Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Prosecutor Ben Smith Transitions to Pursuit and Deterrence of Journalist Darren M Meade


Published on

Prosecutor Ben Smith Transitions to Pursuit and Deterrence of Journalist Darren M Meade

After the conviction of Ms. Richter and particularly after Mr. Smith survived the
first appeal in January 2013, as expected he gained confidence in his decisions and felt justified in feeling that he was unfairly accused by the Richter family, the Ripoff Report and Darren M Meade.

Smith began to use his prosecutorial power to see if he could cause those criticizing
him to back off.

To accomplish his desire to chill the criticism or punish his critics, Smith used a number of tools that are only available to a prosecutor:

a. Issuing subpoenas that can be done confidentially.
b. Issuing sealed search warrants.
c. Collecting and examining private documents of his critics that would not normally
be available to a private citizen including, but not limited to: bank records, emails,
attorney client communications, and phone conversations.
d. Distributing or releasing confidential documents publicly and privately gathered by
those subpoenas.
e. Filing motions to put pressure on those who were critical of him.
f. Making public allegations about the behavior (criminal) of his critics that, when
made by a prosecutor, is presumed to be true or valid.
g. Indicting at least one of his critics, Darren Meade.

None of the above actions are available to a private citizen or have the power to
chill or punish to the same level as when made by a prosecutor.
Smith chose to use prosecutorial power despite knowing it was improper. He did
so not only toward Meade but others as well, including but not limited to:
a. Threatened criminal prosecution against various persons, including Ed Magedson and
Xcentric Ventures to retaliate against the political and professional criticism that
has been reported on Ripoff Report;
b. Unlawfully searched emails, including those containing privileged attorney-client
c. Disclosed attorney-client privileged communications to the public;
d. Disclosed private and personal communications to the public;
e. Disclosed bank account numbers and private financial records to the public in
violation of law;
f. Wrongfully instituted civil proceedings for the purpose of placing private records
in the public records;
g. Issued over 100 criminal subpoenas as part of his campaign of harassment;
h. Improperly obtained and executed search warrants; and
i. Falsely accused others, including Meade, of criminal conduct.

Assuming Smith’s affidavit claims are true, after the conviction, he spent more than
1,600 hours investigating Meade,and others for posting criticisms about the Richter investigation and trial.

If true, that amount of time would have precluded the filing of the charges in the
first place because any in-depth review would have exposed that the claims were false or certainly did not support probable cause to indict anyone.

Published in: Law
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Prosecutor Ben Smith Transitions to Pursuit and Deterrence of Journalist Darren M Meade

  1. 1. E—FlLED 2015 MAY 27 1:30 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY State of Iowa, Case No. FECR012634 Plaintiff, v. Darren Mitchell Meade, O R D E R Defendant. The court convened a hearing on May 27, 2015, to consider the State’s “Conditional Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice. ” The State was represented at the hearing by Sac County Attorney Benjamin John Smith. The Defendant was represented by attorney Glen S. Downey of Des Moines, Iowa. Defendant Darren Mitchell Meade voluntarily and intelligently waived his personal presence at the hearing. During the hearing, the State requested that all pending charges in this case be unconditionally dismissed with prejudice. The State acknowledged that such a dismissal would bar future prosecution of all charges set forth in the trial information, despite the provisions of Iowa R. Crim. P. 233(1). In its pending motion, the State set forth in detail its reasons for the requested dismissal. Those reasons, as hereby incorporated in this order, support the State’s assertion that the requested dismissal is in the furtherance of justice. The Defendant voiced no objection to the requested dismissal. IT IS, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE COURT as follows: 1. The State’s Motion to Dismiss is granted. All pending charges in this case against the Defendant are hereby dismissed, with prejudice. 2. The above-described dismissal renders all other pending motions and
  2. 2. E-FILED 2015 MAY 27 1:30 PM SAC — CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT applications in this case moot. 3. The court costs are taxed against the State. 4. The Defendant’s appearance bond, if any, is exonerated. Copies to: Benjamin John Smith, Esq. Glen S. Downey, Esq.
  3. 3. E—F| LED 2015 MAY 271130 PM SAC — CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT State of Iowa Courts Type: OTHER ORDER Case Number Case Title FECR012634 STATE VS DARREN MITCHELL MEADE (JUDGE RUIGH ASSIGNED) So Ordered 4,95. ' Dale E. Ruigh, District Courtju e Second Judicial District of Iowa Electronically signed on 2015-05-27 13:30:48 page 3 of 3