Defendant Christopher Worrell case update request to be released -DENIED (again)

There is a ton of information and research in this publication—which is why I typically reserve the weekends to do a heavy research project because I’m otherwise preoccupied during the work-week

On March 12, 2021 - Christopher Worrell was charged via criminal complaint, further discussed here - Worrell gleefully assaulted numerous law enforcement officers. The affidavit proffered photographic evidence that Worrell’s assault was intentional and let’s not forget about his 2009 criminal behavior. 

• Worrell impersonating a LEO - the 2009 Police Report - again look at page 3 -that is what Worrell had “on him” at the time of arrest.

April 13, 2021 - Christopher Worrell Case Update - The government recently unsealed his indictment and they added enhancements of Dangerous or Deadly weapon - using a dangerous and a deadly weapon two clear distinctions that most will unintentionally conflate.

DEFENDANT’S SUPPLEMENT TO DEFENDANT’S REPLY - June 1, 2021

On June 1, 2021 Defendant Worrell filed a supplemental (to his previous reply) -see DDC-ECF https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508558804 - in which he disclosed the following medical facts/conditions:

• On May 30, 2021, Mr. Worrell, for the second time in under two weeks suffered a period of unconsciousness and fell to the floor… he was sent to the medical unit inside the jail. Given OTC pain relief-pills, observed and then sent back to his cell

• Mr. Worrell asserts that he has”been without cancer treatment while under control of the Government for now 82 days” resulting in various itchy skin rashes and has “begun passing out with alarming regularity”…

• During a recent “black out” event, Defendant Worrell apparently broke his hand He also broke his hand…and “has yet to have this broken bone properly repaired, instead it has simply been wrapped and he is being treated for pain”

June 3, 2021 Order -Defendant’s Emergency Request DENIED:

See DDC-ECF Link to Order https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508562834

a further dissection of the Court’s Memorandum concerning Defendant Worrell’s Emergency Motion Reconsideration of “release” can be found under the June 8th section.

the Court hereby DENIES defendant Christopher Worrell's emergency motion [47] for reconsideration. Defendant shall remain in the custody of the U.S. Marshal,

USA v Worrell Order RE: Defendant Emergency Motion for Reconsideration

June 7, 2021 Government’s Response - Court’s Show Cause Order

RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by USA as to CHRISTOPHER JOHN WORRELL - see DDC-ECF https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508569367 …this is pretty standard because the subject matter concerns the Defendant’s Medical History… the Government opted to be overly cautious by filing some documents under seal. Once Defendant Worrell formally stated he did not object to the Memorandum (which accompanied the June 3rd Order) then the Government followed in kind.

Government’s Response to Show Cause re Memorandum re June 3rd Order

June 8, 2021 Defendant Worrell’s Response

Based on Defendant Worrell’s June 8, 2021 filing (see DDC-ECF https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508573537) it certainly appears that being in custody is taking a brutal toll on Defendant Worrell. That’s not me advocating for his release, it’s me merely reading his recent filing and finding a modicum of compassion/empathy. Notwithstanding absent concrete exigent circumstances, I tend to agree with the Government and Court —Defendant Worrell is exactly where he is meant to be, in custody of the US Marshals…

As Mr. Worrell has already made a number of public filings not under seal which contain his medical history with regard to his non- Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosis…

…his COVID-19 diagnosis, his broken hand, and his episodes of passing out or blacking out, references to these need not be under seal or be redacted.

June 9, 2021 Order & previously sealed Memorandum

see DDC-ECF https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508576451 — ORDER granting in part and denying in part 59 Motion for Leave to File as to CHRISTOPHER JOHN WORRELL. The Court further directs the Clerk of Court to file the government's proposed redacted supplemental brief [71-1] as a new docket entry titled "Government's Redacted Supplemental Brief." Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth

June 9, 2021 Order -Granting and Denying in Part

Redacted Memorandum Opinion

Also to show you how you can also obtain various Orders, Memorandums and/or Opinions from the District of Columbia Federal Court - allow me to walk you through the very short (and arguably easy) steps;

• Step # 1 —> https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/district-court-opinions

• Step # 2 —> https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Opinions.pl?2021

• Step # 3 👇🏻

  

• Step # 4 taaa-dah like magic (I’m kidding there’s nothing magical about it) Defendant Worrell Memorandum/Opinion; https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2021cr0292-74

I will never understand those who “act” like they are the only individual that possess the mythical powers to obtain public court documents. To me that kind of information hoarding is entirely selfish. It is also extremely manipulative and doubly self aggrandizing when it’s accompanied by an insane emoji heavy incoherent thread/stream of consciousness. I would rather teach my readers/followers how they can obtain these public court filings for zero cost. After all sharing is caring and occasionally I care…

…the Court finds that there are no previously unknown facts having a "material bearing" on the issue whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the safety of others and the community. See 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(2). Nor has defendant met his burden to show that there is a "compelling reason" for release under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i).

Thus, for the reasons explained below, the Court will DENY defendant's emergency motion for reconsideration

I think one of the reasons people should read the various Court filings regarding the Defendants of the deadly Jan6th insurrection is —the facts are clear and often times you realize there’s new information. For Example on page 3 of the newly unsealed Memorandum;

….defendant positioned himself next to a wooden stairway on the side of the Capitol plaza, unclipped a canister of pepper-spray gel from his tactical vest, and discharged a stream ofpepper-spray gel toward the law enforcement officers positioned at the base of the steps.

Memorandum Opinion Redacted as to Defendant Worrell

The Government is Following the Money

Defendant is an avowed member of the Proud Boys organization. Id. at 3-4. He was arrested wearing a shirt with the words "Proud Boys" emblazoned on it, and law enforcement located in his house numerous shirts, patches, and challenge coins featuring the Proud Boys colors, logos, insignia; or specific Proud Boys chapters…defendant traveled to Washington D.C. with other Proud Boys in vans paid for by another individual…They stayed in hotel rooms paid for by another individual

I think for the most part I’ve followed this particular case closely - so when I started reading page 4 —I realized either I missed these facts or this was new information (the latter being accurate)

Defendant refused to follow the FBI’s direction -then threatened a potential witness…’cause MAGA-baby

Incidentally when the FBI showed up at Defendant Worrell’s house to execute a search warrant - I kid you not - he was “away camping” with a bunch of other Proud Boys. That in of itself substantiated the Government’s concern that Worrell and other Proud Boys seem to be in communication and potentially planning a second attack. Don’t lose sight of that tiny detail —because it matters and contributes to the Court’s recent denial (again)/

March 12, 2021, the FBI went to defendant's residence to arrest him incident to the execution of a search warrant… defendant was away camping…Over the phone, an FBI agent instructed defendant to turn himself in to the nearest FBI field office in Sarasota…Defendant refused and stated that he would turn himself in at his residence…For public-safety reasons, the FBI declined to force defendant to turn himself in at Sarasota…

While defendant was being arrested at his residence, he told law enforcement that he knew who alerted the FBI to his activities, offering a particular individual's name. He also mentioned that he was upset at a particular Twitter user who had exposed his identity online. Defendant said something to the effect of, if he ever found that person, the FBI would "be corning for [him] again."

…clear and convincing evidence demonstrated that no condition or combination of conditions of release would reasonably assure the safety of others and the community…

To be fair - we did not know about Defendant Worrell’s ominous social media post (see ECF Doc 60-2 at 12) because at the time the exhibits and Government’s response was filed under seal. Conversely I seem to recall this was discussed during a hearing and I’m 99.99% sure I read it in one of the hearing transcripts

"SO WHOMEVER [sic] CALLED THE 'FEDS' ON ME REST ASSURED I KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND WE WILL BE DISCUSSING THIS SOON!! The best part is you have NOTHING accept [sic] empty accusations!! You are the piece of shit I knew you were!!

Defendant Worrell then went on to respond to a commenter with this delightful and super sane response..

"It's a simple case of a butt hurt pu"'*y ass bitch that thought they could F**k with someone with some dumb bullshit!! They are about to get educated in 'real life."'

The Court relied heavily on Chief Judge BERYL A. HOWELL‘s March 19, 2021 PreTrial Detention Order (see DDC-ECF https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508450148 ¹ in the June 2021 Memorandum the Court found Defendant Worrell’s arguments to be unavailing

Here, defendant was previously arrested for impersonating a police officer, which involved "intimidating conduct towards a total stranger in service of taking the law into his own hands." …

Defendant's initial refusal to turn himself in, and his statements during his arrest concerning others who exposed or reported him to the FBI, also "raise[ d] serious and troubling signals about defendant's willingness ... to not intimidate or threaten any potential witnesses."

Defendant Worrell’s Medical Arguments

If you recall in April I passively stated that naltrexone hydrochloride <—is a synthetic opioid and is not used to treat to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and the “topical cream” well Defendant Worrell’s prescription expired before his March 2021 arrest. Moreover Defendant Worrell’s “Dr” doesn’t have medical staff, nor does he make/retain any notes. When pressed by the Court and the Government Defendant Worrell’s “Dr” acquiesced and said;

“….he provides a "concierge" holistic or nontraditional medical service…naltrexone hydrochloride, the government explained that the medical staff at the Charlotte County Jail were unaware of any use for naltrexone as a cancer treatment…. Dr. Rucker contended that he prescribed it for "off-label use."

I’m not saying Dr Bino Rucker perjured himself …

It is one thing to submit an “affidavit or declaration” -but failing to stipulate the “under penalty of perjury” —certainly raises a few concerns, both ethically and professionally (as noted by the Court’s footnotes) —Defendant Worrell’s “oncologist” is NOT a board certified oncologist…

“…states that he is the "treating oncologist" for defendant…Dr. Ruckcr's submissions note that while he has not seen defendant since before his arrest on March 12, 2021 his opinion that both prescriptions are medically necessary, that defendant is at increased risk of rccontracting COVID-19, and that defendant should be released from detention because confinement aggravates defendant's non-Hodgkin's lymphoma…

Defendant declined this treatment plan, did not follow up with the oncologist, and apparently did not see any oncologist between August 2020 and his arrest….While at the D.C. Jail, he has met with multiple doctors in the chronic-care facility…

They determined that his requested medications arc outside the standard of care, have questionable support in the scientific literature, and that his condition would be best managed by an oncologist, not a urologist.

The footnote on page 11 is absolutely brutal…the subtext is both the Court and the Government are (albeit subtly) saying Defendant Worrell and his defense attorney lied or at best (unintentionally) mislead the Court

Dr George Bino Rucker - we should talk

One very fortunate thing is the State of Florida is all about “the sunshine” and it’s easy to find various professional information;

• https://flboardofmedicine.gov/

• http://www.floridahealth.gov/licensing-and-regulation/license-help/index.html

• or click this link for a printable file of his licensing info in the State of Florida (highlighted red line copy can be found here)

Setting aside the fact that Defendant Worrell’s “oncologist” is not licensed by the state of Florida as an “oncologist” @RuckerOzone but that’s what the Florida State Medical Board has on file. Which is odd because of this - http://www.doctorrucker.com Dr Rucker’s Facebook page The majority of Rucker’s social media accounts have not been updated in over a year. And it appears the only social media platform(s) he is using (on a semi-regular basis) is LinkedIn and occasionally YouTube - the latter hasn’t published a video in well over a year. But his “other” YouTube Channel Dr Ozone appears to be very active

To be fair his Rucker Integrative Medicine YouTube channel appears to have not uploaded any videos since March 2020- there is a short video about a patent of his who had liver cancer and now she’s “healed” -which bodes the following question; if that were the case wouldn’t the patient agree to be used as a video testimonial? To put a fine tip on this pointy arrow - what the white rabbit hole did I just walk in to?

If Dr Bino Rucker or Dr G. Bino Rucker, or Dr George B Rucker or Dr Dini Rucker² sounds familiar to you. Well there are numerous MLB reason for that;

• March 2016 Washington Post -Athletes in doping documentary linked to controversial anti-aging industry

• http://holisticmedicalcare.net/providers/dr-bino-rucker-md-2

And frankly I don’t think I’d even recommend my own enemies to see Dr Rucker and his “cancer treatments” —it wasn’t until I took the time to watch a few of his YouTube videos for me to fully understand what the Government and Court are dealt with. Frankly I only made it through 4 videos before I tapped out. If this is the Dr Defendant Worrell is using to bolster his arguments of why he should be released. The irony is Dr Rucker just might have given the Government a “new” target to investigate and that target would be Dr. Rucker..

For example —see Dr Rucker’s LinkedIn -see what I underlined?
“Low Dose Naltrexone Case” - originally published in February 2018 via his LinkedIn account - I took the liberty of uploading to my public drive because it was kind of a PITA to find the link and then it would populate “document not found”

In addition it appears his brother - purports to also be a medical doctor (yet there is no record of licensure for Dini Rucker) Dr Dini Rucker ³ (also see @RejuvYou - also archived) is also an alternative medicine doctor - preliminary research suggests his focus is on animal “care” but on Dr Bino Rucker’s YouTube channel I found this video where it certainly appears Bino is using Dini’s medical equipment on a horse.

Like I said Dr Rucker is a bottomless rabbit hole and proved to be difficult to come back to the land of facts. I don’t know of any reputable Doctor that “doesn’t keep records” but in the context of this footnote — I genuinely wonder if the Government might initiate a separate investigation into the “questionable” medical practice of Dr Rucker…

Another compelling reason § 3142(f)(2)… or not…

As previously explained there are several factors the Court is required to evaluate pursuant toThe Bail Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3141 et seq. - but here again the footnote is where “the action is”

…authorizes the detention of a defendant awaiting trial on a federal offense only under certain, limited circumstances. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).

Again the Court is required to examine the following four factors -

1. the nature and circumstances of the offense charged, including whether the offense is a crime of violence, a violation of Section 1591, a Federal crime of terrorism, or involves a minor victim or a controlled substance, firearm, explosive, or destructive device

2. the weight of the evidence against the person

3. the history and characteristics of the person, including-A) the person's characteristics physical and mental condition, family 1ies, employment, financial resources, length of residence in the community, community tics, past conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal history, and record concerning appearance at court proceedings …B) whether, at the time of the current offense of arrest, the person was on probation, on parole, or on other release pending trial, sentencing, appeal, or completion of sentence for an offense under Federal, state, or local law; and

4. the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the community that would be posed by the person's release.
   
   

Under the legal framework of Reopening a Detention Hearing Under Section 3142(f)(2) - a defendant “may” request a reconsideration but the law requires:

"may be reopened, before or after a determination by the judicial officer, at any time before trial if the judicial officer finds that information exists that was not known to the movant at the time of the hearing and that has a material bearing on the issue whether there are conditions of release that will reasonably assure the appearance of such person as required and the safety of any other person and the community” § 3142(f)(2) - but important here the Defendant is required to overcome the (intentionally high) standard - Defendant Worrell could not and his attempts to satisfy that burden were woefully inadequate…

I do think that it’s peculiar the Defendant didn’t seek an appeal with the USCA-DC but decided to stay within DDC

“…a motion for reconsideration should not be used as a vehicle for relitigating issues on which the comt already ruled because the party disagrees…”

But it’s possible the Appeal path has already been foreclosed due to the Circuit previously affirming the March 2021 Pretrial Detention Order. Either way the Defendant’s regurgitated argument failed to satisfy the burden that would cause a hearing on reconsideration. The Court’s methodical point by counterpoint of the arguments is in fact a delightful read.

Summary:

The Court was unpersuaded by the Defendant’s arguments - starting in part:

….defendant has not provided a valid basis fo reopen the detention hearing under § 3142(f)(2)… The Court is not persuaded that defendant's lymphoma and COVID-19 warrant reconsideration under of the rationales where Courts in this District have recognized that justice may require it…

…To the extent that defendant wants a different doctor and different treatment, the Comt is not persua~ed that the government's rejection poses an objectively unreasonable risk of damage to defendant's health…

….Defendant's Additional Arguments For Reconsideration Are Without Merit…

Again you can pull down nearly all the documents related to Defendant Worrell’s case - by clicking the Christopher Worrell Folder on my public drive - at last count there are twenty documents in that folder.

And this is why I wait for the weekend to do a more exhaustive write up because during the week my bandwidth is limited. At any rate I hope this is both informative and helpful - I am working on a DOJ article but it required doing a rather deep dive into the FBI Vault files… ETA later today or tonight -Filey

1. for access purposes back in March 2021 I created a Christopher Worrell folder on my public drive, found here - the March 2021 PreTrial Detention Order found here

2. it appears that “Dr” Dini Rucker attended VA-Tech at the same time his brother Dr George Dino Rucker attended UVA - it’s uncontested that they are brothers but there’s a possibility that they might be twins or both within <1 year of each other. But it does show the brothers have deep business connections;

CUSTOM WELLNESS SERVICES, LLC -incorporated March 8, 2021
VITALITREK INC. (inactive) - see page 2 of Articles of Incorporation

3. K9 REVIVE, LLC - Article of Incorporation filed with FL SCC Dec 2018

RECHARGE SUPPLEMENTS, LLC - Incorporated August 2020

RUCKER INTEGRATIVE MEDICINE CORP -Incorporated June 2019 - also see page 2 of articles of incorporation which is embedded