Tuesday, 17 July 2018

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case)...Amicus Commentary To Motion For Leave (Document 236) To Restrict...By Brandon Hall

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO


MATTHEW HALE
Plaintiff

V.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS

C.A  NO. 14 - CV 00245



AMICUS COMMENTARY TO MOTION FOR LEAVE (DOCUMENT 236) TO RESTRICT



COMES NOW, Brandon Hall, a forty Two (42) year old man, who is a friend and supporter of the Plaintiff Matthew Hale who has read document 236 via the internet.

I have been aware of Matthew Hales situation since 2005, and have been in  contact with Mr. Hale directly for years now. I support him monetarily as I am able to help him in his legal struggles to have his rights to freedom of religion and speech upheld, his named cleared of all charges for which he was convicted and his freedom secured. Like Mr. Hale, I am a believer in the Creativity religion, a religion that teaches the survival, expansion and advancement of the White race, to which I belong.

I have read the entire trial transcripts of Mr. Hale's case and, after reviewing the states evidence and being informed of circumstances of the case, I believe he was wrongly convicted and innocent of all charges. I myself am a generally law abiding, working citizen with only minor traffic violations to my name.

No one know of has demonstrated more clearly the double standard facing White people in our society than Matt Hale The injustices that Mr. Hale has suffered at the hand of our justice system have set a dangerous precedence and are an egregious, clear threat to the liberties of White people of the United States of America of which every White American should be made aware.

Unfortunately, the United States Government and it's agency the Federal Bureau of Prison (BOP) have seemingly made every effort to prevent word of Matthew Hale's situation from reaching the American public through their increasingly heavy handed censorship of Mr. Hale's communications as illustrated by document 236 and their refusal to allow Mr. Hale any interviews with news media reporters.

The injustices suffered by Mr. Hale are multiple and more outrages are inflicted upon him daily, it would seem. Firstly, in spite of clear and convincing evidence of a non-criminal  history, he was denied a law degree for his beliefs simply because some find them objectionable a clear violation of his first amendment rights. Such a blatant injustice was denied a hearing in the courts but was settled behind closed doors through the opinions of anti-white biased committee of judges.

Next, and most damaging to the liberty of Mr. Hale's person, were the outrages and injustices of  Mr. Hale's criminal trial where it was allowed to stand that his defense attorney was allowed to rest his case without presenting any evidence refuting the prosecution's  case. Following that was Mr. Hale's extremely harsh prison sentence for which there is no precedence in American history that I am aware of. Later justices affirmed the "justness" of this atrocity in later appeals, completely ignoring the glaringly  obvious injustices perpetrated against Mr. Hale because of him being denied a competent defense or any defense for that matter.

Since Mr. Hale's imprisonment we are having to witness the increasingly restrictive censorship of Mr. Hale's communications with friends and family in the outside world. When I first started communicating with Mr. Hale the restrictions on his mails were nowhere near as restrictive as they are now. I take these seemingly arbitrary charges in censorship to be merely harassment of Mr. Hale because of his legal fight to have his first amendment rights upheld by the courts. Mr. Hale at no time advocated any criminal activity and the state has not presented any clear evidence that he has done so.

Any of his statements deemed "inflammatory" or "denigrating of non-white persons and adherents of Christianity"  but not specifically advocating any criminal activity, I believe, fall under first amendment protected speech and should not be censored such as document 236 is requesting.

Again, in this case only Mr.  Hale's writings are considered inflammatory while the teaching of Islam and the old testament of the bible, for example, both of which advocate violence, are overlooked. It is easy to demonstrate that the adherents of Christianity and Islam have perpetrated far more crimes of violence that was motivated by the ideologies of their religions than have believers in Creativity committed against others. This double standard against White people in general and adherents of the pro-White Creativity religion in particular must end. Mr. Hale must be allowed his first amendment rights to practise the religion of his choosing and to speak his mind through the mails and other means.


SUBMITTED JULY 9TH 2018 …. BY BRANDON HALL



     





      

Monday, 16 July 2018

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case)....Amicus Commentary To Motion For Leave (Document 236) To Restrict ...By William Gerard

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

(C.A NO-14 CV-00245)

Rev Matt Hale
Plaintiff

V.

Federal Bureau of Prisons


AMICUS COMMENTARY TO MOTION FOR LEAVE (Document 236) TO RESTRICT


COMES NOW, William Gerard, a fifty five (55) year old man and a concerned citizen as well as a friend of the Plaintiff Matthew Hale, I have read document 236.

I consider myself an ordinary American concerned about the worsening situation in today's society. No one can be unaware of the rampant criminality today. We are treated nightly to the sad statistics of violence and attacks on persons and property. Perhaps the worst thing that in a less "informed"  society we might never have learned about the criminal actions of the very agencies and people responsible for upholding the law. And yet, when lesser criminals are apprehended, tried and, if convicted, imprisoned, these people consider themselves-and indeed very well may be - above the law!  And that is why I feel obligated to defend Matt Hale an innocent man, I believe was framed for a crime that never happened. I believe that Matt Hale has been imprisoned only for his beliefs. This is diametric to the laws and philosophy upon which this nation was founded.

As a means of helping Matt deal with his martyrdom, I have been corresponding with him for about two years. During that time there have been a few long delays, before my mail reached him, ranging from ten days to two weeks, the same situation also exists regarding Matt's replies to me. In one instance, two of my letters never reached him and vise versa, there were also two of my letters returned by the BOP because I addressed him once as "Rev" and once as "Br" Matt Hale.

Apparently it offends the BOP when Matt is given any respectful title  though why that should be considered "gang related" is beyond comprehension of any rational person.

Matt Hale is not the first person to be wrongly incarcerated, but the duration of his sentence - especially served in solitary confinement when he is no threat to anyone - manifests a deeply malignant, even irrational assessment by the Federal Government of a man who has never harmed, or threatened  to harm anyone. As well, when one adds to this situation, the physical and mental harassment to which Matt Hale is, continuously subjected, no rational person should be unconcerned regarding those with the physical power to enforce such restrictions. The last thing that is need in the Matt Hale case is further secrecy on the part of those in whose power he remains.

SUBMITTED JULY 5TH 2018...BY WILLIAM GERARD




              

Sunday, 15 July 2018

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case)...Amicus Commentary To Motion For Leave(Document 236) To Restrict...By Mark Quitta

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO


MATTHEW HALE
Plaintiff

V.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Defendant

(CA NO. 14-CV-00245)



AMICUS COMMENTARY TO MOTION FOR LEAVE(DOCUMENT 236) TO RESTRICT


COMES NOW, Mark Quitta, a thirty three (33) year old man and a friend of the Plaintiff Matthew Hale, who has read document 236 via the internet.

Matthew Hale is not a member, much less the leader of a "gang"!  His belief system "Creativity" has nothing to do with "gangs" The term gang is defined as, 1. A group of trouble making young people. 2. A group of criminals and, in its most benign manifestation, 3. A group of people who enjoy each others company.

None of these definitions in any way addresses Creativity" which is religious in nature. Unless one is willing to consider groups such as the Roman Catholic Church, Judaism and Islam as "gangs" then one cannot view Creativity in that light. Indeed the term "gang" has been used through out this entire matter as a means of creating a situation that is both criminal, and non existent. Sadly those involved have been quite successful in delegitimizing constitutionally guaranteed actions.

With regard to the situation extant, I have had numerous letters returned to me because the BOP deemed them "gang related" owing to the fact that I mentioned Creativity. I personally am not in any gang, neither am I violent, nor do I plot against anyone or anything in the society. Of course neither  is or (does) Matt Hale! 

Further more, I am no mans "follower", but rather I am a supporter of Matthew Hale, a man I believe is being persecuted for his nonconformist viewpoints.

But I must ask the court, what happened to freedom of religion in this country? Why may we worship artificial intelligence and even Satan himself while it is considered not only "wrong" but criminal to respect the survival of ones own race and believe in a future for ones folk?  Using this criteria, great figures from history from Cesar to Lincoln would find themselves incarcerated with Matthew Hale.!

Every day we endure reports of corruption at the highest levels of government and no one goes to jail. Indeed, no one is even charged! Consider this in light of a man whose only crime is that the government does agree with his viewpoint! Just as the word "gang" has a definition so too does the word" justice"  It means (1) Fairness, (2) A system or application of the law. (3) Validity, (4). Good reason and, finally and most important, (5) Judge. It is my hope that in light of the total miscarriage of justice that applies in this matter, this court will live up to the definition by enforcing it without fear or favor.

SUBMITTED JUNE 25TH 2018 ...MARK QUITTA


  


Thursday, 12 July 2018

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case)... Unopposed Second Motion For Extension For The Tenth Circuit / ORDER



IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT REVEREND MATT HALE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
vs.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Case No. 18-1141


UNOPPOSED SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

Appellees move for an additional 30 days to file their response brief, which the Court has directed be filed on or before July 18, 2018. Appellees request a new filing date of August 17, 2018.


In support of this motion:

1. This is Appellees’ second request for an extension.

2. Appellant is in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons at the United States Penitentiary – Administrative Maximum, in Florence, Colorado. However, counsel has conferred with Appellant, who is proceeding pro se, who stated that he does not oppose the motion.


3. Undersigned counsel, who is responsible for writing the response brief, cannot finish the brief by July 18 with the exercise of due diligence: a. Appellant has raised eight issues for this Court’s review. Opening Brief at 19-21. It is necessary for the response brief to undergo several levels of review, including review by Department of Justice officials in Washington, D.C., before filing. It is not possible to complete those reviews by the current filing deadline.

b. Since the filing of the previous request for an extension, counsel has been responsible for preparing and filing continuing briefing on dispositive motions in Prison Legal News v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, No. 15-cv-02184-RM-STV (D. Colo. 2015), and Ajaj v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, No. 15-cv-00992-RBJ-KLM (D. Colo. 2015). Counsel was required to be out of the office for travel out-of-state in the Ajaj case. Counsel is also responsible for preparing for trial in the Ajaj matter, which is scheduled for August 27, 2018, as well as for managing and handling the numerous daily litigation tasks in these and a number of other cases pending in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.
 
 

DATED this 11th day of July, 2018. Respectfully submitted,
ROBERT C. TROYER
United States Attorney
/s/ Susan Prose
SUSAN PROSE
Assistant United States Attorney
1801 California Street, Suite 1600
Denver, Colorado 80202
(303) 454-0100
susan.prose@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for Defendants-Appellees

 


 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE


I certify that on July 11, 2018, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, using the appellate CM/ECF system.

I further certify that I directed that personnel in the U.S. Attorney’s office send the foregoing by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, to:

Matthew Hale
Reg. No. 15177-424
ADX – Florence
P.O. Box 8500
Florence, CO 81226


********************************************************************

 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS



FILED

United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit
July 11, 2018
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________ REVEREND MATTHEW HALE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al., Defendants - Appellees. No. 18-1141


 
                                                                    ORDER
 
This matter is before the court on Appellees’ Unopposed Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Response Brief. At the direction of the court, the motion is granted. The brief shall be served and filed on or before August 17, 2018. The court will not grant additional extensions absent extraordinary circumstances.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk


 

 


 

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case)....Amicus Commentary To Motion For Leave(Document 236) To Restrict...By Helen Hall

                                          IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                                  FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO


Civil Action 14-cv-00245



MATTHEW HALE
Plaintiff

V.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Defendant



AMICUS COMMENTARY TO MOTION FOR LEAVE (DOCUMENT 236) TO RESTRICT


COMES NOW, Helen Hall a sixty three (63) year old Women, concerned citizen and friend of the Plaintiff Matthew Hale. I have read document 236.

Efforts on my part to communicate with Mr. Hale were badly confused and denied when a greeting card sent to him at PO BOX 8500 was returned to me un-opened., with a yellow sticker informing me that the card was " not deliverable as addressed, unable to forward"  I asked Evelyn Hutcheson, Mr. Hale's mother, what was going on and I learned other people had had mail returned to them for the same reason, eventually she mailed me a copy of a letter she had received from the Bureau of Prisons(hereinafter BOP)  stating that the correct address was not 8500 but 8000. A check of the BOP website showed that the mailbox number listed was 8500 , the same number it has always been. I further verified this with a call to the prison, during which an unidentified male stated that the Florence ADMAX mailbox had not been changed.

 Unsure what was going on, I mailed letters to both boxes and eventually learned Matt was getting letters sent to either box. There was no reason the card that I sent should be returned. When I looked today, July 2, on bop.gov, I see it shows the address as PO BOX 8500. This "game" by the BOP is only one example of the unlawful harassment Matthew Hale is experiencing while he is helpless in their "charge".

Also, 2017 I received four or more "returned correspondence" forms from Complex Warden John Fox. Two, dated May 10th, 2017 and May 31st, 2017, respectively indicated that my letters contained "Security threat group related information"  while one form dated September 29th 2017, stated that my letter contained "gang related information". I believe that one of the May letters was returned (unopened) because I addressed Matt as "Rev" on the envelope. Because I had been corresponding with Mr. Hale for many years about Creativity and addressing him as "Rev" I did not know why my letters were now being labelled "gang" related and I considered it a very bad joke on the part of the prison staff. Later I found out that all references to the church were being censored.

At that time, Mr. Hale asked his correspondents to "black out" all words relating to his faith, "Creativity"  on returned mail and to resend the letters. I did so, but as I recall, the prison rejected the blacked out letters too. At this time, the second half of 2017, I began to send simple greeting cards hoping to make it through the censors, but with mixed success, as described above.

I have no criminal record, beyond a few traffic tickets, and I am not in a gang. Creativity is philosophy of life and is not, nor has ever been, "gang related." Frankly I believe that the Fist amendment to the United States constitution guarantees "freedom of (not from!) religion" As Matthew Hale's religious beliefs come under the name, Creativity, the BOP's heavy handed censorship is decidedly unconstitutional.

America's prisons are full of actual gang members who are treated better than a man who has committed no crime, or even consider committing same. Yet, for all his innocence, because the establishment hates Matthew Hale's vision of the world, he is incarcerated for forty years, fifteen of which he has spent in solitary confinement being harassed and tortured by a penal system that obviously answers to nothing and no one- including the constitution. It is time for this travesty of justice to end and for Matthew Hale to be freed from durance vile.


SUBMITTED JULY 3RD 2018  BY HELEN HALL






             









    

Wednesday, 11 July 2018

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case)..Amicus Commentary To Motion For Leave (Document 236) To Restrict..By John Crookston

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

MATTHEW  HALE
Plaintiff

V.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Defendant



AMICUS COMMENTARY TO MOTION FOR LEAVE (DOCUMENT 236) TO RESTRICT

COMES NOW John Crookston, a sixty five (65) year old man a concerned citizen and friend of  the plaintiff  Matthew Hale. I have read document 236.

I have been writing the Plaintiff Matthew for about four years and am deeply concerned when I notice his situation is deteriorating even while he lies helpless in the hands of the federal government. I keep track of the letters I write to Matt and his replies. I believe I have written about 42 letters of which about 35 have been answered. But over the past year or so 6 letters have been returned, several of which were in their original envelopes with a label indicating that there was no such address as P.O BOX 8500. That is false! Ms. Prose sends her legal mail to Matt at box 8500. I'm sure that if her mail were being returned the matter would by now have been corrected.

I have also had legal mail returned and/or rejected. This correspondence contained the copies required when sending a brief to the court, copies of which must be sent to the U.S Attorney as well as to Matt. These were sent back as being "gang related." How can such a singularly innocuous communications be labeled "gang related"? Indeed is it even possible to be a "gang of one"? I am not a member of "Creativity" much less a minister in that church, but even if I were, that would not make me a "gang member"!  Before one can be a member of a gang or engage in "gang related" activities there has to be a gang! Matthew Hale's belief system Creativity is no more a gang than is any other creed in this country whether Christian or Jewish or Muslim or "other"

With regard to Matt Hale's situation : I have read all the various transcripts of the trial and know that at no time did Matt ever mention killing anyone, and certainly not a federal Judge, who, by the way, had found in Matt;s favour in a case that appeared before her. Upon reading the "testimony" of the governments paid witness Tony Evola, in an attempt to discover the "evidence" upon which Matt was convicted, I can attest that no such evidence exists. As that is the case, there is no rational or juridical reason to punish an innocent man for writing about his desire to be free.

Apparently this entire matter concerns a book Matt has written and that has been confiscated. Really? We have people speaking on national media and the internet, as well as writing and publishing books calling for the assignation of the current president and his family, the murder of whites, the overthrow western civilization and on and on and on and not only aren't these books and tracts (and blogs) censored, those involved do not find themselves sentenced to forty years in solitary confinement for what they did do, much less what they did not do! Given the climate today, the injustice suffered by Matthew Hale is beyond atrocious, it smacks of the Gestapo in more ways than one.

Personally, I am a straight White male, a father, grandfather, husband, union carpenter, craftsmen, artist and singer. I do not hold with the politically correct view that makes of my race the cause of every ill in history but that fact does not make me a "hater" and neither should it make anyone with similar opinions guilty of some vague international criminal conspiracy such has been used to incarcerate Matt Hale!

When everything is said and done, it comes back to those protections "guaranteed' to Americans under what's left of our constitution. According to that much weakened document - Supposedly the foundation of all our laws! The eighth amendment states - Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted" Matt Hale's entire prison experience has been one of cruel and unusual punishments that continue to this day. His real crime? He holds opinions and beliefs that are not accepted by present establishment. That is his entire offense, that he is grossly politically incorrect. However, since so far at least, being politically incorrect is not a crime (yet) he should not be punished for it,. It is my hope that the court looks upon this matter as did our Founders and rules in favour of Matt Hale.

SUBMITTED JULY 3 2018...… BY JOHN CROOKSTON


   





                                

Tuesday, 10 July 2018

Rev Matt Hale(Civil Case).. B.O.P Reply in Support of Motion for Order to Restrict Access(Doc 236)



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO


Civil Action No. 14-cv-00245-MSK-MJW

REVEREND MATT HALE,

Plaintiff,

v.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,

Defendant.




FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER
TO RESTRICT ACCESS (DOC. 236)




Mr. Hale points to no reason for the Court to deny the BOP’s motion to restrict access, which seeks only minimal redactions in one docket entry. See Doc. 236 (motion to restrict); see also Doc. 238 at 3-8 (excerpt from Hale’s filing entitled "Plaintiff’s Notice of Non-Service of Docket Entries 233-235, Motion to Strike and (Initial) Response to Defendant’s Motion for Order to Restrict Access" (Doc. 236)). At bottom, Mr. Hale simply disagrees with the BOP’s correctional judgment that a very small portion of his plainly inflammatory writings—which the BOP was obliged to briefly describe in responding to his motion for relief from judgment (Doc. 229)—should be redacted from the public record to attempt to prevent violence against certain racial and religious groups. See Doc. 236 at 2.

As the Special Investigative Services Lieutenant at the ADX explained, these statements gave ADX investigators "great concern that Creativity followers could infer that Hale was, once again, tacitly sanctioning criminal actions against non-whites." Doc. 233 at 2; see also Kelley Decl., Doc. 233-1 ¶ 11.

Mr. Hale construes the situation differently and objects to the redactions, see Doc. 238 at 3-8, but as an inmate, there are limitations on his First Amendment rights. As the Supreme Court has emphasized, "[a]n inmate does not retain rights inconsistent with proper incarceration[,]" and "freedom of association is among the rights least compatible with incarceration." Overton v. Bazzetta, 539 U.S. 126, 131 (2003). Moreover, when it comes to protecting institutional security and public safety, the Supreme Court has long held that deference is due to the correctional judgment of BOP officials. In this sensitive security context, the Supreme Court has emphasized "a policy of judicial restraint" in which the professional judgment of prison officials receives "substantial deference." Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 85-86, 89 (1987); Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401, 407-08 (1989) (observing that the Supreme Court "has afforded considerable deference to the determinations of prison administrators who, in the interest of security, regulate the relations between prisoners and the outside world").

 Here, the BOP has requested minimal redactions based on an informed analysis of the situation by responsible prison officials, who have exercised their predictive judgment—based on their experience as correctional professionals and their knowledge of Mr. Hale and his communications—to attempt to forestall a threat.

There is good cause for the Court to grant the BOP’s motion to restrict. Finally, as Mr. Hale has acknowledged, he received docket entries 233 and 234 and has filed a reply in support of his motion for relief from judgment. See Doc. 238 at 1. There is no basis for the Court to strike docket entries 233 and 234 from the record.


Respectfully submitted on July 6, 2018.

ROBERT C. TROYER
United States Attorney


s/ Susan Prose
Susan Prose
Assistant United States Attorney
1801 California Street, Suite 1600
Denver, Colorado 80202
Tel: (303) 454-0100; Fax: (303) 454-0404
Email: susan.prose@usdoj.gov
Counsel for the Federal Bureau of Prisons




UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (CM/ECF)

I hereby certify that on July 6, 2018, I directed personnel in the U.S. Attorney’s Office to serve the foregoing document on the following non-CM/ECF participant by U.S. mail:
Matthew Hale
Reg. No. 15177-424
ADX – Florence
P.O. Box 8500
Florence, CO 81226
 
s/ Susan Prose



Susan Prose
United States Attorney’s Office