider knives may rock, I don't know. I will never own one because I won't support someone who makes his living by lying about his service record in order to make a living from the ones actually serving and doing it with pride. Not half assed stories and fabrications to sell more knives.
THOSE of you who are without sin cast the first stone!!!!! :eek:
 
Have you read the BP agents report- not the stuff on right wing radio and blogs? I live in El Paso and I know some of the AUSA, the lawyers at CBP, and some of the law clerks in the fed courts here. Other BP agents testified against the agents in question and the agents themselves made multiple sworn statements contradicting themselves. Not to hijack the thread but the reality of that case is far different from what Lou Dobbs says.

No, I am talking about the recent congressional hearing on the matter. The rest of the case could be good, but with the main branch of the government that gave information on the case dirty, the case should be questioned. I actually wasn't so concerned until that point in the congressional hearing.

Another problem currently with the BP, verbal reports of shootings are OK. This is a procedural problem that should be fixed.

Anyway, this is a diversion not needed here, I just posted the example to show that government agents can and do lie to get a conviction when convenient.


--Carl
 
No, I am talking about the recent congressional hearing on the matter. The rest of the case could be good, but with the main branch of the government that gave information on the case dirty, the case should be questioned. I actually wasn't so concerned until that point in the congressional hearing.

Another problem currently with the BP, verbal reports of shootings are OK. This is a procedural problem that should be fixed.

--Carl

I don't want to hijack, so I would refer you to the DHS report that is available online and leave it at that.
 
THOSE of you who are without sin cast the first stone!!!!! :eek:
I am not casting stones. I am making a decission on the information available. Instead of trying to incite people maby you could give us some insight into why none of the Strider faithfull including your self can disprove any of the evidence.

Show me where the magazine articles were recanted by Mick or the Publishers or writers.

Explain to me how a person who was DXed out of the military and supposidly suffered major spinal injury was doing black ops after his discharge date.

Explain how if he was on a black op as he says when he stole the car that the government didn't just make it disapear as they could have.

back to work for a while. I will check in a bit for your answers.
 
I don't want to hijack, so I would refer you to the DHS report that is available online and leave it at that.

http://www.culberson.house.gov/news.aspx?A=281

Just to let everyone know what I am talking about (this is the web page for Rep. John Culberson of Texas).

Edited to add the DHS reports have not yet came out in the redacted form (official ones) but congress does have the full reports.

--Carl
 
Departures from the Federal Sentencing Guidelines have to be justified by a judge in writing. There has to be a record to review on appeal. They are not suggestions, they are the law.

Federal judges in criminal matters cannot do "creative sentencing." Congress prescribes sentences through promulgation of the guidelines.

A prosecutor lying to get Mick to plead and do a standard plea sentence? One thinks a professional public defender would have cause to file a complaint.

Then again, it is not up to the critics to put substance in Mick's horseshit, it's his.

Civil lawyers, with a lower standard of proof, have more room for shady tactics.

Homeland Security didn't exist in the 1990s. The Federal Sentencing Guidelines certainly did.

There is no chance of an Appeal upon a plea of Guilty. No record need be preserved forever if there is no chance of appeal. When one pleads guilty the Court goes through the freaking Magna carta to insure the plea is made knowingly, voluntarily, and the person IS pleading guilty because he/she IS Guilty. The offer of proof given by the prosecution upon a plea is superficial. If a Prosecutor tried to enter all evidence while giving the offer the Judge would cut his nuts off!!!

I have seen some really funky negoitiated dispositions out of the US Court. Doing a year in somalia pushes my belief mechanisms to the max, but who knows..........t

Federal Courts NOW have to follow sentence guidelines. Mick's plea was not during that period. back then Judges did as they saw fit, that's why and how sentencing guidelines came to be. If Congress set sentencing for Federal offenses they would make sure any offense committed by a Politician be a violation with a 410 fine. Congress relied on a Commission to establish the guidelines within the parameters they set. Please read 18USC 355 as it existed in 1995. Judges had loads and loads of options. Heck they still do in everything not drug related!!!!
 
There is no chance of an Appeal upon a plea of Guilty. No record need be preserved forever if there is no chance of appeal. When one pleads guilty the Court goes through the freaking Magna carta to insure the plea is made knowingly, voluntarily, and the person IS pleading guilty because he/she IS Guilty. The offer of proof given by the prosecution upon a plea is superficial. If a Prosecutor tried to enter all evidence while giving the offer the Judge would cut his nuts off!!!

I have seen some really funky negoitiated dispositions out of the US Court. Doing a year in somalia pushes my belief mechanisms to the max, but who knows..........t

Federal Courts NOW have to follow sentence guidelines. Mick's plea was not during that period. back then Judges did as they saw fit, that's why and how sentencing guidelines came to be. If Congress set sentencing for Federal offenses they would make sure any offense committed by a Politician be a Violation with a fine not to mexceed $10. Congress deciding how long a sentence is, really????

You are incorrect that a completely detailed record is not made during a guilty plea. Even an open court confession, guilty plea, and attendant sentence can be collaterally attacked in the Federal Court of Appeals. Claiming ineffective assistance of counsel is a favorite.

Federal Courts THEN had to follow sentence guidelines. Mick's plea WAS during that period. In fact, they were considered MANDATORY back during Mick's criminal misadventure.

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines are rules that set out a uniform sentencing policy for convicted defendants in the United States federal court system. The Guidelines are the product of the United States Sentencing Commission and are part of an overall federal sentencing reform package that took effect in the mid-1980s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Sentencing_Guidelines
 
There is no chance of an Appeal upon a plea of Guilty. No record need be preserved forever if there is no chance of appeal. When one pleads guilty the Court goes through the freaking Magna carta to insure the plea is made knowingly, voluntarily, and the person IS pleading guilty because he/she IS Guilty. The offer of proof given by the prosecution upon a plea is superficial. If a Prosecutor tried to enter all evidence while giving the offer the Judge would cut his nuts off!!!

I have seen some really funky negoitiated dispositions out of the US Court. Doing a year in somalia pushes my belief mechanisms to the max, but who knows..........t

Federal Courts NOW have to follow sentence guidelines. Mick's plea was not during that period. back then Judges did as they saw fit, that's why and how sentencing guidelines came to be. If Congress set sentencing for Federal offenses they would make sure any offense committed by a Politician be a Violation with a fine not to mexceed $10. Congress deciding how long a sentence is, really????


Do you want to try that again?


http://www.ussc.gov/2006guid/TABCON06.htm

Background: The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 changed the course of federal sentencing. Among
other things, the Act created the United States Sentencing Commission as an independent agency in
the Judicial Branch, and directed it to develop guidelines and policy statements for sentencing courts
to use when sentencing offenders convicted of federal crimes. Moreover, it empowered the
Commission with ongoing responsibilities to monitor the guidelines, submit to Congress appropriate
modifications of the guidelines and recommended changes in criminal statutes, and establish
education and research programs. The mandate rested on Congressional awareness that sentencing
was a dynamic field that requires continuing review by an expert body to revise sentencing policies,
in light of application experience, as new criminal statutes are enacted, and as more is learned about
what motivates and controls criminal behavior.

Sentencing guidelines were inacted in 1987, case was filed in 1993.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/#chapter_ii
FRCRMP Rule 11. Pleas

(a) Entering a Plea.

(1) In General.

A defendant may plead not guilty, guilty, or (with the court's consent) nolo contendere.

(2) Conditional Plea.

With the consent of the court and the government, a defendant may enter a conditional plea of guilty or nolo contendere, reserving in writing the right to have an appellate court review an adverse determination of a specified pretrial motion. A defendant who prevails on appeal may then withdraw the plea.

(3) Nolo Contendere Plea.

Before accepting a plea of nolo contendere, the court must consider the parties' views and the public interest in the effective administration of justice.

(4) Failure to Enter a Plea.

If a defendant refuses to enter a plea or if a defendant organization fails to appear, the court must enter a plea of not guilty.

(b) Considering and Accepting a Guilty or Nolo Contendere Plea.

(1) Advising and Questioning the Defendant.

Before the court accepts a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the defendant may be placed under oath, and the court must address the defendant personally in open court. During this address, the court must inform the defendant of, and determine that the defendant understands, the following:

(A) the government's right, in a prosecution for perjury or false statement, to use against the defendant any statement that the defendant gives under oath;

(B) the right to plead not guilty, or having already so pleaded, to persist in that plea;

(C) the right to a jury trial;

(D) the right to be represented by counsel -- and if necessary have the court appoint counsel -- at trial and at every other stage of the proceeding;

(E) the right at trial to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, to be protected from compelled self-incrimination, to testify and present evidence, and to compel the attendance of witnesses;

(F) the defendant's waiver of these trial rights if the court accepts a plea of guilty or nolo contendere;

(G) the nature of each charge to which the defendant is pleading;

(H) any maximum possible penalty, including imprisonment, fine, and term of supervised release;

(I) any mandatory minimum penalty;

(J) any applicable forfeiture;

(K) the court's authority to order restitution;

(L) the court's obligation to impose a special assessment;

(M) the court's obligation to apply the Sentencing Guidelines, and the court's discretion to depart from those guidelines under some circumstances; and

(N) the terms of any plea-agreement provision waiving the right to appeal or to collaterally attack the sentence.

(2) Ensuring That a Plea Is Voluntary.

Before accepting a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court must address the defendant personally in open court and determine that the plea is voluntary and did not result from force, threats, or promises (other than promises in a plea agreement).

(3) Determining the Factual Basis for a Plea.

Before entering judgment on a guilty plea, the court must determine that there is a factual basis for the plea.

(c) Plea Agreement Procedure.

(1) In General.

An attorney for the government and the defendant's attorney, or the defendant when proceeding pro se, may discuss and reach a plea agreement. The court must not participate in these discussions. If the defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendere to either a charged offense or a lesser or related offense, the plea agreement may specify that an attorney for the government will:

(A) not bring, or will move to dismiss, other charges;

(B) recommend, or agree not to oppose the defendant's request, that a particular sentence or sentencing range is appropriate or that a particular provision of the Sentencing Guidelines, or policy statement, or sentencing factor does or does not apply (such a recommendation or request does not bind the court); or

(C) agree that a specific sentence or sentencing range is the appropriate disposition of the case, or that a particular provision of the Sentencing Guidelines, or policy statement, or sentencing factor does or does not apply (such a recommendation or request binds the court once the court accepts the plea agreement).

(2) Disclosing a Plea Agreement.

The parties must disclose the plea agreement in open court when the plea is offered, unless the court for good cause allows the parties to disclose the plea agreement in camera.

(3) Judicial Consideration of a Plea Agreement.

(A) To the extent the plea agreement is of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(A) or (C), the court may accept the agreement, reject it, or defer a decision until the court has reviewed the presentence report.

(B) To the extent the plea agreement is of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(B), the court must advise the defendant that the defendant has no right to withdraw the plea if the court does not follow the recommendation or request.

(4) Accepting a Plea Agreement.

If the court accepts the plea agreement, it must inform the defendant that to the extent the plea agreement is of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(A) or (C), the agreed disposition will be included in the judgment.

(5) Rejecting a Plea Agreement.

If the court rejects a plea agreement containing provisions of the type specified in Rule 11(c)(1)(A) or (C), the court must do the following on the record and in open court (or, for good cause, in camera):

(A) inform the parties that the court rejects the plea agreement;

(B) advise the defendant personally that the court is not required to follow the plea agreement and give the defendant an opportunity to withdraw the plea; and

(C) advise the defendant personally that if the plea is not withdrawn, the court may dispose of the case less favorably toward the defendant than the plea agreement contemplated.

(d) Withdrawing a Guilty or Nolo Contendere Plea.

A defendant may withdraw a plea of guilty or nolo contendere:

(1) before the court accepts the plea, for any reason or no reason; or

(2) after the court accepts the plea, but before it imposes sentence if:

(A) the court rejects a plea agreement under Rule 11(c)(5); or

(B) the defendant can show a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.

(e) Finality of a Guilty or Nolo Contendere Plea.

After the court imposes sentence, the defendant may not withdraw a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, and the plea may be set aside only on direct appeal or collateral attack.
(f) Admissibility or Inadmissibility of a Plea, Plea Discussions, and Related Statements.

The admissibility or inadmissibility of a plea, a plea discussion, and any related statement is governed by Federal Rule of Evidence 410.

(g) Recording the Proceedings.

The proceedings during which the defendant enters a plea must be recorded by a court reporter or by a suitable recording device. If there is a guilty plea or a nolo contendere plea, the record must include the inquiries and advice to the defendant required under Rule 11(b) and (c).

(h) Harmless Error.

A variance from the requirements of this rule is harmless error if it does not affect substantial rights.

Link for sentencing guidelines http://www.ussc.gov/2006guid/TABCON06.htm
 
I am not casting stones. I am making a decission on the information available. Instead of trying to incite people maby you could give us some insight into why none of the Strider faithfull including your self can disprove any of the evidence.

Show me where the magazine articles were recanted by Mick or the Publishers or writers.

Explain to me how a person who was DXed out of the military and supposidly suffered major spinal injury was doing black ops after his discharge date.

Explain how if he was on a black op as he says when he stole the car that the government didn't just make it disapear as they could have.

back to work for a while. I will check in a bit for your answers.

Micky, in the other thread on this subject, the individual who wrote the article explained what the mistakes were and how they were made.

Again, I see a leap to a conclusion. Please show me the line where he says he was on a black op for the government when he stole the car. I believe he stated
Back in the day, I worked with a group of hard hitting fuckers….no doubt. We did a lot of work. Some good, some less than.

Again, I don't see a lie, but rather a jump to conclusion to support your wish.

I would like to hear the lie about his military career. I served honorably, and have 2 brothers and a cousin who followed me into the service, both brothers discharged honorably, cousin is still in.

I don't take it lightly when someone does lie about their military service, but I also don't take it lightly when someone accuses a man that was discharged honorably of doing doing so without real proof. Jumps to a conclusion don't cut it. Show me something that he said about his military service that is a lie. Again, it can't be a speculative feeling that this isn't right.

I know some might think I am a friend of Mick's defending him, but I don't know him. What I am trying to defend is the idea someone who served honorably (by all accounts so far, if you have evidence otherwise, please show it) being tarred and feathered because someone doesn't think this statement or that is accurate. I just can't see a vet being treated this way on speculation.

Now on comments that he had a horrible back injury. I think the statement was he injured his back and lost his jump status. My understanding is that it is not hard to loose jump status. An injury that points to the potential of more injuries would loose you your jump status. There are NFL players that play professional football after having vertebrae fused. Chances are, the injury that required the fusing would loose a person jump status, especially during a period of unprecedented peace. Again, the speculation on the injury is just that.

--Carl
 
I watch enough court tv and Law and Order to have to wonder if an over zealous prosecutor wouldn't say anything to a naive young man just to get a confession with no intention of honoring anything he said though. I vaguely remember seeing somewhere that Mick did not have representation there to protect him from such behavior.

Its feesible and believable that Mick was told exactly what he said he was told in this regard. Once the prosecutor got what he wanted he forgot all about his little promise to him under the table or plea or whatever it was.

STR

Str, I hate to break it to you but Law and Order is total fiction and bears no relationship to what prosecutors do. Generally, they do not talk directly to defendants, they go thru their lawyers , confessions are generally made while in police custody, before the police actually arrest and present their case to the intake division of the prosecutors office. You can believe want you want to, but that simply doesn't happen except in the most rare of cases.
 
Suppose I must be bored, but after reading all of these posts it seems most of you are mad because Micks mis-appropriation of military status helped him profit from knife manufacturing.

Not just the fact he lied. His profits probably make alot of you jealous in the first place.

As a sidebar I also suppose that if his knife sales gets less attractive by members and guests reading these negative threads it will slowly quit diluting the funds of these members so they can buy more Busse's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top