🪦 Deceased Nathan Larson / Tisane / Lysander / Leucosticte - Creepy pedo "incel" LOLbertarian Putin and Breivik lovechild.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
PPEcel said:
It's going to be a long wait, the Eastern District of California is one of the most understaffed, if not the most, federal district courts in the country.

I wouldn't be surprised if sentencing takes place early/mid 2024.
Click to expand...
I hope so. That actually sounds optimistic. Maybe this guy is resigned to his fate, since he's fucked himself out of being able to do a clown show representing himself out of pure autism, but if he wanted to be a real prick, I think the effective denial of his participation in his own case is something worthy of interlocutory review, as is the denial of his right to self representation.

Considering the ubiquity of videoconferencing technology these days, his desire not to wear a mask should be accommodated reasonably.

I am also seeing a contradiction in the concept that he's competent to stand trial but essentially being treated as incompetent to represent himself, apparently because of an irrational aversion to masks (well at least I consider it one).

If he wasn't deliberately fucking himself he has a lot of ways to throw a monkey wrench in the proceedings and slow them down even more.
 
AnOminous said:
I hope so. That actually sounds optimistic. Maybe this guy is resigned to his fate, since he's fucked himself out of being able to do a clown show representing himself out of pure autism, but if he wanted to be a real prick, I think the effective denial of his participation in his own case is something worthy of interlocutory review, as is the denial of his right to self representation.
Click to expand...
Non-legal person here, what's an interlocutory review (or appeal)? I googled it and Wikipedia told me it's when "a ruling by a trial court is appealed while other aspects are proceeding." I also found a guide to self-representation in federal district court while googling "interlocutory appeal right of self-representation", which is probably what Nathan would do.

I get that part (about as well as I could have.) But what exactly is Nathan going to appeal, as in what ruling? Is he going to claim that he was deprived of his right to self-representation, as you say, or is he going to claim that denying him participation in his own case is wrong? Or is he going to do none of that and shitpost on Gettr instead? (archive).

Please let me know if I'm being irritating, by the way. I just find this sort of thing fascinating as a non-legal spectator.
 
deepFriedBaka said:
Non-legal person here, what's an interlocutory review (or appeal)? I googled it and Wikipedia told me it's when "a ruling by a trial court is appealed while other aspects are proceeding." I also found a guide to self-representation in federal district court while googling "interlocutory appeal right of self-representation", which is probably what Nathan would do.

I get that part (about as well as I could have.) But what exactly is Nathan going to appeal, as in what ruling?
Click to expand...
The general rule is that one can only appeal after the case is done in the trial court, and an interlocutory appeal is an exception to that general rule. There are a few things, such as the issuance of, or granting or denying a request to modify an injunction, where there is a right to an appeal while the rest of the case is pending.

This, though, would be a permissive appeal, that is, the appeals court could approve the appeal and then grant or deny relief, or, more likely, deny interlocutory review entirely. Specifically, the argument would be that the failure to allow him to represent himself is not only of constitutional dimension but could not be repaired on direct appeal, as the harm would already have occurred.

(This could also be framed as a mandamus with similar reasoning with similarly minimal chances of success.)

The ruling would be denying him his right to self-representation discussed earlier in this thread. I think he has the right to represent himself, plus I hope he actually does because I want to see someone actually sentenced to life in the electric chair at some time in my life.
 
Last edited:
Got curious and put Nathan's details into a free Sentencing Guidelines calculator. I think the result speaks for itself. Not a lawyer, etc.

Screen Shot 2022-05-29 at 4.10.30 PM.png

(I wish. He sadly won't get the death penalty. But he's fucked either way.)

For context, according to the calculator, Nathan's sentencing level without a plea bargain is 43, and with one is 40.

United States v. Nathan Daniel Larson - Possible sentencing according to USSG calculator (sentencing.us)

Screen Shot 2022-05-29 at 4.09.59 PM.png

Without Pleading Guilty

Months: Zone: Level: History: Fine:
life D 43 II $25,000 to $250,000

Count 1: 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)
U.S.S.G. § 2A4.1(a) Base Offense Level 32
U.S.S.G. § 2A4.1(b)(5) the victim was sexually exploited +6
U.S.S.G. § 2A4.1(b)(6) the victim is a minor and, in exchange for money or other consideration, was placed in the care or custody of another person who had no legal right to such care or custody of the victim +3
Total offense level for this count 41

Count 2: 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a)–(d)
2G1.3(a)(3) Base Offense Level 28
2G1.3(b)(3) the offense involved the use of a computer or an interactive computer service to persuade, induce, entice, coerce, or facilitate the travel of, the minor to engage in prohibited sexual conduct +2
Total offense level for this count 30

Count 3: 18 U.S.C. § 2422
2G1.3(a)(4) Base Offense Level 24
2G1.3(b)(1) the minor was otherwise in the custody, care, or supervisory control of the defendant +2
2G1.3(b)(3) the offense involved the use of a computer or an interactive computer service to persuade, induce, entice, coerce, or facilitate the travel of, the minor to engage in prohibited sexual conduct +2
Total offense level for this count 28

Count 4: 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a),(b)
2G2.1(a) Base Offense Level 32
2G2.1(b)(1)(A) offense involved a minor who had not attained the age of twelve years +4
2G2.1(b)(6) Use of misrepresentation or computer service +2
Total offense level for this count 38

Count 5: 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a),(b)
2G2.2(a)(2) Base Offense Level 22
2G2.2(b)(1) the defendant's conduct was limited to the receipt or solicitation of material involving the sexual exploitation of a minor; and the defendant did not intend to traffic in, or distribute, such material -2
2G2.2(b)(2) the material involved a prepubescent minor or a minor who had not attained the age of 12 years +2
2G2.2(b)(6) the offense involved the use of a computer or an interactive computer service for the possession, transmission, receipt, or distribution of the material, or for accessing with intent to view the material +2
2G2.2(b)(7)(A) 75 images +2
Total offense level for this count 26

Multiple Counts (Chapter 3D)
§ 3D1.1(a)(1) Counts grouped as follows: Group 1 is Count 1 (18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)). Group 2 is Count 2 (18 U.S.C. § 2423(a)–(d)). Group 3 is Count 3 (18 U.S.C. § 2422). Group 4 is Count 4 (18 U.S.C. § 2251(a),(b)). Group 5 is Count 5 (18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a),(b)).
§ 3D1.1(a)(2) & 3D1.3 Offense levels applicable for each group: Group 1: 41; Group 2: 30; Group 3: 28; Group 4: 38; Group 5: 26. Highest offense level: 41
§ 3D1.1(a)(3) Total units: 2 units, increase of 2. Breakdown: Group 1: 1 unit; Group 2: 0 units; Group 3: 0 units; Group 4: 1 unit; Group 5: 0 units +43

Criminal History (Chapter 4A)
§ 4A1.1 Criminal history level: II (2 or 3 points) 2
Total points (Criminal History category II) 2

Total offense level 43

Pleading Guilty
Acceptance of Responsibility (U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1)
§ 3E1.1(a) the defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense -2
§ 3E1.1(b) Government motion -1

Total offense level 40
Click to expand...
 
Trapitalism said:
What the hell is happening with his trial? At this rate, he'd be 95 when they try him.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the guy did it just get a length of rope and find a sturdy tree near the prison. That or put him in genpop, leak what he's there for and let the problem take care of itself. How much tax payer money is getting wasted on this pedoscum?
 
Cases like this can take years as was said earlier look at Mercedes Carrera the ex porn star meth bitch who molested her underage daughter for darknet pornos to sell to faggots like Nathan. The problem isn’t the actual facts of the case he was caught up in but probably finding ALL the victims and evidence this sped has out there and considering he was out and proud about his status it’s bound to be a bit. Besides he is locked up and never seeing a kid again thank fuck so this isn’t a ‘waste’.

I am just glad the kid of his is safe from him considering what he wanted to do.
 
Trapitalism said:
What the hell is happening with his trial? At this rate, he'd be 95 when they try him.
Click to expand...
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California has barely half the number of federal judges it needs to hear cases in a timely manner.

Congress sets the number of federal judges for each federal judicial district. Obviously, as the population of the United States increases, so does the number of lawsuits that are filed, and the number of judges required to hear them. But Congress is generally reluctant to hire more federal judges because, if your party doesn't control the White House, you'd be allowing a President you dislike to nominate judges.

California's population has exploded in the last few decades, but the number of federal judges in the state hasn't commensurately increased for the aforementioned political reasons. This means massive case backlogs in all four federal district courts in the state.

Of the 77 new federal judgeships that Judicial Conference recommended be created last year, 40 were in California:

So that means Larson has to wait. And civil litigants will need to wait even longer.
 
PPEcel said:
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California has barely half the number of federal judges it needs to hear cases in a timely manner.

Congress sets the number of federal judges for each federal judicial district. Obviously, as the population of the United States increases, so does the number of lawsuits that are filed, and the number of judges required to hear them. But Congress is generally reluctant to hire more federal judges because, if your party doesn't control the White House, you'd be allowing a President you dislike to nominate judges.

California's population has exploded in the last few decades, but the number of federal judges in the state hasn't commensurately increased for the aforementioned political reasons. This means massive case backlogs in all four federal district courts in the state.

Of the 77 new federal judgeships that Judicial Conference recommended be created last year, 40 were in California:

So that means Larson has to wait. And civil litigants will need to wait even longer.
Click to expand...
Turning judicial offices political was possibly the worst idea anyone could ever come up with for the smooth running of the courts. As exemplified by the history of legislating through the courts.
 
PPEcel said:
So that means Larson has to wait. And civil litigants will need to wait even longer.
Click to expand...
He's virtually guaranteed to go away for so long nobody involved is in any big hurry.
Coccxys said:
Turning judicial offices political was possibly the worst idea anyone could ever come up with for the smooth running of the courts.
Click to expand...
They never weren't. The first major Supreme Court decision was about the appointment of a federal judge when Jefferson refused to deliver the appointment of one of Adams's picks after defeating Adams in the election.

And federal judges aren't elected, so they're as little affected by politics directly as it's possible to be.
 
AnOminous said:
They never weren't. The first major Supreme Court decision was about the appointment of a federal judge when Jefferson refused to deliver the appointment of one of Adams's picks after defeating Adams in the election.

And federal judges aren't elected, so they're as little affected by politics directly as it's possible to be.
Click to expand...
good old john marshall
 
The nice thing about Nathan's trial stretching for a couple more years is that it gives me the incentive to buy a Pacer account. Courtlistener is pretty good at showing documents already paid, but it doesn't cover documents that people haven't bought yet (like the status conference transcripts).

Everyone who's involved here (namely the government, Nathan, and his lawyer) understand that he's going away for good. The government obviously want that outcome, Nathan himself isn't stupid enough to think he can wriggle out of this, and his standby lawyer is well aware that his client's charges carry the very real possibility of a life sentence.

Keeping him in jail is a massive waste of taxpayer money, but Nathan taking himself out would be a denial of justice. There's really no clear outcome here that doesn't involve a lot of continuances and delays before he inevitably pleads guilty or is foolish enough to insist on a jury trial.

(I forgot that Nathan was reassigned counsel after his mask spergout.)
 
Last edited:
deepFriedBaka said:
The nice thing about Nathan's trial stretching for a couple more years is that it gives me the incentive to buy a Pacer account. Courtlistener is pretty good at showing documents already paid, but it doesn't cover documents that people haven't bought yet (like the status conference transcripts).

Everyone who's involved here (namely the government, Nathan, and his lawyer) understand that he's going away for good. The government obviously want that outcome, Nathan himself isn't stupid enough to think he can wriggle out of this, and his standby lawyer is well aware that his client's charges carry the very real possibility of a life sentence.

Keeping him in jail is a massive waste of taxpayer money, but Nathan taking himself out would be a denial of justice. There's really no clear outcome here that doesn't involve a lot of continuances and delays before he inevitably pleads guilty or is foolish enough to insist on a jury trial.

(I forgot that Nathan was reassigned counsel after his mask spergout.)
Click to expand...
Many of the status conference transcripts haven't been purchased because there are usually months of delays before they are available for purchase. Par for the course in federal courts.
 
Coccxys said:
Yeah, the guy did it just get a length of rope and find a sturdy tree near the prison. That or put him in genpop, leak what he's there for and let the problem take care of itself. How much tax payer money is getting wasted on this pedoscum?
Click to expand...
I would rather put him in solitary without any light, the only contact with the outside world being his meager meals through a tiny hole in the door, left alone with his thoughts in complete sensory deprivation for the rest of his life.

Or maybe we could send him to Putin, and Putin can send him to Black Dolphin.
 
We’re going to get a documentary on Nathan tomorrow. It’s a good introduction for those who are just discovering him, probably could add it to the OP when it comes out.


EDIT: I'm a retard today, it's out now. Link.
 

Attachments

  • 3841C5E8-A895-473D-A51F-75A1C0091B99.jpeg
    3841C5E8-A895-473D-A51F-75A1C0091B99.jpeg
    798.8 KB · Views: 133
Last edited:
TheBest said:
We’re going to get a documentary on Nathan tomorrow. It’s a good introduction for those who are just discovering him, probably could add it to the OP when it comes out.
Click to expand...
@skaytec is long gone, but maybe you could ask one of the mods if they're willing to help out? Fair warning, the comments are abound with pronoun sperging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom