Bradley Phipps Marrs, of Richmond, is a lawyer passionately defending the Patriot Front in a civil case in Richmond. Marrs compared representing members of this hate group to representing mass murderers.

Marrs, and his partner, Glen Allen of Baltimore, have petitioned the court to dismiss the civil rights case entirely.

On Friday, April 14, Marrs got into an email exchange with an ARRRG agent.

First Email to Marrs on Friday April 14, 2023

According to court documents, Bradley Phipps Marrs represents 3 members of a hate group called Patriot Front in a case out of Richmond (CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:22-cv-00670-MHL).

The defendants are Paul Gancarz, Daniel Turetchi and Aedan Tredinnick. They are known members of the Patriot Front, which is a neo-Nazi hate group.

Who is paying Mr Marrs' fees for representing these people?

Does Mr Marrs represent other white nationalists?

Marrs Response 10 Minutes Later

First of all, just because someone alleges something in a lawsuit doesn't make it true.

Secondly, who are you, and what business is it of yours? Why are you sticking your nose into other people's private business?

Thirdly, there is something called attorney-client confidentiality. It means I am not permitted even to consider answering questions like yours.

I can tell you this: The lawsuit is not well founded. It would actually set a precedent very dangerous to cherished American freedoms, if it were to succeed. We believe it should be dismissed, and we hope to make that happen.

ARRRG Reply to Marrs the Following Morning Saturday April 15, 2023

A court case is not a private matter.

Maybe you don't know who your clients are, but they've all been exposed through their actions to be members of Patriot Front. The group does not shy away from what they are what they represent. Thomas Rousseau is a dangerous person, as are all of these people.

https://unicornriot.ninja/2022/patriot-front-members-exposed-in-parking-lot-clusterfck/

Marrs One Last Time to Defend His Clients

You are misinformed.

But let's suppose you were right. You still have no right to inquire into, e.g., who pays a lawyer.

In our free America, even the most heinous mass murderers get to be defended in court, to assure that the laws are applied equally and fairly. Even if ultimately found guilty, there are issues as to the grade of offense, and the severity of the punishment that must be worked through.

The case you ask about is not even a criminal prosecution. The plaintiffs argue that an act of vandalism in a park they sometimes patronize entitles them to money. I wonder how you would feel if this became a precedent. Would you like to see, let's say, the residents of Monument Avenue sue the BLM members who spray painted the Lee statue? Because if my clients were to lose this case, there'd be nothing to stop hundreds of anti-BLM people from suing BLM and its members literally thousands of times. In a democratic society, we cannot allow civil lawsuits to become a weapon to silence those we disagree with, no matter how strongly we may feel, nor even how right we may be in our views.

I would respectfully suggest you find something more social to do with your Friday nights. Tapping out poison pen emails on topics you obviously don't understand is not good for your own mental health.

As for me, I'm proud to protect our civil justice system, and the right to free expression so essential to a truly democratic society, from this abusive suit.

P.S. My clients were not prosecuted by the City of Richmond. You might stop to ask yourself why

For the record, if BLM targeted a white neighborhood repeatedly, and if BLM espoused violent hatred towards white people, one would hope that would at least rise to a civil case. And destroying a confederate statue that represents violence and hate is quite different than destroying a mural to Arthur Ashe. Ashe hurt no one.

As for the motion to dismiss in this actual case, they have an argument to make to dismiss, but it doesn't feel strong enough to dismiss the case. If the judge allowed the case to proceed, the Patriot Front lawyers can argue their case in front of a jury. If the judge doesn't dismiss this case, who is paying these two lawyers - Bradley Marrs and Glen Allen - could be on the hook for some dough.

The judge tends to respond quickly in this case, if plaintiffs don't seek another motion to extend, the judge will probably rule on this motion to dismiss soon.

You can read this latest Patriot Front's entire court filing here.

Complete coverage of this case can be found here.