Just when you thought that the “Deluded Duo” had finally realized the utter futility in their Quixotic cause, here they go again. A recently filed “APPELLANTS’ PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING AND EN BANC DETERMINATION” is requesting a hearing before Appellate Judges Garland, Henderson and Tatel, who summarily affirmed Judge Rosemary Collyer’s (my all time favorite District Judge) decision on their ludicrous and laughable legal lamentations attempting to get the entire ASD Civil Forfeiture case overturned. Right……..
I suppose someone should give them credit for their tenacity, but I am not anyone who would do that. It is just another reminder of the skewed “logic” and belief in internet nonsense as seen in Kenneth Wayne Leaming’s filings; Leaming had been in communications with Todd and Dwight to gift them with his vast legal knowledge; after all, Leaming is a self-professed “Private Attorney General”. However, it should be noted that Leaming is in Federal Custody following his Pro Se representation of himself and subsequent conviction on 7 Felony counts. His sentencing hearing is scheduled in May. So much for his brilliant legal mind, eh?
As part of the reasoning behind this Petition, they reference a Youtube video that supposedly details the rapid changes in technology:
“It is axiomatic that we live in exponential times where technology is growing faster than our ability to integrate it into the systems meant to manage it, and take it into account 1
1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcfrLYDm2U at minute 5:00 through minute 5:05
They go on to mention the archaic tactics used in the Civil War and how they were repeated for 5 years, then add this:
A famous Law Professor once observed that the ‘Law’ is the grease on the gears of civilization and went on to say that a lawyer’s job is to teach. As was pointed out in the decision, the use of summary affirmance should be restricted to those cases where the merits are so clear that expedited action is in fact, justified. Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294,297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The merits of the Appellees motion for summary affirmance however, are far from clear, and for the same reasons that kept General Picket from objecting to the sending of his troops to the slaughter. The decision to grant summary affirmance is not justified by the reasoning employed to grant it.
There are 9 pages of this nonsense in the Petition, none of it seems to make sense to anyone but Dwight Schweitzer. I have uploaded this document onto the Files website.