I am the prosecutor assigned to this case for trial. From my review of the file, it appears that you insisted that we identify victims in order to charge assault. We've done what you asked but still this case hasn't settled. I'm wondering if cooler heads have prevailed and we are headed for a resolution or if your client continues to insist a trial.
Should we be going to trial, my investigators have continued to identify victims on the bus and we will add additional counts of Terroristic Threats and Assault 2 as necessary. Please keep in mind that this concept of identifying individual victims was your idea and could lead to multiple consecutive sentences.
The tone of your prior correspondence seems to indicate that you don't believe this offense was particularly serious. I am assigned to handle all the felony charges arising from the RNC (other than those involving the conspiracy). Throwing large, heavy objects from an overpass onto an open interstate with the sole purpose of impairing the constitutional rights of busloads of citizens by either injuring or terrorizing them is by far the most serious RNC case I have.
Sincerely,
Richard Dusterhoft
Prosecutor
Critique of this letter from Dave's lawyer
A few points are in order here.The author of the letter wonders why the case has not settled but has never made Mr. Mahoney an offer. He surely is not so deluded as to think we would entertain entering a plea of guilty in the absence of an agreement on disposition.
This is clearly an attempt to coerce a guilty plea out of Dave before he has had a chance to get all the legal issues resolved. For example, he is accused of pointing while someone else drops a bag of sand. It is alleged that the bag of sand landed on the back end of a bus carrying Republicans. The issue that arises from this claim by the government is whether merely pointing is a sufficiently substantial act to constitute aiding and abetting. Other issues also exist that would never get resolved with a plea at this early date.
Mr. Mahoney is not a government actor; it is therefore a fundamental principle of constitutional law that he cannot violate anyone's constitutional rights. We all know, however, that constitutional rights were of little to no concern by the occupying forces during the RNC.
It was not our idea to identify victims and then pile on charges as the government has done here. Our point was that a bag of sand is not normally a weapon and can only be considered a weapon if there is someone present to be harmed by it. In their initial Complaint the government never alleged that any such person was present. We pointed that out to them and the judge agreed that was a problem.
I'm not sure who this writer considers a hot head here. Certainly the writer of this letter is not a "cooler" head.
The writer of the letter claims this incident is the worst thing that happened during the RNC. Apparently those persons whose rights were violated by unlawful arrests and detentions, beatings, chemical sprays, and rubber projectiles simply do not count. Nor apparently does the "chill" on speech and protest that currently exists around here on account of the behavior of the authorities during the RNC.
Robert Kolstad
Click to download the attached file(s):
More from Ramsey County Attorney | Top of Page
Useful article? Use these tools to let someone know:
Send & Share | Print | Access RSS Feed for Syndication
