Erik Stidham, the Holland and Hart Attorney for St. Luke's Hospital in the Bundy/Rodriguez Case, facing Criminal Charges for "Intimidation by False Assertion of Authority"
HOME > Lawsuit Details > Erik Stidham Criminal Complaints
Share this page:
Erik Stidham, the Holland and Hart Attorney for St. Luke's Hospital in the Bundy/Rodriguez Case, facing Criminal Charges for "Intimidation by False Assertion of Authority"
Wednesday, May 17th 2023
This past week, criminal complaints were filed against Erik Stidham, the lead attorney from Holland and Hart Law firm who is representing St. Luke's Hospital in the lawsuit against Ammon Bundy and Diego Rodriguez.
According to Idaho State Statute 18-3005, it is illegal for anyone to intimidate others by using any actions or documents that appear to be official from a government source, when you know that they do not apply to the person you are intimidating. In short, you are not allowed to intentionally make someone else feel threatened or intimidated by using government documents or orders that don't pertain to them.
Apparently, this is exactly what Erik Stidham did, on multiple occasions. On January 19th, 2023, Judge Lynn Norton issued a "Protective Order" against Ammon Bundy and Diego Rodriguez (you can read it here), which essentially said that neither Ammon or Diego were allowed to "wilfully intimidate, threaten or harass any person" who is a party to the lawsuit. This of course, was a silly and superfluous order as this type of "harassment" is already not allowed in court cases. It was evident that the order was issued as a tactic to set Ammon and Diego up to later be arrested for "contempt of court" charges even when it was not legitimate (because it is up to the judges discretion to determine if Ammon or Diego had disobeyed her order). Additionally, since this is a civil case and not a criminal one, it would be unconstitutional for arrest warrants to be issued against any defendant in the case without a fake "contempt of court" charge being made up against them.
In fact, this is the exact order that was fraudulently used against Ammon in order to issue an arrest warrant against him. You can read the details about how fraudulent it was here.
Knowing that the repercussions of this tyrannical action were severe, and that others would rightfully be fearful of such actions being taken against them, Erik Stidham seized upon the opportunity to intimidate others with the same order.
However, it must be noted, that an order issued by a judge is not valid against people who are not under the judge's jurisdiction or authority. In this lawsuit, both Diego Rodriguez and Ammon Bundy are defendants in the lawsuit and are therefore subject to the judge's rules and jursidiction. The rest of the citizens of Idaho are simply not bound to any judge's order(s) without that judge first having jurisdiction over them.
In short, only Ammon and Diego can be rightfully ordered to do anything by this judge in this lawsuit. And even this corrupt judge rightfully applies the order only to Ammon and Diego and the other entities which the lawsuit alleges they represent. You can read it here for yourself:
This past week, criminal complaints were filed against Erik Stidham, the lead attorney from Holland and Hart Law firm who is representing St. Luke's Hospital in the lawsuit against Ammon Bundy and Diego Rodriguez.
According to Idaho State Statute 18-3005, it is illegal for anyone to intimidate others by using any actions or documents that appear to be official from a government source, when you know that they do not apply to the person you are intimidating. In short, you are not allowed to intentionally make someone else feel threatened or intimidated by using government documents or orders that don't pertain to them.
Apparently, this is exactly what Erik Stidham did, on multiple occasions. On January 19th, 2023, Judge Lynn Norton issued a "Protective Order" against Ammon Bundy and Diego Rodriguez (you can read it here), which essentially said that neither Ammon or Diego were allowed to "wilfully intimidate, threaten or harass any person" who is a party to the lawsuit. This of course, was a silly and superfluous order as this type of "harassment" is already not allowed in court cases. It was evident that the order was issued as a tactic to set Ammon and Diego up to later be arrested for "contempt of court" charges even when it was not legitimate (because it is up to the judges discretion to determine if Ammon or Diego had disobeyed her order). Additionally, since this is a civil case and not a criminal one, it would be unconstitutional for arrest warrants to be issued against any defendant in the case without a fake "contempt of court" charge being made up against them.
In fact, this is the exact order that was fraudulently used against Ammon in order to issue an arrest warrant against him. You can read the details about how fraudulent it was here.
Knowing that the repercussions of this tyrannical action were severe, and that others would rightfully be fearful of such actions being taken against them, Erik Stidham seized upon the opportunity to intimidate others with the same order.
However, it must be noted, that an order issued by a judge is not valid against people who are not under the judge's jurisdiction or authority. In this lawsuit, both Diego Rodriguez and Ammon Bundy are defendants in the lawsuit and are therefore subject to the judge's rules and jursidiction. The rest of the citizens of Idaho are simply not bound to any judge's order(s) without that judge first having jurisdiction over them.
In short, only Ammon and Diego can be rightfully ordered to do anything by this judge in this lawsuit. And even this corrupt judge rightfully applies the order only to Ammon and Diego and the other entities which the lawsuit alleges they represent. You can read it here for yourself:
Incidentally, the order states that it also applies to "officers, agents, and or employees" of the other legal entities named in the lawsuit. And Garth Gaylord is not an "officer, agent, or employee" of any of these legal entities and Erik Stidham should, and most certainly does, know that.
Even though this is as clear as day, Erik Stidham took the opportunity to use this order to intimidate Garth Gaylord, another Idaho citizen who had posted videos and commentary on his YouTube channel in regards to the St. Luke's lawsuit. In fact, Erik Stidham sent a cease-and-desist letter to Garth stating, with emphasis, that Garth himself could be held in contempt of court for violating this order that was given to Ammon and Diego:
Even though this is as clear as day, Erik Stidham took the opportunity to use this order to intimidate Garth Gaylord, another Idaho citizen who had posted videos and commentary on his YouTube channel in regards to the St. Luke's lawsuit. In fact, Erik Stidham sent a cease-and-desist letter to Garth stating, with emphasis, that Garth himself could be held in contempt of court for violating this order that was given to Ammon and Diego:
This is against the law! It is the crime of INTIMIDATION BY FALSE ASSERTION OF AUTHORITY. The law very specifically states, "18-3005. INTIMIDATION BY FALSE ASSERTION OF AUTHORITY. (1) Any person who…Simulates legal process including, but not limited to…subpoenas, warrants, injunctions, liens, orders, judgments, or any legal documents or proceedings; knowing or having reason to know the contents of any such documents or proceedings or the basis for any action to be fraudulent…is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail for a period not to exceed one (1) year, or by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) or both."
Erik Stidham simulated the legal process of delivering an order to Garth Gaylord even when he knew it did not apply to Garth, and as a lawyer he should know that this is a crime, yet he did it anyway in order to intimidate Garth by falsely asserting authority against him.
A formal criminal complaint has been filed with magistrate judges, Samuel Hoagland, C. Macgregor Irby, and Laurie Fortier. It is now their statutory duty and obligation to investigate the matter and take appropriate action.
A formal criminal complaint has been filed with magistrate judges, Samuel Hoagland, C. Macgregor Irby, and Laurie Fortier. It is now their statutory duty and obligation to investigate the matter and take appropriate action.
SITE SECURED BY:
