有人知道以前作文版斑竹expire7现在的情况么

nynyaaaUID: 204913

还好在美国，要是天朝给你来个多快好省的办案，那估计和炮轰天安门案一样了

arcyoungUID: 2260045

nynyaaa 发表于 2013-4-8 21:37
还好在美国，要是天朝给你来个多快好省的办案，那估计和炮轰天安门案一样了

:lol

magic_zhaoUID: 2137791

还没消息么？

pacer我上着太慢，懒的注册。

so猫UID: 148633

update一下。暂时没有消息。cocoblue没有再回复我的邮件了。

nynyaaaUID: 204913

pacer上没消息

nynyaaaUID: 204913

32 Apr. 11, 2013  35  Memorandum by Bo Jiang re 33 Memorandum Supplemental Memo re New Evidence (Groene, Fernando) (Entered: 04/11/2013)


1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Newport News Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
v. ) Criminal No. 4:13cr034
)
BO JIANG, )
Defendant. )
DEFENDANT JIANG’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM
IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR REVOCATION OF RELEASE ORDER
COMES NOW, the defendant Bo Jiang, by counsel and submits this Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to the Government’s Motion for Revocation or Release Order. This brief memorandum is submitted for the limited and specific purpose of challenging the admissibility of a proffer of evidence made by the United States during Monday, April 8, 2013, hearing on the revocation motion. To the extent that the proffer made may weight in and influence this Court’s decision to revoke the Release Order by United States Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leonard, counsel is compelled to raise issues of admissibility of said proffered evidence. Thus, Jiang here requests that this Court ignore the government’s proffered additional evidence as it was elicited in violation on his constitutional right against self-incrimination guaranteed under the Fifth and Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
Counsel will dispense with a restatement of the procedural history of the case the Court is well aware of it.
I. Newly Discovered Facts
The Court conducted a de novo hearing on the issue of detention on April 8, 2013. The government presented evidence from an FBI agent at the hearing. At the beginning of the
Case 4:13-cr-00034-RBS-DEM Document 35 Filed 04/11/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 197
2
hearing, the government proffered some new information regarding a statement that Jiang had
made in response to the agents’ questioning regarding his belonging seized during the “border
search.” The government presented the evidence to insinuate to the Court that Jiang’s mother and
friends would be packing his possessions in the near future to ship to China.
At the time of the hearing and when the government made its proffer¸ discovery had not
been produced. In fact, immediately before the hearing counsel received a packet with 26 pages
which included Jiang’s NCIC information and reports interviews and inventory by Homeland
Security Investigations and FBI. Counsel had not reviewed those before the hearing. Though this
discovery appears incomplete, counsel has had the opportunity to review the produced materials.
In light of the FBI case agent’s report and the testimony by the FBI agent at the hearing where
counsel for the United States asked her whether (in counsel’s recollection, as no transcript of the
hearing has been requested or prepared) aside from a problem or confusion with “a few legal
words,” Jiang here challenges the government’s new proffer as constituting evidence obtained in
violation of his Miranda rights and therefore requests that it be excluded and disregarded by the
Court.
In support of this claim, and relying without contesting - for the purposes of this motion -
on the facts contained in the government’s investigative reports, Jiang avers the following and
quotes from these reports:
1. Jiang was encountered by agents at the end of the jet-way at Dulles International
Airport at 12:40 p.m., on March 16, 2013;
2. He was interviewed for many hours and at 5:55 p.m., on March 16, 2013, “informed
to he was been arrested for making a false statement, specifically hat he failed to tell
the interviewing agents about the electronic media that was located in his checked
Case 4:13-cr-00034-RBS-DEM Document 35 Filed 04/11/13 Page 2 of 5 PageID# 198
3
through baggage.”
3. Jiang “was issued his Advise of Rights.”
4. Jiang “did not waive his right to have an attorney present for questioning.” (emphasis added).
5. “The agents and Jiang departed Dulles International Airport at 6:38 p.m., … and arrived at the Norfolk City Jail at 10:10 p.m., …”
6. “During the trip, Jiang sat with his head back and eyes closed. He awoke on I-64 East in the vicinity of the Hampton Coliseum. At the times, he was asked if he had a trusted acquaintance who could take possession of his items not sized by the FBI.” (emphasis added).
7. In response to that question, Jiang made the statement proffered by the Government.
Said statement should be suppressed as it was obtained in violation of Jiang’s constitutional rights, particularly as he had not waived his rights to have an attorney present during questioning. Thus, anything Jiang said in response to what he was asked is inadmissible. Additionally, any questioning by FBI agents on Monday, April 18, 2013, when Jiang was asked to and agreed to consent to a search of his efficiency apartment residence, was also made in violation of Jiang’s Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights
II. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, Jiang prays that this Court suppress and exclude from any consideration on the issue of the revocation of the Release Order in this case, any and all mention in the above-referenced government’s proffer.
Case 4:13-cr-00034-RBS-DEM Document 35 Filed 04/11/13 Page 3 of 5 PageID# 199
4
Respectfully submitted,
BO JIANG
DEFENDANT
By: ________/s/____________ Fernando Groene
Fernando Groene, P.C.
Virginia State Bar No. 24028
P.O. Box 2152
Williamsburg, Virginia 23185
Phone (757) 645-6388
Fax (1757) 828-5528
Email: groenelaw@yahoo.com
Case 4:13-cr-00034-RBS-DEM Document 35 Filed 04/11/13 Page 4 of 5 PageID# 200
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on April 11, 2013, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such filing (NEF) to the counsel of record.
Lisa R. McKeel
Assistant United States Attorney
Fountain Plaza Three, Suite 300
721 Lakefront Commons
Newport News, VA 23606
757.591.4000
757.591.0866
Lisa.McKeel@usdoj.gov
Gordon Kromberg
Assistant United States Attorney
2100 Jamison Avenue
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
703.299.3700
703.299.3981
Gordon.kromberg@usdoj.gov
________/s/ _________________________
Fernando Groene
Fernando Groene, P.C.
Virginia State Bar No. 24028
P.O. Box 2152
Williamsburg, Virginia 23185
Phone (757) 645-6388
Fax (1757) 828-5528
groenelaw@yahoo.com Case 4:13-cr-00034-RBS-DEM Document 35 Filed 04/11/13 Page 5 of 5 PageID# 201

yanhuangbabyUID: 178305

nynyaaa 发表于 2013-4-12 03:17
32 Apr. 11, 2013  35  Memorandum by Bo Jiang re 33 Memorandum Supplemental Memo re New Evidence (Gro ...

没有看得很明白，

意思是姜波反对FBI提出的新证据，希望法官无视这些无效的证据？

nynyaaaUID: 204913

反正目前法院没有说法。辩方这个文件是说控方的某些举证是侵害被告人宪法权利的，应视为无效证据。

nynyaaaUID: 204913

34 Apr. 12, 2013  36  DETENTION ORDER granting the Government's Motion for Revocation of Release Order and ORDERING that the Defendant be detained until trial as to Bo Jiang (1)(signed by Chief U.S. District Judge Rebecca Beach Smith on 4/12/13) & filed on 4/12/13. (mnew) (Entered: 04/12/2013)

nynyaaaUID: 204913

晚上回家了我再把具体文书传上来

arcyoungUID: 2260045

nynyaaa 发表于 2013-4-11 19:28
反正目前法院没有说法。辩方这个文件是说控方的某些举证是侵害被告人宪法权利的，应视为无效证据。

文件上好像是说

7版主要求法官不能接受政府提出的新证据来支撑政府反对申前释放的motion
因为新的证据是政府方面提供的FBI与7版主的对话记录
7版主的律师认为若是法官选择使用这份新的记录 则是有违7版主的宪法权利
特别是违反了7版主的Miranda Rights 律师似乎在暗示FBI在去押7版主往监狱
路途中时有引诱7版主自动放弃Miranda Rights的意思 但是没有指明
最后的律师结论是希望法官不征引FBI提供的新资料

但是这个确实有点牵强了 若是这样的话7版主在整个应对过程中所说的话就完全
不能采信了？7版主从一开始就应该保持沉默的 不知道他以前港片看得多不多...

arcyoungUID: 2260045

nynyaaa 发表于 2013-4-12 15:35
34 Apr. 12, 2013  36  DETENTION ORDER granting the Government's Motion for Revocation of Release Ord ...

OK 7版主已经失败了

nynyaaaUID: 204913

DETENTION ORDER

宇宙婴儿UID: 2631584

--

指向大海UID: 158737

宇宙婴儿 发表于 2013-4-14 00:04
不知道我可否提一个不恰当的建议，请各位大大轻拍。
那就是，把这个帖子移动到水版去，会不会更好些？
作 ...

我在我微博写了一点东西，隔天就有网站转载了，和正在判的案子联系起来。。都是看热闹的

这个时候，怎么还会有人利用这点消息来繁荣寄托的人气？？

现在他是被告方，被告方的人在被审期间都是要承受莫须有的罪名的，不管是innocent or guilty 这种事，是因为我们这些老版主见过七哥或者MSN上长期聊过，才对他的人品有个判断。。这种事，怎么可能放到陌生网友那里去让人坏了他的名声，这件事现在，也就只有ODU的室友，同学一些人还在真的帮些忙，做些事，我们这里其实都啥实质的忙都没帮，不过还好，我们没有散布负面消息。你有没有看到他要在美国的监狱里呆到至少5月底。他的母亲现在都心力交瘁了？

这已经是我的轻拍了。而且我不会为回复你这个帖子再道歉什么。就这样子。