AUSA Ramaswamy doesn’t file reply to Brian’s response to motion to dismiss habeas corpus (2255)

Stanley Bolten,

For the first time in the criminal case of United States v. Brian David Hill, formerly a USWGO Alternative News reporter nicknamed as Brian D. Hill, Assistant U.S. Attorney Anand P. Ramaswamy may have conceded defeat in his motion to dismiss Brian’s case/motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence by a person in Federal custody (2255 motion).

In my last article, I have brought to peoples attention that Brian had filed a response to the Government’s motion to dismiss again asserting his innocence, that he has legal justification under case law for an evidentiary hearing to establish his facts of actual innocence, that he was targeted along with Luke Rudkowski and Stewart Rhodes and others for a political agenda by somebody who had operated multiple accounts and had an agenda to frame up political adversaries, and that Brian has a lot of clearly established evidence of actual innocence. He has proven good justification regarding fact of false confession as a fact of innocence, as well as demonstrate that people on the Autism Spectrum Disorder can exhibit a sophisticated form of delayed echolalia that can cause a person with Autism to repeat things from police or things overheard from crime scenes. Essentially a person with Autism can give a false confession or make misleading statements when being interviewed (just asking questions and asking for statements) or interrogated (the detective thinks your guilty and pressures you to admit to guilt whether you are guilty or innocent). Other facts have also been well established regarding his innocence. Even cited case law that his guilty plea should be withdrawn for his actual innocence claims because of his health being deteriorated and ineffective assistance of Counsel.

What would cause the Assistant U.S. Attorney Anand Prakash Ramaswamy to consider not even filing a reply to Brian’s response brief and evidence that is directly and collaterally attacking AUSA Ramaswamy’s own motion to dismiss Brian’s habeas corpus petition?

According to the deadline posted on CourtListener which mirrors the docket sheet information right directly from PACER which is a Federal Court service that provides public access to electronic Court records, it was set for February 9, 2018. It is now February 11, 2018, and nothing has been posted to the Docket sheet, not even today.

Well Brian has already caught AUSA Ramaswamy putting a liar on the stand named U.S. Probation Officer Kristy L. Burton of Danville, Virginia, who had knowingly committed perjury after Brian had warned the Court days after him being arrested which was revealed via pro se filings. Brian had filed Declarations while incarcerated which are under penalty of perjury (lying is a criminal offense for Affidavits) stating that his former Probation Officer lied about one or more material facts to get him arrested and said that he believed they were working to prevent him from proving his actual innocence, and called Judge Osteen a crooked Judge. After that Judge Osteen voluntarily recused himself from all future proceedings after the “crooked” Judge comment was filed in writing. At the time the article was made it is interesting that Judge William Lindsey Osteen Junior is no longer the Chief Judge of the Middle District of North Carolina but now the Chief judicial officials turns out to be Thomas D. Schroeder. That shows you that Judge Osteen must have been crooked enough to be removed from the highest judicial position of a particular federal Court district. Brian has proven that the Assistant U.S. Attorney was even willing to put a perjurer on the stand to prevent Brian from being found innocent by them attempting to revoke his supervised release. I blogged about that here.

Brian has also revealed things under different appellate and Supreme Court case laws which all case law standards vary on the issues outside of the United States Supreme Court. He revealed that he is entitled to equitable tolling for his actual innocence claim or may even be entitled to completely subverting from the statute of limitations requirement on the sole claim of actual innocence. He has revealed that AUSA Ramaswamy and the U.S. Attorney Office (while under the direction of Ripley Rand and/or acting U.S. Attorney Sandra Hairston) has covered up evidence that would prove Brian’s innocence, that the crime (obstruction of justice) was done specifically to prevent Brian from proving his innocence because it is all about intent of what was done. Another interesting argument was that he can have the statute of limitations subject to equitable tolling upon filing of a defective but timely pleading (likely referring to 2255 pleadings) which Brian filed two defective pleadings that could have been construed as 2255 motions or pleadings by Federal Judges but they weren’t considered 2255 motions as those defective pleadings didn’t have the statutory basis for being construed as 2255 motions.Then Brian had stated that because AUSA Ramaswamy put a liar on the stand, formerly his Probation Officer named Kristy Burton of Danville, Virginia, to try to revoke his supervised release and Ramawamy’s crime of subornation of perjury and her committing perjury in court unlawfully and unconstitutionally impeded his ability to file a timely 2255 motion by November, 2015. Thus if that argument is considered as valid by the Federal Court, then his period of mandatory home detention and GPS electronic monitoring had ended on December 30, 2015, thus the one year statute of limitations would be extended until December 30, 2016. Only 11 months after that deadline would pass, that Brian filed the 2255 motion in November, 2017, after U.S. President Donald J. Trump became the 45th President of the United states. That would give Brian a largely decreased number of a time gap to possibly permit equitable tolling of the 1 year statute of limitations period for the ground of actual innocence if not complete subversion of the statute of limitations clause on the ground of being innocent of the crime and prosecutorial misconduct.

Brian has given a lot of facts and that is likely why AUSA Ramaswamy didn’t even respond by the deadline that was set on Friday, February 9, 2018, for responding to Brian’s opposition brief/memorandum explaining why he should be allowed to fully prove his facts of innocence, and that his criminal conviction should be vacated and his criminal sentence also vacated. So Brian may be found innocent and the Court may move for vacatur of his sentence and conviction. By having his criminal conviction vacated and overturned, he will be the next person to be allowed to petition for removal from the Virginia Sex Offender Registry as required by the federal SORNA law. Brian’s case may be the next big case regarding a child pornography suspect being found not guilty or in a stronger case of actual innocence. Brian will finally be recognized as a true set up victim by the Federal Court and will be successful at foiling the child pornography set up attempt that was made against him likely by somebody using or even more likely by somebody working at the Town of Mayodan or even the N.C. State Bureau of Investigation in Greensboro, North Carolina. It will be interesting to see his evidentiary hearing.

So is AUSA Ramaswamy admitting defeat or conceding defeat by not responding by the deadline? Will the Government pull further crimes and acts of frame up against him? Stay tuned. Cheers!

11 thoughts on “AUSA Ramaswamy doesn’t file reply to Brian’s response to motion to dismiss habeas corpus (2255)

Add yours

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: