1/12/12 Defendants in beard, hair cutting attacks plead not guilty

  • By Nick Sabo
  • January 12, 2012
  • 321
                        
SUMMARY: Sam Mullet's attorney argues attacks were 'random' acts in which Mullet was not involved Members of a Jefferson County Amish sect involved in alleged attacks on other Amish pleaded not guilty to charges in federal court Wednesday Jan. 11. Pleading not guilty to a seven count indictment on hate crimes in U.S. District Court, Cleveland, are Daniel S. Mullet, 37, 8865 County Road 53, Bergholz; Eli M. Miller, 31, 385 Township Road 280, Bergholz; Levi F. Miller, 53, 35 County Road 53, Bergholz; Johnny S. Mullet, 38, 362 Township Road 280, Bergholz; Lester S. Mullet, 26, 522 Township Road 54, Hammondsville, Samuel Mullet, Sr., 66, 385 Township Road 280, Bergholz, Emanuel Shrock, age and address unknown, Lester Miller, age and address unknown, Raymond Miller, age and address unknown, Freeman Burkholder, age and address unknown, Anna Miller, age and address unknown, and Linda Shrock, age and address unknown. The 12 co-defendants are charged with conspiring and carrying out beard cutting attacks on nine individuals in five attacks that occurred between Sept. 6 and Nov. 9. The attacks were allegedly in retaliation for perceived disobediance, and/or conflicting with, Samuel Mullet’s role as leader of the Bergholz Amish. Mullet is Bishop of the Bergholz Amish, a group that broke away from a Frederickstown, Ohio, Amish church. Court documents have alleged Samuel Mullet has a cult-like hold on the Bergholz Amish, and claim the attacks were carried out at his bidding. At the plea hearing, U.S. District Judge Dan A. Polster denied a request by Samuel Mullet’s attorney, Edward G. Bryan, that Samuel Mullet be released from jail pending trial. Samuel Mullet has been held since he was arrested Nov. 23 during a raid led by federal agents on his Bergholz residence. He was ordered detained indefinitely in a Nov. 30 hearing. In a Jan. 5 motion seeking Mullet’s release, Bryan contested claims that releasing Samuel Mullet may result in further attacks. Bryan claims that in four of the five beard cutting attacks, the alleged victims were family members of the perpetrators and were spurred by personal, inter-family grievances. The only attack that did not involve family was an Oct. 4 attack on a Holmes County bishop. Bryan calls the attacks “random acts” that have not conclusively been linked to Samuel Mullet. Bryan writes that “During the (Nov. 30) detention hearing, it was clear that part of the government’s strategy was to portray Samuel Mullet as some type of mysterious cult leader who had supernatural powers over others...the only problem with this strategy is that the government failed to present any credible evidence that this was the case.” Bryan called the reasons for holding Samuel Mullet as being based on “gross speculation and innuendo created by his detractors’ negative claims”. In a Jan. 10 motion arguing for the continued detention of Samuel Mullet, Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Dettlebach writes the findings of federal agents indicate that the “common thread” in the five attacks “is that each of the victims demonstrated some form of perceived “disrespect” for Mullet’s judgement”. Dettlebach further connects Samuel Mullet to the attacks and writes “The notion that, within a roughly 10-week time frame, the assailants separately and independently conceived of the unusual and untraditional concept of forcibly cutting beards and head hair as retribution [and] carried out these assaults without first obtaining the blessing of, or giving advance notice to, their domineering leader, defies logic”. The case against Samuel Mullet and his 11 co-defendants is scheduled for trial March 12.


Loading next article...

End of content

No more pages to load