Federal Judge Throws Out Charges Against White Supremacist Founder Over Prosecutorial Bias Concerns

Federal Judge Throws Out Charges Against White Supremacist Founder Over Prosecutorial Bias Concerns

A recent ruling by U.S. District Judge Cormac J Carney has garnered widespread attention after he dismissed criminal charges against Robert Paul Rundo, the alleged founder of the white supremacist group Rise Above Movement. The judge’s decision was based on concerns that prosecutors had not pursued similar cases against left-wing Antifa members, highlighting potential bias in their approach.

Rundo, a Huntington Beach resident, was accused of recruiting and training individuals to engage in violent attacks against political rivals at rallies in Orange County, San Bernardino County, and Northern California. However, Judge Carney’s ruling has put Rundo’s fate in the hands of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Carney’s decision to dismiss the case and order Rundo’s immediate release has drawn significant attention. While acknowledging that Rundo likely promoted reprehensible ideas and committed acts of violence, Carney pointed out that far-left Antifa members engaged in worse conduct but were not targeted for prosecution. The judge expressed his frustration with the lack of adherence to the rules and the Constitution, stating that he was at a loss to understand the situation.

Carney’s reputation for making tough decisions and holding the government accountable is well-known. Defense attorney Kate Corrigan described him as a humble and intellectually gifted judge who is unafraid to take positions grounded in the law, regardless of their popularity. Carney meticulously reviews all evidence presented in his cases and actively questions the attorneys involved.

Carney’s judicial career began after his time as a college athlete at UCLA, where he excelled as a receiver. He later graduated from Harvard Law School and served as a business litigation attorney before being nominated to the federal bench in 2003 by President George W. Bush.

Throughout his career, Carney has made several notable rulings that have challenged the legal community. In 2009, he dismissed a case due to prosecutorial misconduct that had intimidated witnesses crucial to the defendant’s defense. Five years later, Carney criticized California’s capital punishment system as arbitrary and dysfunctional, sparing a murderer from the death penalty.

Carney’s commitment to holding prosecutors and investigators accountable has been a recurring theme in his rulings. In 2017, he presided over a case involving alleged child pornography, where he found that FBI agents had made false and misleading statements while seeking a search warrant. Carney emphasized the sanctity of a person’s home and the need for proper justification to search it.

In recent years, Carney faced scrutiny for potentially racially insensitive comments and disagreements with colleagues over jury trials during the pandemic. Despite briefly serving as the chief judge of the Central District of California in 2020, Carney faced criticism for his language and his stance on resuming court operations amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Carney’s involvement in the Rundo case has raised concerns about the treatment of the defendant and the actions of prosecutors. While the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is now involved, Carney continues to question the government’s right to re-arrest Rundo without pending charges and without the opportunity for a bail review hearing.

As Carney’s retirement approaches, his current caseload is being reassigned to other judges. However, he remains closely involved in the Rundo case, expressing his belief that the fundamental rules of criminal procedure should not be disregarded.

Author: CrimeDoor

Leave a Reply

Share on:

[mailpoet_form id="1"]

Subscribe to Our Newsletter