by the proposed conditions made by the magistrate judge these conditions would have kept mr gallagher on a very tight leash amongst the conditions were that he would have to participate in the pros the personalized recovery orientation services program this program would have assigned mr gallagher both a physician and a therapist he would been required to attend counseling three to five days per week as determined by the program this included both individual counseling and group sessions he would be provided medication as needed that's part of the reason for having the physician involved in the program would also be giving him job and life skills in addition the proposed conditions by the magistrate judge a ddress his housing needs those are not perfect he would have been temporarily housed in a shelter until he could work with social services services to obtain appropriate housing which he had before he was arrested to help ensure the safety of individuals who are involved in the incident that led to these charges he would require permission from pretrial services to enter the courthouse and and each time he entered the court house the m e judge was going to require him to be escorted by a member of the federal public defender's office in addition the court is aware they re after meet with his pretrial services officer and confirmed with that that office that those meetings could take place outside of the courthouse to ensure that there were no any for there would not be any further incidents in addition she added at the request it would have added at the request of the government requests that he not make any additional threats along with the normal standard conditions that are applied in all situations pretrial release in addition when the question came up before the district court judge defense counsel proposed that he also be placed on electronic monitoring in rejecting these proposed conditions of the magistrate judge the district court cited red flags that it saw that existed in this situation in and identifying red flags he cited a number of incidents around the country he referenced james hodgkins who was the shooter who went after the republican congressional representatives at a baseball practice in virginia he referenced jared ramos the inet the shooter at the annapolis newspaper he referenced incidents that could really relate to an incident in toronto or in new york city where cars were driven into crowds and he referenced incidents where individual shot into crowds none of these incidents are now of use to what happened in mr gallagher's case all in all of these incidents except for one there were no red flags these were not individuals who were identified or on the radar of any law enforcement except for jared ramos who had a long term raj against the newspaper and even then at the time of the incident was not on law enforcement's radar that there was a problem in mr gallagher that your client has a long history of threats against various people makes him a safer candidate for release than people who no one knew had any problem until they started shooting is that the argument over because because now they can watch out for him and put him on twenty four hours of valence and devote all those resources there will be one thing there will be research on time on him he will be watched not just by law enforcement but you also be watched by his health care providers he'd be on a very short and tight leash and if there's any problem he can easily be yanked back by the collar now is one of the other courthouse in custody if you will else that's well yes because part of the idea is that will between a rock and a hard place of something starts to go south as we say one of the things that is that we might be able to diffuse the situation aren't partake of what happened what we saw in the video tapes is that there was actually a poor job being done of trying to defuse the situation if you would like we can actually provide the videotape which was given is that every time that mr gallagher has had an incident where he has had one of these verbal outbursts he also police admits to any authority figures in this situation while he initially acted out and verbally acted out against the bluecoats at the courthouse he then went to follow their command and wanted to go up to the small business administration office to get is receipt for his cellphone he was turned around by another security officer and sent back to the desk where they gave him the cell phone and that led to a slightly other apparently another small outburst and he then went to leave the building and he was escorted  building he did not return to the building he made no attempt to return to the building in any of his of this is unlike the last case which was here as a motion for bail pending an appeal that has you know is going to raise other issues about a conviction this technically in my right that maybe you are making a motion for bail pending the resolution of your appeal but your appeal is very early stages and i just don't know from because i haven't reviewed the statistics but how quickly are cases of this sort moving through the western us to be honest it's hard for me to say we are cases generally are moving docket like they do in virginia i know judge alarum or propose suggested that maybe this case should move through a little quicker i am not the trial attorney in this case so i can't give you an answer i know that there is other work that is currently being done on the matter however we were not talking about the twelve defendant case with no we are not human no we are not we are not if it goes to trial it should be i would assume that this would be a couple of days less than a week would be my guess if i were to make any guesses on that at all and if anything else would like to hear i think you have gotten to the crux of my argument i just hope that you your morning your honour's mary katherine baumgarten for the united states the standard of review is very high it is clear air this court generally under the various various case defers to the district court's findings with respect to not only the factual findings but also the ultimate assessment of those findings acknowledging that the district court would be in a better position respectfully than this court would be to assess the defendant his dangerous clear here the defendant multiple times to multiple court security officers threatened to kill them on april twenty sixth twenty eighteen because they asked him to get the laminated card that is part of the process to give him back his cell phone he has an extensive explosive history not only in this building but it many other federal agencies is set forth in the preacher charles services bail or the bail report we generally refer to it as the bail report sets those forth in detail today the day that he was there april twenty sixth it was a small business administration the week before it was the i r s where he threatened to kill a security officer there the day before this case he had an a c d in a local to court because he threatened to kill a librarian because she place where he is detained or their mental health services available there should be your honor of the quality that i know there should be but are there it is my understanding that he would then was prescribed at least medication paxil to address some of his issues the issue is the availability of mental health that's clear in the record but the defendant has chosen it various times not to follow through on his mental health treatment and as a result of that he cycles within a thirty day period of time i'm sure this court is very aware of not just the examples i cited but also the department of labor i'm sorry you have a diagnosis i don't see one specifically and i reviewed the transcripts again this morning and it appears as if there's some issue taken by the p d s office of the trial counsel about the adequacy of that to answer the question procedurally i'm not the trial counsel having said that i did speak with trial counsel for the u s attorney's office in rochester it is my understanding that the defense has asked for multiple adjournments with respect to the case the court correctly noted judge larry maher i believe during his decision that he rendered on the bench with respect to reversing or vacating the orders of release did say encourage the parties let's get your trial the seems as if this is a case that screams out for the immediate trial as quickly as possible there's a video as we noted no audio in there you have sworn statements of three court security officers just like that are here i looked at the gentleman's badge that say that this is what he did it's very clear the jury's to have to make that determination it is my understanding the government is ready to proceed to indictment but specifically the p d s office has requested these adjournments and is asked that it not proceed to indictment at this juncture we will go but the p d s office has requested some additional delay i understand it's i'm not assailing anybody from doing that but i wanted it to be clear that we're not being dilatory on the case of public defender correct yes i should say i did not did not need to be disrespectful icon of the people i didn't think you were being i just want to be clear but in this case the judge was very thoughtful he was very concerned he did a risk assessment he was very clear that they are it's what district courts do all the time that make difficult decisions about releasing somebody acknowledging what it means acknowledging that there may be better mental health treatments available on the outside but having said this this is a defendant who in the courts well reasoned basis has identified the factors that it disagreed respectfully and was able to do so did novell look at the same facts i don't believe that anybody's disagreeing about the facts it's the ultimate assessment of those facts thank you thank you gave your predecessor a minute which lapsed into something more than well thank you your honor i do appreciate that yes there are there are the general facts we're not in disagreement with  whether or not we are asking for delays delays it's because we are working on this case and trying to move forward in the case does require investigation i think it's important i just i find it unusual as you're sitting  camera you an assistant u s attorney all right well with two former assistant u s attorneys who i think would find it at least i find it odd that the f b i d a s office is able to delay a presentation to a grand jury and somehow prevail on the government not to just proceed with the counsel who's who's working this case is a very good trial attorney your honor i must mean yes we  just joined our office just over a year ago and we're very lucky that we were able to get her join us one of the things one when you look at the the code of the district courts of terminations really did not go over did not address why the magistrate judges propose conditions could not ensure the safety of the community or his appearance in court and i think that becomes a very important factor in trying to determine whether or not these conditions will protect the community and we'll show we'll have mr gallagher appear thank you thank you your honor thank you both as with the preceding case we'll get you a decision shortly