Stay ConnectedJoin PI Ed Opperman with expert guests and authors as they discuss true crime stories in the news, conspiracy theories, issues of social injustice and NWO resistance.
Follow on Twitter and Instagram @OppermanReport
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report–1198501/support.
Copyright: © Copyright The Opperman Report
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Montgomery Blair Sibley is a former American lawyer who had his Florida Bar license suspended in 2008, and is best known for defending Deborah Palfrey, the "DC Madam", in 2007-2008.[1][2]
Blair wrote a book about Palfrey, and his defense of her, entitled Why Just Her: The Judicial Lynching of the D.C. Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey.[2] Henry Vinson, author of Confessions of a D.C. Madam, wrote that Sibley "had to contend with the feds judicial chicanery and sleight of hand."[3]
In 2008, The Florida Bar suspended Sibley's right to practice law in that state for three years.[4] Sibley was later determined to be a vexatious litigator.[5]
In 2012, Sibley unsuccessfully sued President Barack Obama, alleging that he was not a natural-born citizen.[6][7]
2016 Presidential Election
In 2016, Sibley, who claims to have Palfrey's phone records, unsuccessfully attempted to have her records unsealed.[8] Sibley claims the information they contain would be highly relevant to voters in the upcoming 2016 presidential election.[6][7]
In February 2016, Sibley sued then-Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts, and his clerk, for failing to file his motion to lift the restraining order (gag order) that prevents Sibley from releasing her records.[9][10]
Sibley then requested that the U.S. Supreme Court release him from the lower court's restraining order, stating: “To be clear, if Sibley is not allowed to file his Motion to Modify the Restraining Order and thereafter does not promptly receive a fair and impartial hearing on that Motion, he will justifiably consider the Restraining Order void as a result of being denied such a hearing by the District Court, the D.C. Circuit Court and now this Court.”[11][12]
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Montgomery Blair Sibley : Defending Deborah Palfrey, "DC Madam"
Montgomery Blair Sibley (Born October 14, 1956) is a former American lawyer who had his Florida Bar license suspended in 2008, and is best known for defending Deborah Palfrey, the "DC Madam", in 2007-2008.[1][2]
Blair wrote a book about Palfrey, and his defense of her, entitled Why Just Her: The Judicial Lynching of the D.C. Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey.[2] Henry Vinson, author of Confessions of a D.C. Madam, wrote that Sibley "had to contend with the feds judicial chicanery and sleight of hand."[3]
In 2008, The Florida Bar suspended Sibley's right to practice law in that state for three years.[4] Sibley was later determined to be a vexatious litigator.[5]
In 2012, Sibley unsuccessfully sued President Barack Obama, alleging that he was not a natural-born citizen.[6][7]
2016 Presidential Election
In 2016, Sibley, who claims to have Palfrey's phone records, unsuccessfully attempted to have her records unsealed.[8] Sibley claims the information they contain would be highly relevant to voters in the upcoming 2016 presidential election.[6][7]
In February 2016, Sibley sued then-Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts, and his clerk, for failing to file his motion to lift the restraining order (gag order) that prevents Sibley from releasing her records.[9][10]
Sibley then requested that the U.S. Supreme Court release him from the lower court's restraining order, stating: "To be clear, if Sibley is not allowed to file his Motion to Modify the Restraining Order and thereafter does not promptly receive a fair and impartial hearing on that Motion, he will justifiably consider the Restraining Order void as a result of being denied such a hearing by the District Court, the D.C. Circuit Court and now this Court."[11][12]
The U.S. Supreme Court denied Sibley's application.[13][14][15][16][17][18]
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
(Note: Due to technical issues, only part of this interview is available.)
The case of Jeff MacDonald has been infused with controversy since the murders took place, almost 39 years ago. Through it all, Jeff has steadfastly maintained his innocence. Over the many years since trial, thousands of pages of government reports, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, that prove the existence of outside assailants, have been obtained. In fact, not only do these documents show Jeff's claim of outside assailants to be true, they also show how the prosecution deliberately set out to suppress evidence supporting these claims before, during, and after his trial.
The MacDonald case has served as an example of malfeasance in the investigation of the FBI Crime Lab's misconduct, and the case has been featured in numerous congressional hearings and in such publications as The Wall Street Journal, The Boston Globe and The New Republic. In January, 2006, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals panel of three unanimously agreed that the affidavit of Jimmy Britt, a respected former US Marshal, was sufficient grounds to propel a rare fourth appeal (successive habeas petition) forward for review to the District Court in Raleigh, North Carolina. Jimmy Britt died in October, 2008. In November, 2008, the District Judge denied relief. The defense will appeal to the 4th Circuit.
The MacDonald case is one of the most enduring and haunting legal cases of our time, and a torturous example of injustice and wrongful conviction. It continues to endure and weigh heavily on the public consciousness because the right conclusion has never been has never been issued in a court of law- that Jeff MacDonald is an innocent man and must be released. If guilt was so clear, its hard to imagine that the interest and emotion this case continues to proliferate would still exist nearly 40 years later.
http://themacdonaldcase.org/index.html
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.
Our TOPPODCAST Picks 
