Wolverine Watchmen WERE NOT bound over for trial in Antrim County
In an October 8, 2020, article entitled Mysterious Wolverine Watchmen militia group ‘flew under radar,’ The Detroit News reported that: “Extremism experts say they had never heard of the Wolverine Watchmen until members of the militia group were accused Thursday of a conspiracy to overthrow the government as part of plans to kidnap the governor.”
Over two years later, on December 7, 2022, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office issued a press release under this demonstrably false headline: “Wolverine Watchman Bound Over in Antrim County.”
While attending the Jackson County trial held for three bona fide members of the Wolverine Watchmen militia, in October of 2022, I observed then Assistant AG Sunita Doddamani introduce numerous exhibits that were admitted as evidence to be considered by that jury. Several of the AG’s poster board exhibits were displayed on an easel, including the above photo array depicting 33 alleged Wolverine Watchmen militia members.
SEE: 13 charged in plots against Michigan governor, police — AP — October 8, 2020
The three Jackson County defendants, Pete Musico, Joseph Morrison and Paul Bellar, are shown in the AG’s “Wolverine Watchmen” trial exhibit alongside federal defendants Ty Garbin, Kaleb Franks, Daniel Harris and Brandon Caserta. Several other individuals who the AG’s office have listed as “unindicted co-conspirators” are also portrayed in the array, including Jada Morrison, Andrew Nickles, Jared Beauchense, Joshua Miller, Solomon Clark, David Norris, Alex Davidson and Brian Puffenberger.
SEE: VERDICT: 2 men found not guilty in Whitmer kidnap plot trial, mistrial declared for other defendants — WXYZ Detroit — April 8, 2022 & Whitmer Kidnapping Plot: Adam Fox, Barry Croft, Jr. guilty on all charges — FOX 2 — August 23, 2022.
What’s distinctly missing from the above array are photographs of any of the five Antrim County defendants who were charged with providing material support for terrorist acts.
In late August of 2022, I filmed the four-day preliminary examination held for Antrim County defendants William Null, Michael Null, Shawn Fix, Brian Higgins and Eric Molitor. During that proceeding, the exhibits and witness testimony presented by the AG’s office clearly demonstrated that none of the five Antrim County defendants were ever members of the Wolverine Watchmen militia. I was standing in the back of the courtroom as FBI Agent Henrik Impola referred to the AG’s “Subjects of Investigation” exhibit and heard him testify that: “The Wolverine Watchmen are a self-styled anarchist organization out of Jackson County, Michigan. They are a group that’s got a vetting procedure membership qualifications. Once you become a member there are certain expectations. It’s has grown to as large as 45 members at one period in time.”
Throughout Agent Impola’s preliminary examination testimony, he repeatedly acknowledged that the Antrim County defendants were not members of the Wolverine Watchmen:
During the Jackson County trial, FBI informant Dan Chappel also confirmed that Antrim County defendant Shawn Fix was not a member of the Wolverine Watchmen:
SEE: ‘The jury has spoken.’ Jackson County men emotional after being convicted in Whitmer kidnapping plot — MLive — October 26, 2022
A month after the AG’s office issued their “Wolverine Watchman Bound Over in Antrim County” press release, I interviewed defendant Eric Molitor and he responded to their claims in the below video clip:
On February 10, Eric Molitor’s attorney William Barnett asserted in a court filing that a “prejudicial press release was recently widely disseminated by the Michigan Attorney General’s Office, falsely asserting that Defendant [Eric] Molitor and four other Antrim County defendants, were members of the Michigan-based militia group, “The Wolverine Watchmen.” Barnett’s filing also alleged that the AG’s “Office knew this assertion to be false and nonetheless proceeded to prejudice all five (5) Antrim County defendants with this highly prejudicial misstatement and blatantly false misrepresentation. That this press release portrayed all the Antrim County Defendants in an extremely prejudicial false light as other Wolverine Watchmen members have either pled guilty. or have been tried and convicted in other courts in unrelated matters in Michigan.”
During a hearing on March 21, Assistant AG William Rollstin argued to Antrim County Circuit Court Judge Charles Hamlyn that: “What has been offered to you is the press release that Mr. Barnett was kind enough to attach to his response. Wolverine Watchmen Bound over for trial, and bound over in Antrim County. Okay. That’s the title of the press release. But just like, you know, when we when we look at a case when we decide a case, we look at all the evidence in the case. What Mr. Barnett failed to point out to the Court and Mr. Siver failed to point out the Court is it’s like a contract. We don’t just read the first sentence of a contract. We read the entire document. […] My point is: when you read the press release, if you get past the first sentence, it’s very accurate and we make no apologies for that.” (See below video at: 49:34 — 51:26)
A March 22 Record-Eagle article entitled ‘CAN’T UN-RING BELL’: Some documents will remain accessible to public, judge rules, reported that: “It’s ironic that the people want to have the process not tainted, yet at the same time they’re trying the case in the media, blackballing and putting the stigma on these defendants, labeling them as Wolverine Watchmen,” said William Barnett, a Cadillac-based attorney who represents Eric Molitor. “None of them are Wolverine Watchmen,” Barnett said. “That was brought out by the FBI agent.”
FBI Agent Henrik Impola, who was in the courtroom Tuesday, previously testified as a state witness that none of the Antrim County defendants were members of the Wolverine Watchmen, described as an anti-government militia group based in Michigan.”
Within his April 14th OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PEOPLE’S MOTION FOR USE OF CO-CONSPIRATOR STATEMENTS, William Null’s attorney Damian D. Nunzio argued that: “Despite the People’s very broad statement of facts, these are the facts that apply to William, Null. William Null was not a member of the Wolverine Watchmen. William Null did not meet any members of the Wolverine Watchmen. William Null was a member of the Michigan Liberty Militia, not a group classified by the FBI as a terrorist enterprise.”
During a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) / Open Meetings Act (OMA) seminar in Traverse City on April 14, AG Nessel looked directly into my camera and initiated a discussion about the Wolverine Watchmen. (See below video at: 49:08–53:58 & 1:28:05–1:30:01)
AG Nessel additionally provided a rationale for why she believes exhibits her Assistant AGs presented during open court proceedings should still be withheld under FOIA. At the end of the seminar, I asked AG Nessel why she and her press office keep incorrectly referring to the five Antrim defendants as Wolverine Watchmen. Below is transcript of the relevant portion of that FOIA/OMA seminar:
AG Dana Nessel: So I think it’s just important that people understand that we want to make sure that every defendant is entitled to a fair trial. And let me let me say this, because I know there’s some great interest here in regard to the Wolverine Watchmen case. Right. Just say yes.
Eric L. VanDussen: Yes, ma’am.
AG Dana Nessel: Okay. So let me talk about this a little bit, because I think this has been of some interest up here, you know. And it has to do with the notion that because you had evidence that was admitted, either in a preliminary exam of a defendant or in another case, a similar case, that’s related in another court, in another trial. And the notion is, well, shouldn’t all of that information, shouldn’t all that evidence be made available to the press, or to the public. Well, in theory, it seems reasonable. But here’s the problem with that. We don’t know what the judge in this particular case is going to rule in terms of the admissibility of that evidence. So let’s say that you had, when it comes to this case involving the, you know, plot involving the governor. Right. You might have materials that were admissible in a related trial in Jackson County. You might say, well, they were already admitted in court in Jackson. Well, what if the court in Antrim County says that’s not admissible, as to these defendants? And now you’ve put this all over the news, everybody’s seen it, and now the defendant can really potentially say that, you know, his right to a fair trial has been compromised because evidence the jury was never supposed to see has now been spread all over the media. […] So, with that, generally, you know, all the information that we collect it’s open and it’s subject to FOIA at the completion of the legal process. And again, that includes information, whether it’s presented in court or not, whether it has to do with the charges or even if it resulted in no charges. And so, you know, again, withholding certain information should not be interpreted as withholding information from the public or interfering with the public’s right to know. It’s just simply postponing the release of that information to the public. Again, in consideration of everybody’s due process rights.
[…]
Unknown female: I think this is going to be our last question as well.
Asst. AG Thomas Quasarano: Well this gentleman […] we’ll go with this gentleman and then this gentleman.
Eric L. VanDussen: This gentleman is Eric VanDussen and he currently has
a lawsuit against you that you somewhat referenced today regarding the withholding of exhibits that were already presented during preliminary examinations in open court here in Grand Traverse County regarding that Antrim County case. And you referenced the Wolverine Watchmen and that you were trying to protect their fair trial rights. My question is: If you’re trying to protect their fair trial rights, why are you referencing the Wolverine Watchmen to five defendants that are not Wolverine Watchmen here in Antrim County and were never members of the Wolverine Watchmen? Thank you.
Asst. AG Thomas Quasarano: Mr. VanDussen. And again, I’m saying this very sincerely; your lawyer’s not here, correct?
Eric L. VanDussen: My lawyer, Frederik Stig-Nielsen, is right here.
Asst. AG Thomas Quasarano: Your lawyer is here. Okay. Because -
Eric L. VanDussen: And you’re the lawyer representing the AG.
Asst. AG Thomas Quasarano: We don’t want to engage in discussions with a
represented party without a lawyer present because the code of professional responsibility, as well as the Society of Professional Journalists. Second principle, which is — are you a journalist?
Eric L. VanDussen: Yes. Freelance.
Asst. AG Thomas Quasarano: Then you know, the code of ethics. So we’re all on the same a -
Eric L. VanDussen: So — so I would just like an answer. The question is:
Your office has put out a press release calling these five gentlemen that are charged in Antrim County, Wolverine Watchmen. And if you’re trying to protect their fair trial rights, why are you — why are you planting that misconception, not you directly, but your press office, and I guess you directly here refer to these Antrim defendants as Wolverine Watchmen. Why are you doing that if you’re trying to protect their fair trial rights?
AG Dana Nessel: With — with all due respect, you have a lawsuit against me. So I’m going to decline to answer that question right now. But I’ll be happy to respond in court.
Eric L. VanDussen: Thank you.
Another hearing was held in front of Antrim Circuit Judge Charles Hamlyn on April 19. During that proceeding, attorney William Barnett and Asst. AG William Rollstin addressed the contentious Wolverine Watchmen issue once again:
Judge Charles Hamlyn: Mr. Barnett, let me go to you. There was something you wanted to talk about relative to a town hall meeting of some kind.
William Barnett: Thank you very much, your Honor. I apologize for bringing this back up, but it’s actually an extension of our protracted discussion last time in person where the court gave direction to both parties to be adults about the comments made in the press and so forth, and that no order was going to be entered in my request to silence, actually, both sides could be silenced here to preserve and not taint the jury further.
I’m aware that there was a very public townhill — townhall meeting set, the timings very poor, last Friday. It’s obviously a public relations step by the attorney general’s office. They came into Grand Traverse County, neighboring county, where there could be spillover. And it was a standing room only in the library. I’m not sure how big that is. And I believe the step was being made by Attorney General Nessel to combat criticism that she’s had regarding transparency and the exhibits. It was over Open Meeting Act issues and Freedom of Information Act issues, the latter being part of this case with Mr. VanDussen’s motions and the Court handling that appropriately at the last hearing.
This happened Friday. I’ve been provided a tape. I was absolutely stunned to hear that the attorney general in front of the standing room only crowd refers to the Antrim case again as the Wolverine Watchmen case. And then proceeds to talk about tainting juries, why we need a protective order regarding exhibits. So it doesn’t — I mean she’s talking about a jury pool, at this hearing. […] But it appears to be purposefully done again. And the prosecutor, Mr. Rollstin, doubled down on this and was offended about my points I think that were valid, as to the prior press release. And they’ve done it again. This time in Grand Traverse County, where we know there’s spillover, relatives, friends. These are neighboring counties. They’re part of this circuit, district, so to speak. I just thought it was totally inappropriate.
And again, the very concern that we brought up that the attorneys were supposed to be handling without the need of a court order. And here we are again. Attorney Ness- Attorney General Nessel referring to these five defendants as Wolverine Watchmen. There’s obviously been three convictions in Jackson County with three individuals that apparently were Wolverine Watchmen. I don’t know how many others that have either been acquitted or had a hung jury or convictions are, or were, part of that group. But, it is an obvious attempt to push a narrative that would taint a jury. And I just I’m disinclined to file a motion or call the witness in front of the Court to explain their conduct. But — because my client doesn’t want me to do that. I don’t want to be a sore thumb about this. But I think a record needs to be made as to what happened, what continues to happen from the prosecution.
If they have great facts, they shouldn’t be needing to do these types of things. This is, in my opinion, the purposeful presentation and or narrative to sway and taint a jury. And the timing. Right in the middle of our case, here comes our attorney general. I can’t imagine if one of our defendant attorneys held a town hall meeting in Traverse City or Antrim about this case or anything that would come up from this case and get away with it. It just, again, I don’t believe this has to do with the attorneys sitting here from the state. But at some point, I think that we need to shut down what is an obvious attempt to taint the jury.
And I again would ask the Court to allow me to share the tape with the Court and with the parties and have the Court make its own ruling, sua sponte, as to what should happen here. Because I’m concerned about the jury pool, whether there should be a recusal, and whether the Court should include things like this. In the voir dire, questionnaire, if nothing else, to reflect whether people are hearing these things and the press release still remains on the state site. I think it was false — no matter how much parsing was done to try to have people read it like a contract — was obviously a false statement, misleading. And seeing that there’s doubling down on it in-person at a standing room only event. And it’s again, this case being referred to as the Wolverine Watchmen case is just really out of — out of line and something I feel needs to be done. […]
Judge Charles Hamlyn: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Rollstin, let me go to you.
Asst. AG William Rollstin: Yeah, obviously what Mr. Barnett has brought up today is just a rehash of what he brought up before. I mean, and he’s working very closely with Mr. VanDussen. So is Mr. Molitor. I mean, If I had to guess, I can’t tell from the camera, but I’ll bet Mr. VanDussen is in the courtroom with the Court today. He was out at the town hall meeting last Friday at the Traverse Area District Library in Grand Traverse County.
The attorney general was talking about the importance of transparency and the FOIA within the State of Michigan. Valid points. And then she was questioned by Mr. VanDussen about the Wolverine Watchmen, completely off topic from what the point of the town hall was for. And remember, Mr. VanDussen’s working very closely with Mr. Barnett, Mr. Molitor. Okay. So it’s — it’s somewhat of an agitator, if you will, Judge. […] So here is Mr. Barnett, again, working very closely with Mr. VanDussen and trying to leverage that as much — as much as possible on behalf of Mr. Molitor. Talking about an off topic subject. Mr. Barnett, file your motion. We will respond and we will appear at the date and time the Court orders us. Nothing inappropriate happened at the town hall meeting. The defendants are part of the Wolverine Watchmen to the extent that they’re all coconspirators. …
An April 20 Record-Eagle article entitled Judge: Prosecution can use co-conspirator statements in kidnap trial reported that Asst. AG “Rollstin labeled VanDussen “an agitator” and said it was VanDussen who questioned Nessel at Friday’s event about the Wolverine Watchmen, which was, he said, “completely off-topic.”
VanDussen, who is a member of the Michigan Press Association and said he has filmed specific court proceedings as part of a plan to produce a documentary film about extremism in Michigan, also filmed Nessel’s transparency presentation Friday.
He uploaded that video to Vimeo and shared a transcript of the event on document cloud, both of which show that VanDussen did ask questions, but it was Nessel who first referenced “Wolverine Watchmen.”
Barnett and VanDussen separately told the Record-Eagle they are not working together, as Rollstin alleged in court.”
Michigan’s Rules of Professional Conduct dictate that “[a] lawyer shall not knowingly … make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer.” See: MRPC 3.3(a)(1).
MRPC 8.4 further indicates that: “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: […] (b) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, or violation of the criminal law, where such conduct reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer …”
Asst. AG Rollstin clearly made a false statement of material fact when he accused me of “working very closely with Mr. Barnett [and] Mr. Molitor.” He additionally misled the Court when he asserted that AG Nessel “was questioned by Mr. VanDussen about the Wolverine Watchmen, completely off topic from what the point of the town hall was for.”
In March, Antrim defendant Brian Higgins entered into a GUILTY PLEA AND COOPERATION AGREEMENT with the AG’s office and pled guilty to Attempted Material Support for Terrorism. The four remaining Antrim County defendants are scheduled for a 15-day trial in August of 2023.
Higgins cooperation agreement requires that he “fully cooperate with the FBI, the Michigan State Police, and the People” and truthfully testify in court. His sentencing will be scheduled after the completion of his co-defendants’ trial.
— — — — — —
See also:
October 5, 2022 — Traverse City Record Eagle — Local filmmaker sues Michigan Attorney General
January 14, 2023 — Wolverine Watchmen stigma is “bullshit — It’s unfair — It’s lies,” says Antrim County defendant Eric Molitor | by Eric L. VanDussen | Medium
February 26, 2023 — Traverse City Record Eagle — Editorial: State motion in kidnap case is out of order
March 17, 2023 — Detroit Free Press’ and Bridge Michigan’s joint piece entitled: Michigan AG calls for transparency — but keeps key records secret in high-profile cases
March 26, 2023 — Traverse City Record Eagle — Our View: Judge’s ruling significant — for all the wrong reasons
April 19, 2023 — The Petoskey News-Review — Nessel talks strengthening government transparency, but defends her own denial of requests
April 20, 2023 — HeadlineUSA — Whitmer Kidnap Case Prosecutor Attacks Reporter, Continues to Spread Misinformation
— — — — — — — — — — -
Eric L. VanDussen
Videographer & Freelance Journalist
ericlvandussen@gmail.com
https://muckrack.com/eric-vandussen
http://vimeo.com/user1676477/videos
