Loading summary
Transcript15 lines
- [00:00]
Mint Mobile Announcer
Well, the holidays have come and gone once again. But if you've forgotten to get that special someone in your life a gift, well, Mint Mobile is extending their holiday offer of half off unlimited wireless. So here's the idea. You get it now, you call it an early present for next year. What do you have to lose? Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch limited time.
- [00:20]
Mint Mobile Terms Announcer
50% off regular price for new customers. Upfront payment required $45 for three months, $90 for six month or $180 for 12 month plan taxes and fees. Extra speeds may slow after 50 gigabytes per month when network is busy. See terms. Hey, want a cookie? Oh, I know you just ate, so you're craving something a little sweet. Besides, one cookie isn't gonna kill you. How about half? Just a bite. Bite it. Bite it. Bite it.
- [00:45]
Mochi Health Announcer
Food noise isn't fair, but Mochi Health is your affordable glp. One source that puts you on a path to successful weight loss by quieting food noise.
- [00:53]
Michael Popak
Bite it. Shh.
- [00:55]
Mochi Health Announcer
Learn more@joinmochi.com Mochi members have access to licensed physicians and nutritionists. Results may vary.
- [01:01]
Michael Popak
Where is the gun? Where is Alex Pretty gun? Which according to Border Patrol, was the impetus for him to be restrained and eventually shot. Where's the gun? Three new filings by the Department of Justice on behalf of Homeland Security, FBI and Border Patrol. When you read them, they are contradictory. They demonstrate a complete lack of respect for the crime scene that was not preserved and a trampling of the chain of custody with various offices not taking responsibility. And from what I can see, we have a missing gun. I don't know where it is. Based on the filings. And only two. Sorry. Only one out of the three sworn declarations looked the judge in the eye. Judge Tolstood and told him, don't worry, Judge, we're not deleting or altering any evidence in violation of your temporary restraining order. About the Alex Preddy crime scene, only one out of the three actually told the judge that. The rest, who knows. This all started when the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension ran to the judge to ask for a temporary restraining order, which he granted them immediately to preserve the evidence collected by the feds so that the state investigators can get their hands on it to do their own investigation to see if state law was violated. State criminal law was violated by federal officers. Okay, so you'd think that the Department of Justice and the various Trump administration bureaus would take the position. Judge, you don't have to order us not to destroy evidence. We would Never destroy evidence. We'll sign whatever you write, Judge. Do a consent decree. We'll do an agreed order. No, they fought it. Yes. Sit down, everybody. The Department of Justice fought the federal judge in court today about whether he should extend his temporary restraining order, arguing he didn't have the power or the jurisdiction to order them not to delete and destroy evidence. Yes, you heard me right? Then I said, well, let's check out their declarations under oath. This is testimony to the judge and see if that solves it. Nope. What I picked up was three things we'll go over on this particular hot take on Midas Touch and Legal Afraid. One, the chain of custody has been completely destroyed by the various federal offices. Right. And so who was handling what and handed off to who, including the gun? The crime scene was left completely trampled on and not secured by the Feds for about 38 minutes. That's a problem. And only one of the three declarants told the judge, don't worry, Judge, we didn't delete anything or destroy it, and we won't in the future. That's bad. Let's start where it all began, with the first declaration filed in order by the government. Mark Zito. I'm like, okay, who are you? He says, I am the special agent in charge of Homeland Security's investigations, HSI St. Paul office. All right, and what do you do? Well, he says later in his filing that it is HSI that is responsible for as the lead investigator of the crime scene and of the evidence. He says in paragraph 11, HSI is the lead investigatory entity. He says HSI is leading the investigation into the shooting. Okay, so you must have the chain of custody pretty well under control. You must have secured the crime scene, and you must be willing to tell a federal judge that you're complying with his temporary restraining order. Right. And that you're not going to destroy or delete evidence. Right. Not so fast. So Zito says that they got a copy of the temporary Restraining Order on 25th January from their.1 of their officers. I'm like, okay, are you complying with it? No, doesn't say he's complying with it in paragraph six. Just says they got a copy of it. All right, at that, that opens up the door to more questions than it answers. He says he's aware of the shooting. Okay. He said, ICE officials were not involved in the shooting, but assisted in securing the scene. So now we already have a chain of custody problem and a crime scene control problem, because now you've got HSI and ICE showing up 38 minutes late. He says in paragraph nine, they showed up at 9:42am the shooting took place, according to the records, at 9:03 or 9:04am so for 38 minutes, this crime scene was just trampled on because they didn't think to preserve it after shooting ten times. Mr. Preddy. Okay, so then they say, after saying they're the lead investigative investigatory entity, they talk about the FBI's role. Paragraph 12. This is where the gun goes missing. The Federal Bureau of Investigation initially responded to the scene of the shooting to collect evidence. Why? Well, why didn't HSI show up to collect evidence? Okay. Including a mobile phone and a firearm belonging to the deceased. So the mobile phone and firearm are collected by the FBI according to Mr. Zito's representation. And then as of this filing, the mobile phone collected by the FBI was turned over to hsi. Where's the gun? Two things are collected by the FBI. One is turned over to the lead investigator. Chain of custody problem. Missing gun problem. Let's continue. The HCI will continue to collect evidence. They are trained because over his training never says before he signs the declaration that he's going to comply with the temporary restraining order and he's not going to destroy evidence. That special agent in charge. Okay, so then I said, let me go to the next declarant. Now we go to Jeffrey Egerton. What's he do? He works for Border Patrol. He's the executive director. Acting executive director. Everybody's an acting something in the Trump administration. Nobody wants the full time job. He's the acting executive director for the Investigative Operations Directorate of the. Of the Customs and Border Patrol. Okay. Talks about what he did as a patrol agent, what he's familiar with. I'm like, okay, this guy seems to be interesting. What else you got? So then he go. I said, well, let's get to the crime scene. He says they got a hold notice on January 25, but he didn't get the temporary restraining order about all personnel currently assigned to Operation Metro Surge to preserve information. Doesn't talk about the shooting. I said, okay.
- [07:43]
Ben Meiselis
He.
- [07:43]
Michael Popak
He said he's aware of the shooting on paragraph eight. Yeah. But then says in paragraph 11 that Border Patrol was not involved in gathering the evidence. Okay. Yet in the next paragraph, he says that the body cam footage, which, by the way, Mr. Egerton is evidence was. Has been preserved. Doesn't say by whom. Chain of custody problem. Doesn't say by whom. Who preserved it? The officers who wore it. Okay. And that it's going to be preserved for 75 years. By whom? So an agency that's not responsible for the investigation and not involved with gathering evidence has a key piece of evidence still apparently maybe with them that hasn't been turned over to the investigators at hsi.
- [08:34]
Ben Meiselis
Hey, everybody, Ben Meiselis here from the Midas Touch Network. I wanted to let you know about my podcast partner Michael Popo's new law firm. It's called the Popoc Firm. Michael Popo's pursuing his dream of starting his own law firm. Really based on the popular demand by all the Midas mighty and legal A effers who are approaching Michael Popak with their cases and saying, can you help us? And at that time, Popak was not able to. So he went out on his own. He started the Popoc Firm where he is now handling catastrophic injury cases like car accident cases, trucking cases, malpractice cases, big negligence cases, wrongful death cases. So if you or someone you know have a case like this, the consultation with Popox firm is free. Give them a call. See if you have a case. It's ThePopoc Firm.com ThePopoc Firm.com or you can call 877-popock-af-p o p o k a f so 1-877-P-O-P o k. Give Michael Popak a call. And I'm really proud of you, Popak. Thanks for all the hard work you're putting in.
- [09:48]
Michael Popak
So we got body cam footage sort of out there, and the gun still missing. No answer to the gun query, where is the gun? All right. And again, just like Mr. Zito, Mr. Egerton never says to the judge, don't worry, I won't destroy evidence. Let's move to the last affidavit, that of no name redacted FBI agent. The judge knows whose it is, whose name it is. One day, maybe we will too. And I'm like, all right, well, we know from Mr. Zito's affidavit that the FBI was involved with collection. Right? I just read that to you. They're involved with collection. So I'm like, all right, well, let's go to the guy that was responsible for collection. Maybe he'll be able to tell me something. We also know from Mr. Zito that the FBI turned over the phone. I'm like, all right, well, let's find out where the gun is, shall we? Remember, in paragraph 12 of Mr. Zito, we'll put it up on the screen that the FBI initially responded to collect evidence, including the mobile Phone and the firearm and the mobile phone has been turned over to the lead investigator. So let's find out where the phone is, shall we? In the FBI filing, he says that he is assigned to the Minneapolis field office and that he oversees the evidence response team, ERT. Okay. About processing at crime scenes that on January 24th he was sent to collect evidence relating to the shooting. Okay, so far I understand. He says there's a 12 step process for collecting evidence. However, due to the scene paragraph four becoming volatile. When? When did it become volatile? How the 12 step process was adapted. Sounds like you didn't follow it for the safety of personnel. So it sounds like the chain of custody has been destroyed and so has the crime scene. Okay, then it was all evidence that was collected. He doesn't tell me what it was. Or the judge was transported back to the Minneapolis FBI field office and then it was packaged like what evidence? He doesn't say the phone. He doesn't say. The gun. He doesn't say that he turned the phone over to the Homeland Security lead investigator. He doesn't say that he turned the gun over to it. He says that the FBI has not altered or destroyed the collected evidence. Whatever. That's it. Again, I present to you the declaration of the FBI that doesn't talk about the gun, nor the phone, nor where the gun is. And that's it, folks. No more declarations. So what's the takeaway? We have three different entities of the administration, Border Patrol, Homeland Security and the FBI who allowed the crime scene collectively to be trampled on and wasted, allowed protesters and others to destroy potential evidence. They sent the FBI in apparently to collect the evidence even though they're not leading the investigation. They sent Border Patrol in even though they're not leading the investigation. Border Patrol says it doesn't have any evidence about the shooting, except they have the body cam footage, which they don't acknowledge as evidence. And they're holding that evidence and have not turned it over to the lead investigator. Homeland Security Investigations. The FBI collected. Homeland Security says they collected a gun and a mobile phone, but that only the mobile phone was turned over to hsi. FBI says they collect it, but don't tell me what, don't tell me when, don't tell me how. Said they had to alter their policies and procedures because of the situation on the ground. They don't talk about a phone or a gun and they certainly don't turn anything over to hsi, the lead investigator. Do you see why the judge in this case is likely not to lift the temporary restraining order about the preservation of evidence and why there is so much, so many problems with the crime scene, the collection of evidence, the chain of custody and the rest. Where's the gun that now it may be somewhere else, like alcohol, tobacco and firearm. Maybe it's being evaluated. Was it returned? Was it, is it given back to border patrol agents? Where is it? I just know as of now, I can't tell from the filings and I don't know. The judge knows and I can tell it hasn't been bagged and tagged to be reviewed. And this is all about the Minnesota Criminal Apprehension Bureau trying to get their hands on the evidence of the crime scene, the witnesses and the shell casings and the rest in order to decide whether state crimes have been violated and the judge is trying to help them there. The fact that a judge even had to enter an order to order the Trump administration not to destroy evidence. And only one out of the three Clarence thought it was, it was a good thing to tell the judge they haven't destroyed any evidence. The other two ignored it, that, that out of the three, none of them said they're complying with the temporary restraining order. And a Trump administration who's fighting not to comply with an order that just makes them not destroy evidence. I'm Michael Popo. We got to cover it just this way here on the Midas Touch Network and Legal A. Thanks for being here. Hit the free subscribe button here. Hit it over on Legal AF YouTube channel where you'll get my updates on when this judge makes his ruling in the next, I would say 24 to 48 hours about the temporary restraining order. And when he does, I'll be back at it here and on Legal AF YouTube and substack until my next report. I'm Michael Popak.
- [15:24]
Legal AF Host
Can't get your fill of Legal af.
- [15:25]
Michael Popak
Me neither.
- [15:26]
Legal AF Host
That's why we formed the Legal AF substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the substack. You'll find the court filing in the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called wait for it Morning af. What else? All the other contributors from Legal ao.
- [15:45]
Michael Popak
For there as well.
- [15:45]
Legal AF Host
We got some new reporting, we got interviews, we got ad free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on substack. Come over now to free subscribe.