The curious case of MIA John Pierce & Ryan Marshall - updated Aug 30th Notice of Appearance by John Pierce.
Sending a man who’s facing two felony criminal cases in your stead to misrepresent to the Court & Government, don’t be surprised that some of us think you’re intentionally trying to throwing the case
Where is John Pierce?
If you don’t know what you know then it’s easy to simply take a person’s (Ryan Marshall, who’s facing two felony criminal trials) word for it that John Pierce is “purportedly” in the hospital and is “unconscious and unresponsive” because John Pierce allegedly has COVID-19. The Government filed a notice with the Court(s) concerning the 16+ defendants purportedly represented by John Pierce
And as tawdry as this sounds, until the Court or the Government actually confirms that indeed Mr Pierce is gravely ill because he contracted COVID-19. Then it might be a very good idea to remain highly skeptical. Given the “source” of this information, Ryan Marshall has a very colorful past and has minimal to zero credibility…
Which Jan6th Defendants is he representing:
Kenneth Harrelson in Case No. 21-cr-28 (APM);
William Pepe in Case No. 21-cr-52 (TJK);
Nathanial DeGrave in Case No. 21-cr-90 (PLF);
Peter Schwartz in Case No. 21-cr-178 (APM);
Leo Bozell IV in Case No. 21-cr-216 (JDB);
Christopher Worrell in Case No. 21-cr-292 (RCL);
Jeremiah Caplinger in Case No. 21-cr-342 (PLF);
Paul Rae, Kevin Tuck and Nathanial Tuck in Case No. 21-cr-378 (TJK);
James McGrew in Case No. 21-cr-398 (BAH);
David Lesperance in Case No. 21-cr-439 (EGS);
Casey Cusick in Case No. 21-cr-440 (CJN);
James Cusick, Jr. in Case No. 21-cr-441 (RDM);
Stephanie Baez in Case No. 21-cr-507 (PLF);
Victoria White in Case No. 21-mj-356 (ZMF);
and Deborah Lee in Case No. 21-mj-554 (ZMF).
…and possibly representing Shane Jenkins, No. 21-cr-245 (APM)
And for the record the dates and timeline are important - for example;
the Government represents they have not heard from Mr. Pierce on or about August 23, 2021
Ryan Marshall appeared before DDC Judge Mehta on August 25, 2021 and orally informed the Court that Mr Pierce was now representing Shane Jenkins
on August 30, 2021 (the date the Government filed its notice in the 17+ separate cases) they noted Ryan Marshall informed the Court in the change of representation.
As of today no notice of appearance has been filed in the USA v Shane Jenkins
the Government also informed the court that it “has had no contact with Mr. Pierce—by phone, e-mail, or otherwise—since Monday, August 23, 2021, when he appeared for a hearing before the Honorable Paul L. Friedman…”
Ryan Marshall who is not a licensed attorney made further representations to the Government and to the Court
On the morning of Tuesday, August 24, Mr. Pierce was scheduled to appear before Judge Friedman for a status hearing in United States v. Nathaniel DeGrave —Ryan Marshall stated “Pierce’s absence was due to a conflict”
only to change his story a few hours later, when Ryan Marshall then attended a reverse proffer session with a different defendant represented by Mr. Pierce, Marshall represented to the Assistant U.S. Attorney that “he had just gotten word that Mr. Pierce had been in an accident and was on his way to the hospital. Mr. Marshall then proceeded with the reverse-proffer session in Mr. Pierce’s absence”
More specifically the U.S. attorney’s office stated in its notice to the Court that in the past week it has received “conflicting information about Mr. Pierce’s health and whereabouts” from purported sources close to the lawyer.
Then on August 25, Mr. Marshall again appeared in Mr. Pierce’s stead in the USA v Shane Jenkins stating in open court: “represented to the court that Mr. Pierce was hospitalized with COVID-19, on a ventilator, and non-responsive” - purportedly an individual close to Pierce reached out to an NPR Reporter and stated that Pierce did not, in fact, have COVID, but instead “was hospitalized on Monday due to symptoms that he believed might be related to Covid-19”; “appears to have been suffering from dehydration and exhaustion”; and “remains under the care of his doctors[.]
on August 26, 2021 Ryan Marshall-informed the Assistant U.S. Attorney that he (Ryan Marshall) “had not had any direct contact with Mr. Pierce, but that one of Mr. Pierce’s friends had told him that Mr. Pierce was sick with COVID-19 and another had said he was not…”
Moreover the Government informed the Court that John Pierce’s Twitter account has been uncharacteristically silent since August 20, 2021 -with the following being his last known tweet
If you’re on a ventilator and unresponsive how can you be hired by the 18th defendant?
But most remarkable in the aforementioned timeline is purportedly Pierce attempted to be hired by an 18th Jan6th Defendant—while he was on a ventilator and unresponsive? Because that’s what the timeline definitely shows. Ergo it strains credulity that if Pierce was this gravely ill how the heck is he supposedly hired by the 18th Client/Defendant.
You can actually check my research - via LinkedIn
list the following Contact numbers
Boston: (617) 313-7401 —> goes to a random voicemail that’s full
Cleveland: (216) 370-7866 —goes to an “engineering test” voicemail
Los Angeles: (213) 262-9333 —> number is not in service
New York: (212) 484-9866 —> number no longer accepts phone calls
Washington, D.C.: (202) 318-9001 —> number is not in service at this time
Primary 277 Park Ave, 45th Floor New York, NY 10172 see who else claims this as their Office via this 2019 SEC filing Highstar NGL Prism/IV-A Interco LLC -also see https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=0001773266
355 S. Grand Avenue, 44th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 - to be clear this is also known as the land many of the current occupants are highly prestigious law firms. was his former office for the now defunct Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht LLP
1 Liberty Sq, 13th Floor, Boston, MA 02109 -which was the satellite office for the now defunct Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht LLP, see 2019 Joint Motion in MA v Exxon -specifically page 3
30195 Chagrin Blvd, Suite 210N, Cleveland, OH 44124 -which is now occupied by https://www.searby.law/contact
So if you are inclined to believe Ryan Marshall or John Pierce then I’m actually a 6’ Swedish supermodel…(note my extreme sarcasm)
If you know anything about John Pierce then you already know how checkered his past is and that he isn’t exactly reliable or forthcoming or unfit to practice law (given the history with Lin Wood & Kyle Rittenhouse and financial issues) —but if you want to know my opinion (again this isn’t factual it’s an opinion) let me ask you a few rhetorical questions
How would you indefinitely delay a criminal trial?
How would you potentially cause a mistrial?
How would you throw a complete monkey wrench into the dozen and half criminal cases?
Easy -you’d allow an unlicensed and disgraced former law clerk act in your stead because the quickest way to blow up the Government’s case would be to have someone like Ryan Marshall as the sole/primary point of contact while the Attorney of Record is purportedly ill due to a car accident, no I mean exhaustion, no I mean Covid-19, no I mean he’s just exhausted…
Because the impact of Ryan Marshall’s duplicity has already been effectuated -
Unfortunately, it seems that Mr. Pierce may be hospitalized and unable to communicate, and it is unclear when Mr. Pierce will recover. Although Mr. Marshall has now appeared several times in Mr. Pierce’s place, he is not a licensed attorney and thus cannot appear in this Court, represent Mr. Pierce’s clients, or provide them with legal advice or services
…case is effectively at a standstill…
One has to wonder if Ryan Marshall mislead or misrepresented to the Court and to the Government during his recent and many Court appearances. Also I’d be curious to know who’s paying Ryan Marshall’s travel related expenses between DDC to SDNY to PA…
Granted the remedy might be as simple as the Court ordering each defendant will be represented by a Federal Public Defender —which I believe each Defendant was originally defended by a Public Defender but I’m concerned about the damage of Ryan Marshall attending a reverse proffer session and potentially misleading the Court. As that would give rise to potential constitutional issues for each Defendant represented by John Pierce. See NPR Tweet/Thread
As to Ryan Marshall who’s appeared in Pierce stead
The footnotes in the Government’s filings are truly remarkable:
It is unclear if and when Mr. Marshall will be able to obtain a bar license, given that Mr. Marshall currently faces felony criminal charges in two cases in the Court of Common Pleas of Fayette County, Pennsylvania: No. CP-26-CR-859-2021 (multiple counts of intercepting communications and unlawful use of an audio device in court), and No. CP-26-CR-851-2021 (multiple conspiracy and theft-related counts). According to public reports, the latter case involves charges arising from Mr. Marshall’s alleged participation in a conspiracy’s to commit fraud while clerking for a judge Fayette County District Attorney set to announce the results of a months-long grand jury investigation into allegations of corruption within the county. “Operation Clean Sweep”on the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas.
Ryan Marshall stands accused connection with a scheme that police said the goal was to defraud a the widow. Ryan Joseph Marshall - was charged with multiple counts, including
tampering with public records and other related offenses.
So my suggestion is to remain skeptical as to the current condition of John Pierce. Remember the source of the information. And if Mr Pierce is indeed gravely ill due to complications of COVID-19 then certainly I wish him a speedy recovery. But given both Marshall and Pierces long and documented history I’m incredulous as to the veracity of Mr Pierce’s current medical condition and you should be too.
-slowly steps off the soap box and sprints to a meeting -Filey
Updated 5:00PM DC local time…
To say this is highly unusual might be an understatement —I was in a rush earlier today with actual work obligations but now that I’ve had a few moments to dive deeper into the John Peirce Files -
The Court and Government should be asked really uncomfortable questions, specifically about the August 25, 2021 hearing. And for that matter any discussions from August 23rd to present with respect to any of the Defendants John Pierce is defending. The potential adverse constitutional issues as it relates to Defendant Jenkins could be very and I mean very problematic. Meaning absent the transcript of the August 25th hearing it is reasonable to ask both the Court and the Government:
did Ryan Marshall misrepresent to the Court he is an attorney?
by “associate” what legal right did Ryan Marshall have to represent Defendant Jenkins in the Aug 25th hearing?
was Ryan Marshall ever asked (on the record) if he was acting at the behest of John Peirce?
did any of the Defendants acknowledge that Ryan Marshall isn’t a licensed attorney?
Because here’s how I see this going, John Pierce might pop up and then throw Ryan Marshall under the bus and argue that his client Defendant Jenkins did not have adequate representation. Let’s review what potential argument Defendant Jenkins might have:
pursuant to Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
filed late on August 30, 2021 - NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: John M. Pierce appearing for SHANE JENKINS (see DDC-ECF) - so if John Pierce is really in the hospital on a ventilator and unresponsive who the hell filed this notice of appearance?
If your head is spinning, apologies but now so is mine because the ramifications of Ryan Marshall, the Government’s August 30th filing which clearly states clearly and it is unambiguous - granted the Government filed the near verbatim Notice to the 17 other defendants but this Notice is particular to Defendant Jenkins -see DDC-ECF or see Scribd link
From the government’s perspective, given Mr. Pierce’s reported illness and the fact that Mr. Marshall is not a licensed attorney, this case is effectively at a standstill. Although Mr. Marshall has been the government’s main or sole point of contact for many of the defendants represented by Mr. Pierce, the government does not believe it appropriate to continue to communicate with him in Mr. Pierce’s absence
WHAT in the FRESHEST of all FRESH HELLS is this?
D.C. Rule of Professional Conduct 5.5, Comment 2 (allowing a lawyer to “employ[ ] the services of paraprofessionals and delegate[e] functions to them, so long as the lawyer supervises the delegated work and retains responsibility for their work”). Additionally, the defendant is effectively without an attorney, as Mr. Pierce currently cannot be contacted and Mr. Marshall cannot provide legal advice or services….
I think reporters should start hounding the Acting US Attorney for the District of Columbia because this isn’t sloppy, this is duplicitous and the Court and the Government might have inadvertently tanked 18+ criminal cases. I’ve been in DC for a long time and I can tell you if I made this mistake, I’d never be employed or employable because this is bad…
also the Government also missed yet another defendant represented by John Pierce but moved via oral motion on August 16, 2021 to withdraw. There was a bit of a litigators turf war on August 13, 2021 and it resulted in Pierce orally moving to withdraw…
So if you are going to accurately report but solely rely on the Government—even in the Government’s Notice(s) to the Court concerning John Pierce, they overlooked Defendant Samsel so that’s approximately 19 defendants/
and the fact that John Pierce filed his Notice of Appearance on June 14, 2021 -
NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: John M. Pierce appearing for RYAN SAMSEL -see DDC-ECF for Document No 29 -also notice the different phone number listed on Pierce’s Notice of Appearance. I redacted the -phone number listed on Document 29 because the phone number John Pierce submitted to the court doesn’t belong to him…
—it belongs to an attorney that I had a pleasant conversation with and I gave him my word I would extend the prerequisite professional curtesy of redacting his cellphone number John Pierce misappropriated (used without his permission or consent) in the DDC June 14th filing … and because I truly am a person of my word I redacted it. See Scribd Link
To be fair and accurate on August 16, 2021 John Pierce made an ORAL MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by John Pierce. as to RYAN SAMSEL..the same day the Court issued a Minute Order granting Peirce’s oral motion to withdraw…so he’s not (currently and hopefully never will) Represent Samsel going forward
A lawyer shall not:
(a) Practice law in a jurisdiction where doing so violates the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction; or
(b) Assist a person who is not a member of the bar in the performance of activity that constitutes the unauthorized practice of law
Comment 2 (which I relevant to the USA’s Notice - reads in part:
 The definition of the practice of law is established by law and varies from one jurisdiction to another. Whatever the definition, limiting the practice of law to members of the bar protects the public against rendition of legal services by unqualified persons. Paragraph (b) does not prohibit a lawyer from employing the services of paraprofessionals and delegating functions to them, so long as the lawyer supervises the delegated work and retains responsibility for their work. See Rule 5.3. Likewise, it does not prohibit lawyers from providing professional advice and instruction to nonlawyers whose employment requires knowledge of law; for example, claims adjusters, employees of financial or commercial institutions, social workers, accountants and persons employed in government agencies. In addition, a lawyer may counsel nonlawyers who wish to proceed pro se.