When thou goest with thine adversary to the magistrate, as thou art in the way, give diligence that thou mayest be delivered from him; lest he hale thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and the officer cast thee into prison. I tell thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid the very last mite. Luke 12:58-59
I don’t know where Jason Goodman of Crowdsource the Truth picks up some of his guests…maybe the Jail House Blues Club on Pan Handler’s Lane…I don’t know…but his September 27, 2018 video called Michael Barden Targeted Individual-Psychological Assault and Weaponized Mental Health Evaluation, has an interesting exchange at the 47.08 mark which reminded me of the scriptural warning in Luke 12:58-59.
Jason Goodman: … of course you’ll have had your settlement meeting which is strange. They’re settling it, I’m concerned about this notion of you taking a plea deal, I, I think somebody has told me, if you’re innocent you should never do that.
Michael Barden: Yeah, as a TI, judging from repetition in the past, getting screwed over on pretty much everything, it’s really tough to take that risk.
Jason Goodman: But the question is, is it a bigger risk to take the plea deal? I don’t know…
The foundational reality on whether or not to take a plea bargain hinges on Actual Innocence. And therein lies the problem for many YouTubers who roam the streets looking for trouble with other citizens and law enforcement, filming their conspiracy complaints about the long lines at the grocery store, asking for a dollar from the honest working man, because THEIR precious free time is spent on their endless cause of photographing their endless rambling complaints….
Meet 43-year-old Michael Barden, who has labeled himself as a Targeted Individual, a descriptor which is repeatedly driven into his viewer’s mind through both words and images.
While claiming to be documenting the reality of his own life as a victim of gang stalking since youth, it would appear that he is also establishing a narrative to justify himself as the innocent victim in all of his real life dealings with others.
The Michael Barden YouTube channel states, “My channel is dedicated to ending Cult Ritual Abuse and Organized Stalking and Harassment. I have been a Targeted Individual for years now, and fighting the illegal use of FISA to target innocent individuals around the world. The videos I make take up a lot of my time and my finances have been drained through targeting and legal fees. Any donation you can give even if it’s a dollar would be very helpful in our fight. I am an Air Force veteran of 15 years and have no retirement. You can send money via PayPal.”
I had to look up FISA to see what this acronym represents, and after reading this brief introductory sentence on the Wikipedia page, I have to wonder why Michael Barden is paranoid about the purposes of this agency. As a former Air Force employee, why would he be personally interested in surveillance warrants against foreign spies inside the U. S.? Notice in this Google search of Michael Barden videos, the repeated attachment of the label Targeted Individual with his name.
Here is a screenshot of the titles which were chosen by Jason Goodman to headline his interviews of Michael Barden. The overuse of the phrase Targeted Individual is beginning to suggest that someone is creating an alibi, writing a false legal narrative to explain the rewriting of a personal history….
Will the mere mention by this blog, of the fact that Michael Barden is referenced in a court filing in the D. George Sweigert vs. Jason Goodman RICO lawsuit, be offered as “proof” that Barden is in fact a targeted individual? Has Jason Goodman even broken this bad news to his new friend?
On October 1, 2018, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, docket entry #32 was added, representing Plaintiff’s Eighth Request for Judicial Notice [RJN]. The three public artifacts which have been entered into the court record can be viewed here: sweigert RJN 8 10 01 2018.
Public Artifact One displays the current criminal charges against Michael Barden, for which Jason Goodman had been pondering the plea deal question. Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon and Disorderly Conduct with a Weapon are serious charges. Jason Goodman and Michael Barden are both non attorneys, facing potential legal judgments in two different arenas. Whereas Barden is facing criminal prosecution for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and disorderly conduct with a weapon in the State of Arizona, Goodman is representing himself in two federal civil lawsuits involving defamation and RICO complaints. Both men are looking for the perfect alibi to get out from under these complaints.
Let’s ask this simple question: how foolish is it for Michael Barden to publicly weigh his legal options with Jason Goodman and his “Crowdsource the Truth” viewers?
I am not an attorney, so perhaps a brief look at another story which has nothing to do with Goodman’s or Barden’s legal situations, might provide us with some cautionary advice before we attempt to override the legal counsel of a person facing a criminal conviction.
The story of Shawn Stuller who believed the advice of his friends over his attorney
The January 8, 2016 Santa Rosa Press Gazette at srpressgazette.com presented a short news story headlined Stuller sentenced to 20 years for drug trafficking, burglary.
Like Michael Barden, Shawn Stuller was looking for the perfect alibi to escape the consequences of his own actions.
Let’s pick up Shawn’s story from an October 7, 2016 article on Robert Baty’s kehvrlb.com website, ‘Kent Hovind’s False Legal Narrative Challenged!” (I have added bolding to highlight points of interest).
Under a post headlined, Another Hovind False Narrative-The Shawn Stuller Case, Robert Baty writes:
“I and others have been following Shawn Stuller’s case because of its association with Kent Hovind and his convicted co-conspirator Paul John Hansen and their sovereign citizen theology.
Shawn met Kent and Paul while they were all in county jail together. Shawn has a long rap sheet and things were starting to get serious with his latest criminal activity.
Kent and Paul convinced Shawn to try their sovereign citizen antics instead of making a deal as he had always done before and which typically put him back out on the street without any serious jail time.
So Shawn tried that and, of course, it got him nowhere. Because of Shawn’s problems with lawyers, private and public, he is the one who caused his case to drag on and ultimately get scheduled for trial after a number of delays.
The judge was not of a mind to allow any further delays and Shawn was not properly prepared to try his case (i.e., still had lawyer problems and couldn’t seem to get any witnesses, or even his mother, to show up for the trial/sentencing).
The judge was not pleased with Shawn’s further attempt at delay and was going to proceed to trial. Shawn decided to do what he had always done before, plead out. In this case it was a blind plea and he would be at the mercy of the court as to sentencing.
Because of Shawn’s antics, the State introduced his criminal history which resulted in him being classified as an “habitual felony offender”.
Kent didn’t mention that the crimes in this case not only included illegally entering a residence, but also stealing controlled drugs [enough of them to qualify as him as a “trafficker”), defecating in the kitchen sink, and stealing some other small item(s)].
Shawn had a change of heart, still playing games, and decided to try to withdraw his plea before being sentenced. Shawn claimed some unnamed criminals who were in the courthouse when he was sent for trial threatened him into making the plea.
The judge didn’t buy it, and when Shawn came back for sentencing he got the 20 years; all thanks to the influence of Kent Hovind himself and his co-conspirator Paul John Hansen whose sovereign citizen antics not only failed but put Shawn in a worse case scenario instead of allowing him to plead and get a sentence that could have resulted in him being free today, October 7, 2016.
Shawn recently filed his appeal brief, through a private attorney whom Kent’s visitor Barbara may have helped to significantly finance. The State’s reply is due soon.”
According to an update by Robert Baty, a transcript of court proceedings on September 20, 2018 reveals that Shawn Stuller was granted considerable mercy by the court in allowing his charges to be reinstated using the original plea deal which had been withdrawn. The link to the 35 page transcript is here.
Here is an excerpt beginning on page 6 of a few of the questions asked Shawn Stuller:
Q. At some point in time, did Assistant Public Defender Nash-Early convey a plea offer of five years in prison to you to resolve the case?
Q. Did she explain to you that the maximum sentence that you were facing, if you chose not to–did she explain to you the maximum sentence you were facing if you chose not to accept the five-year plea offer?
Q. At some point in time did she tell you that the plea offer of five years was no longer available?
Q. Now, after you found out that the plea offer of five years was no longer available, did you at some point become aware that you were now subject to an enhanced habitual offender–you were now subject to an enhanced habitual offender sentencing?
Q. And that you were now facing a maximum of life in prison?
Q. Had you known that you were subject to an enhanced sentence of life in prison as an habitual offender at the time of the five-year plea offer was on the table, would you have accepted the five-year plea?
When questioned, the asst. public defender who had formerly represented Stuller, recalled explaining the habitual felony offender sentencing to him, but added, “I do recall that he didn’t believe me because he had never been to prison before.”
Back in 2016, Robert Baty had wondered, “More important from the aspect of my coverage is that failure of Kent Hovind, Paul John Hansen, Rudy Davis (LoneStar1776), and Erin Davis to accept responsibility for the roles they played in putting Shawn away for 20 years, barring a successful appeal and subsequent developments. If Shawn gets a do-over, his prospects might be greatly improved if he could get Kent and Paul to admit to their responsibility as to how it all played out and the three of them would admit to just how silly and frivolous their sovereign citizen antics were.” Thus in the recent 2018 appeal, we observe that Shawn Stuller was very fortunate in his circumstances to be granted a merciful return to the original sentencing proposition of the five-year plea deal.
In this recent update on Shawn Stuller, there was a falling out between Stuller and one of his friendly advisors, Rudy Davis, who has a prison ministry for self-proclaimed “Innocent” American Political Prisoners on his YouTube Channel, Lonestar 1776.
I suppose it is not for me to say who Jason Goodman should feature on his CSTT show. But given his past troubles with some of his former guests, he might want to start selling T-shirts with a line from Alexander Pope’s An Essay on Criticism, For fools rush in, where angels fear to tread.
Update 10/6/2018: Prepper Kitty has provided this link to Didn’t Do It Bail Bonds in connection with Michael Barden.
Yesterday Michael Barden posted a link to the above article on his Facebook page. Comments which were made, have obliged me to respond. Other than the two Facebook groups I am a member of, I rarely post comments to other Facebook pages.I have never commented on YouTube or Twitter. As shown below, comments were made attributing the authorship of this blog to Dave Sweigert, thus denying the true author of the Tracking the Leopard Meroz blog as being Jacquelyn Weaver, who is identified in the copyright notice.
Numerous persons who know me personally can attest that this blog represents my writings. WordPress has the unique identifying features which authenticate my authorship of this blog. Thus I felt compelled to correct the record on Barden’s FB page, and have screenshot several comments to document that fact.
Near the end of the comments, the following was asked and this Update comprises my answer. So let’s begin at the beginning….
To begin with, Michael Barden rhetorically asks who wrote this article which he claims discredits good people. He calls it is a huge article about him, in spite of the fact that half of the article concerns an incarcerated felon named Shawn Stuller who made the mistake of listening to the advice of a couple of men with Sovereign Citizen beliefs. When he rejected a 5 year plea deal on the table, Stuller was given a sentence four times longer for his crimes. Fortunately for him, the Court later had mercy on him and allowed him to accept the original plea deal.
This blog is a Christian commentary, thus this article is tied together with a Scripture quote which serves as a sound warning to those involved in legal matters. I transition what I wrote on Mike Barden’s situation in early October to the Stuller story, by stating that cautionary advice was necessary BEFORE “we attempt to override the legal counsel of a person facing a criminal conviction”. In this case, Mike Barden was discussing legal options in a YouTube video with Jason Goodman, who is not an attorney.
I displayed verifiable public documentation on Barden’s aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and disorderly conduct with a weapon charge, and I gave the opinion that these were serious charges. I also displayed some screenshots to reflect that both Jason Goodman and Mike Barden repeatedly play the theme of his claim to be a Targeted Individual, which implies that his troubles are the fault of others. I quote from a Jason Goodman interview of Barden, where the interviewer is asking whether it is a bigger risk to take the plea deal. The title of this article emphasizes that this cautionary piece involves the dangers of reframing reality through social media videos.
As I understand it, after this article was written, Mike Barden pleaded guilty, and now desires to reverse that and try a different approach to his case. He is not helping himself in that effort when he videotapes himself in his everyday life, or when he discusses his case in detail on the Jason Goodman show. “Evidence” relevant to his case is something that needs to be examined in accordance with the established rules of evidence and in a court setting which is under oath. This cannot be properly done in videos, where the viewer cannot prove the soundness of the testimony of witnesses, and hard facts and evidence.
Immediately after Mike Barden posted my article on his Facebook page, the Facebook Administrator for Crowdsource the Truth (CSTT), Casey Whalin claims without any evidence, that Dave Sweigert wrote the article. He says he can tell by the way the words are put together.
I write a blog which is presently being read by 3 categories of persons: those interested in the Christian Alternative Media; those following the Port of Charleston dirty bomb incident which is now referenced in 2 federal civil lawsuits; and those who are interested in antigovernment/sovereign citizen/ tax protestor issues. The article I posted involving Michael Barden addresses two of those general categories of interest.
I state in my blog under “history and foundation” that I write a commentary to encourage readers to think critically about what they read and hear so that they are not deceived by deceivers. I also state that I use information found in the public domain which anyone can access, and my point in doing this exclusively is to demonstrate that reasoned judgments can be made by analyzing the face of a topic, without knowing all the hidden details. I am not a professional investigative journalist, although I came from a family that published a weekly newspaper for over 50 years. My blog/commentary is free and does not ask for donations. A professional investigative journalist seeks out original sourced material, which requires both time and expense. I have never claimed to be a professional investigative journalist, but rather someone who writes a Christian commentary, which is a different standard of writing. However, I do document everything I comment on, from video transcriptions, screen shots, links to the written works of other authors, etc. Thus Mike Barden has lied about the substance of the article involving him.
It is readily apparent from the Facebook comments displayed above, that the content of this article was not addressed by Michael Barden, nor Casey Whalin. Rather, the main focus of Mike Barden and Casey Whalin and Jason Goodman was to use this article as an opportunity to create a false accusation against Dave Sweigert. I routinely post the public domain court documents of the lawsuit which Sweigert has filed against Goodman, as a courtesy to my readers that follow that case. I also did the same in the Robert David Steele defamation lawsuit. Dave Sweigert has never written anything on this blog, and from what I have observed, when he desires to publicly comment, it is through his own YouTube channel, or through commenting on a social media site.
It is wrong for anyone to attribute the writings of this blog to anyone other than the real author, and these men are fools to promote falsehoods which can be easily overturned in any court room.