日本語
한국어
Tiếng Việt
简体中文
ANN ARBOR, MI – In a harrowing escalation of what is alleged to be a sustained campaign of federal retaliation, U.S. Marshals conducted a violent raid on September 4, 2025, at the home of Conrad Rockenhaus, a 100% disabled combat veteran. Despite the public record showing only a simple arrest warrant for a fabricated, non-violent probation violation, eyewitness accounts and video evidence depict a scene of terror, including smashed windows, physical assault, and the denial of critical medical attention and legal representation.
U.S. Marshals Unleash Violent Retaliatory Raid
On September 4, 2025, a U.S. Marshals Fugitive Task Force descended upon the temporary residence of Conrad Rockenhaus. This raid, captured on video, reportedly involved Marshals refusing to produce a warrant, breaking down the door, using excessive force, and physically beating Mr. Rockenhaus, who is a combat-disabled veteran suffering from a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). Neighbors reported surveillance on the home for days prior to the incident, suggesting a premeditated operation.
Following the violent arrest, Mr. Rockenhaus suffered a grand mal seizure in the courtroom during his initial appearance, a direct consequence of the physical trauma. He was subsequently rushed to the hospital and is now detained in Livingston County Jail, where concerns about inadequate medical care are mounting. Adding to the injustice, a federal judge has controversially stripped him of his constitutional right to an attorney, leaving him legally vulnerable.
Civil Rights Lawsuits Detail Pattern of Malicious Prosecution
These events are the latest in a series of incidents documented in federal civil rights lawsuits filed in the Eastern District of Michigan (Rockenhaus v. Agapiou, cases 2:25-cv-12716 and 2:25-cv-12736). The lawsuits allege a deliberate campaign of retaliatory prosecution against Conrad Rockenhaus and his wife, Adrienne, which intensified after Adrienne filed a formal complaint against U.S. Probation Officer Stylianos Agapiou for misconduct, harassment, and illegal seizure of her business property.
The retaliation, as laid out in extensive court filings and supported by video evidence and internal communications, exposes a pattern of fabricated evidence and malicious prosecution. This includes the U.S. Probation Office, under officers Stylianos Agapiou, Supervisor Jeffry Konal, and Chief Dion Thomas, allegedly authoring fraudulent arrest warrants based on verifiably false claims, while actively exploiting the known medical vulnerabilities of a disabled veteran.
Probation’s “Catch-22” and Manufactured Non-Compliance
At the core of the ongoing federal case is what critics call an “impossible mandate” – a set of contradictory probation conditions imposed on Mr. Rockenhaus. Despite being certified 100% disabled and unable to work by both the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Social Security Administration, he is required to maintain a full-time job and pay $800 per month in restitution from his disability income.
Further exacerbating his situation, probation officers have allegedly sabotaged his ability to comply by conducting unannounced visits and illegally seizing his authorized work equipment—essential tools for his approved software development employment. This “manufactured non-compliance” has then been used as a basis for fraudulent violation petitions, effectively punishing him for failing to achieve a goal made impossible by the very system designed to supervise him. This strategy of entrapment is a central focus of the Bivens civil rights complaint.
Texas Origins: False Testimony, Conspiracy, and Coerced Plea
The current ordeal in Michigan is rooted in a multi-year saga that began in Texas in 2019. Mr. Rockenhaus, a proponent of free speech and online privacy, faced arrest on a pretextual computer crime charge after refusing to assist federal agents in decrypting traffic on Tor exit nodes he operated for journalists and activists.
His three-year pre-trial detention was triggered by provably false testimony from Texas Probation Officer Tiffany Routh, who claimed under oath that Mr. Rockenhaus installed a “Linux operating system” that disabled monitoring software. In reality, it was a pre-approved SPICE graphics driver for his Ph.D. program, incapable of disabling such software. This false testimony was allegedly fueled by a documented conspiracy involving his then-wife, Ashley Luster, and attorney Walter Reaves, who are accused of colluding to prolong his incarceration for financial gain.
Confined to horrific county jail conditions, Mr. Rockenhaus reportedly endured beatings by guards and was denied life-sustaining seizure medication. The grueling experience ultimately forced him into accepting a coerced guilty plea.
Retaliation Unleashed: The First Fraudulent Warrant
After his release to Michigan, Mr. Rockenhaus’s supervision was stable until his case was reassigned to Officer Stylianos Agapiou in September 2024. A hostile environment quickly developed, leading Adrienne Rockenhaus to file a detailed formal complaint against Agapiou on February 13, 2025.
The response was immediate retaliation. Seven days later, Chief Dion Thomas allegedly engaged in an act of intimidation by calling Adrienne’s ex-husband. This was followed by the issuance of an April 29, 2025, arrest warrant, signed by Supervisor Jeffry W. Konal, which is now being challenged as a fraudulent document built on lies and deliberate misrepresentations.
- False Absconder Claim: The warrant’s central claim that Mr. Rockenhaus was an “absconder” whose “current whereabouts are unknown” is contradicted by the probation office’s own communications, which show continuous knowledge of his hospitalization in a VA mental health facility.
- Identity Theft Allegations: It falsely accused him of opening seven new lines of credit, an allegation later disproven by an investigation revealing identity theft against both Conrad and Adrienne.
- Medical Deception: A misleading claim of illicit drug use based on a positive marijuana screen deliberately omitted his legal prescription for Marinol (dronabinol), a medication known to cause such a result.
Evidence, including phone records and text messages, proves Supervisor Konal possessed direct knowledge of Mr. Rockenhaus’s medical crisis but chose to ignore and misrepresent these facts to fabricate a basis for a traumatic arrest.
Traumatic Raid and Attorney Misconduct
The May 5, 2025, raid saw U.S. Marshals execute this fraudulent warrant, holding the complying couple at gunpoint and threatening them with a dog. Disturbingly, a transporting U.S. Marshal allegedly showed Mr. Rockenhaus a sexually harassing text he wrote about Adrienne during their journey.
A central legal objective is to withdraw the coerced guilty plea Mr. Rockenhaus entered on May 13, 2025. This plea was allegedly the direct result of attorney Marc Lakin’s ethical breaches and coercion. Lakin is accused of ambushing Mr. Rockenhaus moments before the hearing, separating him from his wife, and threatening him with more jail time if he refused to plead guilty—a tactic that cynically exploited his combat-related TBI despite possessing exculpatory evidence of innocence.
Lakin’s misconduct continued after he was fired, as he allegedly refused to withdraw from the case, made exorbitant financial demands, and issued threats, leading Mr. Rockenhaus to file pro se motions and a formal grievance with the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission.
Procedural Trap and Second Fraudulent Warrant
The legal challenges were compounded on August 29, 2025, when Judge Stephen J. Murphy III struck Mr. Rockenhaus’s pro se motions, citing rules against “hybrid representation.” This created a legal Catch-22, effectively leaving him without counsel and blocking him from advocating for himself, despite his retained attorney refusing to act.
In a further development, Officer Agapiou filed a second warrant petition on August 20, 2025, filled with new, demonstrably false claims, including a fabricated OnStar story and false restitution payment allegations, alongside the recurring misleading drug use claim.
Documented Double Standard Highlights Retaliation
Official court records from the case of U.S. v. Jalen Johnson, supervised by the same officer, Jeffry Konal, reveal a stark double standard. Johnson, facing a firearm charge, committed numerous severe violations including repeated positive drug tests and new crimes. Yet, Konal’s office responded therapeutically, referring him to therapy and using a summons for court appearances. This documented disparate treatment serves as hard evidence that the punitive actions against Mr. Rockenhaus were personal and retaliatory, not standard procedure.
A Fight for Accountability and Justice
This case, marked by allegations of federal misconduct, attorney malfeasance, and judicial obstruction, transcends the experiences of one veteran. It represents a critical fight for the right of every American to hold government officials accountable without fear of terror or retaliation.
“When I witnessed a federal officer engage in what I believed to be serious misconduct, I did what any citizen is supposed to do: I filed a detailed, formal complaint through the proper channels,” said Adrienne Rockenhaus. “The retaliation from the officer’s supervisors was immediate and terrifying. We will not be intimidated into silence.”
Conrad Rockenhaus added, “As a 100% disabled veteran, I was told that supervised release was a process to help me reintegrate. Instead, my disabilities, especially my Traumatic Brain Injury, have been used as weapons against me. We are fighting for a system that offers veterans justice… not one that exploits their vulnerabilities for the sake of punishment.”
The evidence is clear, the timeline is documented, and the injustice is irrefutable. The question now is one of accountability for federal officers involved in this alleged campaign of malicious prosecution and civil rights violations.