No products in the cart.


Navarro: Jury Cannot Use Constitution – Bunkerville Trial

By Loren Edward Pearce


Court watch, Tuesday, April 4

That is what we have with Gloria Navarro in her interaction with the fed prosecution team. What we really have is a judge who is solidly in support of her team mates, the federal prosecutors.

At 10:11 am, on April 4 during arguments over jury instructions, Navarro looked at the prosecution team and said, “I am not sure what to do” then she said she would go back to the issue later. Repeatedly, throughout the hearing, the judge would look to the prosecutors for guidance and then would say, “I agree”.

The defense was repeatedly denied their motions and requests until the suggestion was made for a jury instruction to change the wording from “victim” to “alleged victim” so as to not give the jury the impression that the victim was a certain fact. Adding the word alleged created the impression that there was still doubt as to who was the victim.

Like throwing a bone with no meat to a dog, the judge reluctantly agreed to change the language to “alleged victim”. A short time later, the judge took the meatless bone away from the dog, and said, “I am reversing myself, I am not going to modify the language to alleged but will leave it as it is.” This tiny concession to the defense was too much for the judge and prosecution and it was taken back.

The defense repeatedly said that it was for the jury to determine if and when the 1st and 2nd amendment would apply in determining their relationship to the intent and actions of the defendants. The prosecution would have opportunity to show the jury why the defense argument was not correct and then let the jury decide.

Navarro said, and I am a witness, jury nullification must be prohibited and no jury instruction should include any mention of the 1st and 2nd amendment. She went on to say that bringing any mention of the 1st and 2nd amendment to the jury would not be helpful and would confuse them. Should there be any violations of the 1st and 2nd amendment or other constitutional questions, that it could be appealed and it was for the appellate court to decide, not the jury. Of course, that is an outrageous statement, starting with the fact that constitutional questions are for the jury to decide as facts may relate to it and appeals means long prison time for the defendants as they await an appellate decision.

One issue that jumped out at me was Navarro’s denial of a jury instruction that would show that Nevada is an open carry state and as such, many of the defendants thought it was perfectly legal to carry weapons while at the protest. The prosecution objected, and the judge agreed, that federal law trumps state law and as such, the Nevada open carry had no relevancy and the jury didn’t need to be confused by that.

Eric Parker asked to testify on his own behalf. When asked by the judge why he wanted to testify on his own behalf and if he understood the risks he was taking, Eric said, “I feel obligated to testify because the court has taken away our other witnesses, not allowing them to testify, so I am compelled to testify as one of the only remaining witnesses the court will allow”.


From Redoubt News

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution
against all enemies,  foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.   You can donate HERE.





  1. “What we really have is a judge who is solidly in support of her team mates, the federal prosecutors.”

    No what you have can no longer even be described as a “judge.”

  2. I’ve explained this to people I know like this: whether you believe these patriots are guilty or not guilty our constitution, the one banned from the courtroom of “judge” Navarro, guarantees these men rights to a fair trial. Call your congressman and senators, make noise. And remember these men stood up for what they believed in, and if your reading this you have too, we have to make noise to be heard.

    1. I called the House Commitee on The Judiciary at (202) 225-3951 Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte.The number is being given out on some facebook pages by people at the courthose in Las Vegas and the staffer told me they are recieving many calls. It only took a few minutes.

  3. People!!!!! ,This so called judge, (an Agent of satan),has repeatedly given you your battle plan. Her greatest fear is a ‘Jury nullification” as she Nullifies the Constitution. You can spit in the ocean if you want, but that is not the front line.

    Put a thousand boots on the ground (un-armed) and march around that court house demanding nullification. make it loud and clear. This is our JERICHO! (JOSHUA : CHAPTER 6, V.5). A THOUSAND VOICES WILL PENETRATE THE COURT HOUSE WALLS. Use God’s plan of attack before it’s to late. Is there a Joshua on the front??????.

  4. Federal Judge Navarro has foresaken her oath as a Judge. She should be impeached. Her oath I assume was similar to my oath of enlistment in that there was a section on protecting and defending the Constitution. When she denied the Defense the protection of the Constitution and any testimony concerning violation of First and Second Amendment protected rights she attacked the Constitution and violated her oath.

  5. I believe the reports of the oath-breaking “judge”, as much the same was done to Wayne Fincher years ago.

    However, in the interest of providing extraordinary evidence to those who will believe this article and those who share it are making extraordinary claims: is hard evidence of these criminal acts available? Video would be preferable, but an audio transcript should be almost as impactful. If nothing else, does someone have a verifiable written transcript to provide as evidence?

    1. This article and one other were emailed to me while Redoubt News was offline due to a DDOS, denial of service, attack. (Interesting timing on that.) They are back online, so I fixed the link. I will also add the other links to my posting here.

      The evidence is reports from people who are sitting in that courtroom each day. We know and trust Shari Dovale, and she knows and trusts her sources. Cell phones are not allowed in the courtroom. The observers are not even allowed to smile, frown, or cry, but they are taking notes. Everything that is happening in that courtroom should be “on the record”. Not sure when that will be available to the public.

      1. Again, I personally believe the reports. Remember, however, that members of the Bundy family were subject to crimes of assault, battery, and kidnapping BEFORE the later outpouring of support great enough to face down armed BLM criminals and return the family’s stolen cattle.

        The turning point only came after the publication of video showing thuggish, criminal behavior of armed government agents against nonviolent but upset citizens who were being prevented from merely observing what they suspected was additional criminal activity, namely the illegal killing of their livestock.

        It has not been difficult to obtain transcripts in some form or another from courts in my locale, or at the very least have the word of a clerk that transcripts of recent activity will be available within a small number of days.

        Put bluntly, there seems to be no reason for the average American to “trust you” when not only has no apparent attempt been made to provide verifiable evidence, but particularly when such verifiable evidence is routinely and inexpensively available to people who are physically visiting the courthouse.

        I already know how this scenario is likely to work out for the Bundys and their friends, simply because barring mention of the Constitution from court proceedings is now a routine practice.

        Why not tempt the lightning to strike twice? Put up the lightning rod – put up the verifiable evidence!

      2. The transcripts are not available, as yet. The dailies (if they are available) will go to the court and the attorneys,not the general public. Recording devices are not allowed in the courtroom. This is the same as in Portland. Everyone is searched and put through a metal detector before entering the courtroom. Even the MSM is barred from recording the trial.

        There are several people in the courtroom that are reporting the events. Many videos and write-ups, but only after they leave the courthouse. What other evidence are you looking for?

        If you think I am mistaken, I fully support your efforts to get copies of the transcripts.

      3. As observed by one of the greatest tyrants of the 20th century, “Politics is war without bloodshed”(Mao Zedong), so this should be treated as an act of war as it is so blatantly an attack on the liberties we cherish and an obvious abuse of taken power by an official who has sworn to uphold the supreme laws of the land. Those patriots in and around the are of this unjust joke of a trial, must hold the line and refuse to let free men be imprisoned for doing their civil duty. Their imprisonment must be avoided by any means necessary; leave no man behind. If we abandon our patriot brothers and sisters in their greatest time of need, moral will suffer on the whole and the war will be lost where the greatest losses and gains are made, in our hearts and minds. “LIBERTY OR DEATH!”

Comments are closed.