Denny Slams His Victim

07 Sunday Jun 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Denny Slams His Victim

Tags

ABC, Amerika, Congress, cowards, Democrats, Denny Hastert, Devil, evil, government, law, money, police, politicians, rape, Republicans, Steve Rieboldt, The People, Washington, women

Last week I brought you the disturbing news about one of our beloved political “leaders” – Rodentia Americanus Denny Hastert. Yes, I have already convicted the filth by way of opinion but, then again, I know these people – I have no doubts here. They possess an evil aura or force one can actually feel like a slap in the face. Long days I spent in the dreadful confines of the Dark City on the Potomac with them. I would rather not recount those experiences and I never want to go back there again. It is my mission to do what I can to disrupt their Satanic plans for you and yours.

I caught a little hell from the GOP peanut gallery. Yes, the Democrats do the same things. I never said they do not. As the RepubliCONS are held to some mythical standard of purity I find it much more interesting when they (always) fall from grace. The truth is they have no grace, no souls, no redeeming qualities. Keep your partisan political-centric idiocy to yourself.

More has emerged on the sordid life and times (crimes) of Denny “The Molester” Hastert – out of the closet, one might say. One victim of the former House Speaker has been identified as Steve Rieboldt (deceased).

I knew Denny had picked on one of the younger, lesser members of his available pool of victims. This is the way of the wolf; always going for the weak. The young man (and I know there were more) was the wrestling team manager (the towel boy) back in the 70’s in Illinois. He probably loved the sport and wanted to be around it while lacking the necessary physicality to compete. He probably, more than any other squad member, had to spend time with his demented teacher.

Rieboldt’s sister, Jolene, spent years trying to bring this horrible abuse to light. Her brother died in 1995 thanks in part to the lifestyle imparted by the Speaker. That rat, then a corpulent member of Congress, had the audacity to appear at the funeral. Jolene confronted him boldly:

“I was just there just trying to bite my tongue thinking that blood was coming out because I was just… So after he had gone through the line I followed him out into the parking lot of the funeral home,” Jolene said. “I said, ‘I want to know why you did what you did to my brother.’ And he just stood there and stared at me. He didn’t say, ‘What are you talking about?’ you know, [or], ‘What? I don’t know what you’re talking about.’ He just stood there and stared at me.

“Then I just continued to say, ‘I want you to know your secret didn’t die in there with my brother. And I want you to remember that I’m out here and that I know.’ And again, he just stood there and he did not say a word.”

Hastert got in his car and drove away. Jolene said Hastert’s non-response “said everything.”

– Jolene Rieboldt, ABC News.

God bless this strong and devoted sister.

Republicans are supposed to be the American tough guys. They stand for national defense, guns, and self-reliance. Bullshit, all of it. Note that this perverted freak didn’t have the nerve to confront or even murmur a response to a woman. Such it often is; those who prey on children are themselves the weakest, lowest bullies known to man. If confronted by an angry father or brother they will literally self destruct.

Hastert now stands accused by his own government of crimes against that government and the all-powerful banking lobby. Laws like this serve only the powerful elite; they are a plague on the rest of us. A real police entity, given to protecting people (not money), would go after this useless shit for what he did to children. But, so we have it in modern Amerika. Banks and money are protected at all costs. The weak and innocent are left to fend for themselves or rely on our vigilant women for protection.

Think about this case the next time some damned elected “servant” grovels on TV about his plans to help you. You’d be better off appealing directly to the assistance of the Devil himself. Sic Semper Tyrannis!

Trial By Combat

27 Wednesday May 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Trial By Combat

Tags

accused, Alexander Hamilton, America, ancient law, Athens, Boston Bombing, Boston Massacre, Boston Tea Party, Britain, Congress, Courts, crime, death penalty, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, English common law, Fingoldin, freedom, Germany, John Adams, jury, King, law, Melkor, Natural Law, Parliament, people, police, punishment, Rome, Trial by Combat

Not too long ago I wrote about my experiences with the American Jury system in the 21st Century. It is broken. End of story. Any acquittal you read about is an anomaly – a celebration of truth and luck in a world gone wrong. Juries are no longer the last check against tyranny they were intended to be in ancient Rome or Athens.

Most people plead guilty to criminal offenses. Most of the rest elect to the convicted (not just tried) by a state appointed and employed Judge. The small few who make it before a jury – not of their peers – are usually found guilty. Everything goes the state’s way. Many celebrate this fact. I do not. We were supposed to have due process and equality under the law. This is especially important to the little person facing the endless resources of the government. It is also, now, a fiction. We have none of it. Just convictions.

(Temple of doom. Google.)

The defendant in the Boston Bombing trial, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was convicted and sentenced to death. His was one of the oddest trials I have ever heard of. It lacked even the plausible credibility of some Soviet-era show trials. In June Tsarnaev learns whether the judge will condemn him to die. He surely will be executed.

If, indeed, he did commit the alleged terror attack, Tsarnaev deserves to die. However, as I have noted before, there is amble evidence to suggest a government link to the plot. If the government is involved in any way, there is usually a plot participation. This might not excuse Tsarvaev but it would implicate others. It won’t though. There was absolutely no mention or murmur of this in court on Tsarnaev’s account. Alarmingly, there was no murmur at all from the defendant. There was no defense whatsoever.

In a way the defense strategy made some sense. They knew, as do I, there is no hope for honest truth or justice in an American court. Accordingly, they adopted an approach which plead Tsarnaev guilty while attempting to shift the blame to the defendant’s dead brother. The ultimate attempt was not to evade a conviction (a given) but, rather, to avoid the death penalty. The approach did not work.

The government opened with a sympathetic case – no-one likes terror attacks on innocent people. The defense then opened by acknowledging the crime and the defendant’s participation therein. “Yeah, he did it. But…” They closed the same way.

Then, the government called witnesses. These were victims who had survived the attack. They told the jury and court of their terrible injuries. Terrible as they are, they do not establish, at all, any criminal culpability. No mind – Tsarnaev had already admitted guilt. In most cases these statements of victims come at the very end of the trial – after guilt has been adjudicated. They are usually used to determine what level of punishment is deserved of the convicted. This case saw all phases conveniently wrapped into one show. No challenge or examination at all was conducted on behalf of the accused.

I, as a defense attorney, could have lessened the blow of these witnesses but asking them if they had ever seen (in person) my client before. None of them had. They had no way to link Tsarnaev to the crime scene.

That tenuous link came from a video and pictorial collage presented by the government. Cameras are everywhere these days and there were numerous shots of the Tsarnaev brothers at the Marathon. Nothing showed them setting off or planting the bombs. Then again, the defendant had already admitted his guilt.

No challenge came to this presentation. There was equal evidence of former government employees – current “security” contractors at the event – with the same backpacks and in the same places as the accused. The difference was that several (not presented) photos showed the brothers leaving with laden backpacks while the agents walk away unencumbered. Nevermind. Guilt admitted, remember.

The government presented weak findings as to how the alleged bombs were made. A good munitions expert could have dissected these as ridiculous. None did. All evidence was submitted without protest. There was then the matter of an alleged admission written on the walls of a hideout boat. No objections.

Given what they were presented with the jury rightly found the defendant guilty. He lost his gamble as to the jury’s recommendation of death. That should have come as no surprise. To the open-eyed and open-minded it should come as an alarm as to where the system has settled.

This is no system in which to place any faith of fairness. The prosecution will get whatever it seeks in most cases. Nothing will change. There are efforts to reform the game but it is too far gone. There is no public support for such efforts. Thus, any alternative seems logical, if it be at all feasible.

Before I go further let me state that everyone is entitled to a defense at trial in cases of alleged criminal offense. Ages ago several British soldiers were tried and acquitted in the Boston Massacre. Their attorney believed in justice, no matter how unpopular the accused. His name was John Adams. You may have heard of him, he served as our second President.

There is an older, if more archaic, alternative to the jury system in criminal or civil cases. You have never heard of it. No American lawyers understand it nor would they encourage it. The Courts will surely be averse to it though it has never been stricken from the codified law (like that matters anymore). No law school will teach it. No agent of the state would wish to face it. No right-minded person would assert the alternative. But, it is there.

There is (or was) a thing called Trial by Combat.

Trial by combat (also wager of battle, trial by battle or judicial duel) was a method of Germanic law to settle accusations in the absence of witnesses or a confession in which two parties in dispute fought in single combat; the winner of the fight was proclaimed to be right. In essence, it was a judicially sanctioned duel. It remained in use throughout the European Middle Ages, gradually disappearing in the course of the 16th century.

Wikipedia (May 27, 2015).

(Fighting it out. Google.)

Wikipedia says this was a Germanic legal tradition, which is true. However, the custom was known to many other ancient cultures. Also, it continued into the somewhat modern age.

The defense continued in regular practice into the Seventeenth and even Eighteenth Centuries. The accused or defendant would assert or demand his right. The prosecutor or plaintiff or a chosen champion would then join the accused in singular combat. This was to the death or to a submission – usually death. I cannot imagine too many district attorneys, police officers, or offended ex-wives going along, willingly, with such strategy. Then again, I cannot see most fat, lazy Americans demanding such a right let alone conducting such as trial.

In 1774 an attempt was made in Parliament, partly in response to the Boston Tea Party, to abolish the practice. This and all other reform efforts failed. No bill or law has ever rescinded the ancient right. The right was in place, part of the English Common Law, when the American colonies declared independence from the King. Thus, the right remained available to Americans. Mostly, such spectacles took form in gentlemanly duels – outside of the courts. Alexander Hamilton participated in one of these with fatal consequences.

Still, no state or Congress has ever formally repealed the practice. The courts have not definitively ruled on it either. This is the case in old England as well as in America.

As recently as 2002 a demand for trial by combat was made in Britain. In Suffolk a man made the demand as his defense in an administrative hearing concerning the local DMV. The magistrates in charge, deeming, him deranged at best, ignored him and fined him a small sum for failing to register (or de-register) his motorcycle. No appeal was made.

You would likely never assert this right as a defense or alternative course of trial. Nor would I. However, if facing severe criminal charges and punishment, trial by combat might mean the difference between prison and a mental hospital. Which seems better to you?

If, though, you should succeed in joining a wager of arms, you may count yourself among the fortunate, even mythical, few. In a federal criminal matter you may consider yourself Fingolfin doing battle with Melkor himself. May the honor and victory be yours.

If You Have Nothing to Worry About, Then Why Did You Call Me?

27 Wednesday May 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on If You Have Nothing to Worry About, Then Why Did You Call Me?

Tags

America, crime, defense, don't talk, freedom, government, Lew Rockwell, people, police, rights, silence, television

The police are supposed to keep us safe from harm. Government was allegedly instituted solely to protect our rights, integrity and freedom (all lies). If this was true then Clover would be correct in his oft stated mantra, “if you ain’t doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about.”

I don’t believe that. I have been in the system and around it. Even now I can smell its faint odor of maliciousness. Yuck!

A long time ago I penned a piece called How to Interact with the Police. It was a short guide on protecting oneself from unnecessary prosecution. I have given several speeches on the subject and advice innumerable to individuals over the years. In short, just don’t talk to them. They are necessarily your friends.

Many cops do a great job enforcing the law while preserving individual freedoms. Many others do not. Consult YouTube for countless abuses of police power in America. Half of the videos there concern people who know and assert their rights and successfully escape the dragnet of police corruption. The other half are of innocent people tased, arrested or murdered by the police, usually for nothing.

In most of those latter cases the “suspect” either invited the police into his life or answered their questions. Don’t do either. There is a reason you have the right to remain silent. This is one commonality between police reality shows and police drama shows (both big hits in Amerika). The suspect always breaks down and confesses or says enough for the police to link him to a crime. This happens in real life too. Oftentimes, the only evidence the cops have of any wrongdoing is the defendant’s statement or admission. Don’t do their job for them.

Don’t talk and you’ll likely walk.

As for calling them or inviting them into your home – never do it. Police are like vampires. They usually need permission to enter but once inside they proceed to destroy. Again, don’t help them.

My friends over at LewRockwell.com have posted another grand article on this topic – a video with instructions. Both are worth a review. Know your rights when dealing with the government’s armed agents.

(Don’t be cornered.)

This problem of malicious police exploration can effect anyone, even the police. A friend of mine, an agent with a powerful federal police agency, called me recently. He knows I no longer actively practice criminal defense but he wanted my unofficial opinion anyway. He happens to be a lawyer himself, by the way.

It seems his agency is conducting some internal investigation into something trivial, something which does not involve my friend. However, despite his doing nothing wrong, for some reason he seemed to have something to worry about. Explain that, Clover.

Given his position, his predicament may be a little more nuanced than that of the average citizen. However, knowing very little, all I could advise him was to say nothing. If the matter concerns written records, then the investigators will have them to review. Let the record speak for itself. There is no need to explain or expand anything. Such actions might lead in a direction no rational person could foresee.

I told him, “You know how you guys are.” He seemed a little offended by the statement but sheepishly agreed with me. Investigators are usually on a fishing expedition and not using some concrete science as portrayed on television. They need a suspect (or witness) to tell them something in order to have any chance of prosecuting anyone. Don’t be that someone. Don’t effectively prosecute yourself. Don’t talk.

Shootout at the Boobie Corral

20 Wednesday May 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Shootout at the Boobie Corral

Tags

America, bikers, blacks, boobs, Branch Davidians, crime, culture, FBI, murder, Muslims, organized crime, police, shooting, State, stupidity, Texas, times, Twin Peaks, violence, Waco, whites

You have undoubtedly heard by now of the second great shootout in Waco, Texas. The first involved the FBI, the U.S. Army and some unfortunate parishioners at the local Seventh-Day Adventist Church. Over twenty-two years ago the government decided to “rescue” some women and children from the clutches of their own church. In typical government fashion the rescue attempt became an inferno (literally).

(Saving the children, government style. Google.)

This time around the action featured members of various biker clubs. The Bandidos and several other gangs met at the local Twin Peaks restaurant to discuss recruitment and territorial matters. It was a sort of corporate retreat for overweight, balding druggies and felons.

Twin Peaks is famous for its sophisticated culinary offerings.

(Steak Tartare and Foie Gras, anyone? Google.)

Bikers are famous for … well …

(Yeah… Why, Google, why?)

Bikers clubs, frequently rivaling the State in criminality, are often subject to intense police scrutiny. The government suffers no rivals. As was, the local police were keeping a malicious eye on the two-wheeling hooligans. They apparently warned the management of Twin Peaks the event would turn out poorly.

At first, things seemed to go well. “You like riding a dangerous over-sized bicycle without a helmet?” “Me too!” Friendships were forming. Then, sadly, someone said or did something someone else did not like.

A fight began which left nine dead and eighteen seriously injured. About 170 were arrested following a mass assault by the police who were, conveniently, staging nearby. When the shooting started the cops were ready and participated immediately. SWAT units and tanks were already on site.

Authorities investigate a shooting in the parking lot of the Twin Peaks restaurant Sunday, May 17, 2015, in Waco, Texas. Authorities say that the shootout victims were members of rival biker gangs that had gathered for a meeting. (AP Photo/Jerry Larson) (Read: Costumed gang members arrest other costumed gang members while others retire neath yellow tarps…)

Many of my fellow conspiracy theorist friends have judged that the police, seeking to eliminate corrupt competition, staged the event and sniped those key members of the clubs whom most threatened their dominance. I, as of yet, do not share this conclusion. However, if the media resoundingly silences the results of autopsies and reports (as in the first murderous Waco affair), much credence will be given to this view. Already, things are “returning to normal.”

As nothing really surprises me anymore, this would make perfect sense. It would also make sense if this was just the result of redneck stupidity – a sign of the demented times of modern America. I recently wrote about blacks in Baltimore burning and looting their own neighborhoods in acts of flagrant stupidity. I also touched on the incessant need of Muslims to shoot up cartoon conventions. It’s only natural for marginally educated or employed white boys to get in on the senseless violence.

So it goes in America. What a great country we had. Remember the 70’s? Or the 80’s? 50’s? 90’s? It seems like such a long time ago. Time marches on. The culture regresses.

I’ve been forecasting a giant, scholarly post of late. Today will be the day. I intend to publish a draft today or tonight by hook or by crook. It’s coming. As sure as the boobs of Texas are upon you.

Far Beyond Control

13 Wednesday May 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

America, anarchy, army, Bush, churches, Clinton, Congress, Courts, crazy, crime, Democrats, election, executive, fear, fools, freedom, George Carlin, government, law, law. people, military, Obama, Patriot Act, police, politicians, Posse Comitatus Act, republic, Republicans, Ron Paul, sheep, Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, special forces, standing army, students, taxes, terror, Texas, U.S., veterans, voting

“Your” government is officially far past the point where it could be possibly reigned in. Next year must hold in store an election. I keep hearing and reading that the Republicans and Democrats are preparing their usual assortment of tired psychopaths from which the little people are to select their future “leadership.” It could be that I have stepped through a worm hole to the past because I keep hearing names like Bush and Clinton.

As George Carlin used to say, “this is the best we can do.” It will never get better. Incredibly, it gets worse every four years. I gave up on voting and political participation a long time ago. I stand by my statement that the last, best chance we had to save the Republic was to elect Ron Paul President in 2008. We missed it. Today, I lead a happy life of personal anarchy. My only involvement with the government is paying taxes and evading the traffic cops. It works well. The sheep still don’t see it.

You may have seen or read about the increasing militarization of government forces – the blurring of lines between domestic police and the standing martial army. I wrote about it previously.

(USA! USA! Google.)

Speaking of blurred lines, I, being a recovering attorney, am THE expert on the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA). The PCA was put into place many, many years ago to halt the use of military forces from providing ordinary law enforcement within the territorial confines of the U.S. It has not worked.

Law after law and action after action have provided a myriad of exemptions to the PCA. Drugs, terror, riots, training – you name it. The PCA is moot.

So it is today that most highly trained, deadliest and most feared elements of our armed forces – the special forces – are on the streets training with local police agencies. It’s like Barney Fife meeting the Seals in Mayberry. Otis better watch out.

The purpose of elite military forces is to carry out daring missions ABROAD (not at home) in order to disrupt enemy activities with minimal effort or notice. They are the last force one should want operating amidst the people at home. This too is lost on the MTV-watching public.

The people are afraid of everything. Should the government announce pillow cases are tools of terrorism, the people will dutifully burn pillow cases in the town square. The fools will demand and cheer as the government bombs pillow factories in places like Libya and Iraq. Imaginary specters are fought with ferocity and pomp.

Meanwhile, real threats go virtually unnoticed. Recently, the same week that saw the U.S. military engage in various live terror trainings in the Southwest (against fictitious enemies) saw real terrorists attack a cartoon convention in Texas. Thankfully, for us, the sane, Texas is not Paris. In the Lone Star State, muslin extremist face summary execution from even lone police officers. Don’t mess with Texas. But, no-one else has drawn the corollary (or disconnect) here. The vaunted military trains for an attack the police can’t handle at the same time the police handle an attack the military can’t. So it goes.

The sheep graze on. Fox News, radio talkers and modern “churches” have instilled in the ignorant people a sense of worship for all things military, all things government – so long as it’s the American military and government. When two groups of drunks meet at the beach, and fight, the sympathy of the nation goes to that group of martial disposition. No mind is given to reality.

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has just tried to put the brakes on the monstrosity known as the USA Patriot Act. The Act was intended to grant additional unchecked power to the central government. Some in the Judiciary have noted this and its underlying illegality. It does not matter, as Ron Paul notes. The Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama/Bush/Clinton/Etc. executive is above the law and will refuse to abide by any Court ruling which limits their authority. The Courts, truly least of the three branches, are powerless to enforce their rulings. The Congress, fat, bribed and stoned into complacency, will do nothing. The sheep graze.

So, pontificate as you will about the coming election. I may listen but I won’t respond. I’m not rude, it’s just that I don’t believe in fairy tales no matter how entertaining. Next November, you go out and waste your time and energy, saving us from the other side. Afterwards, you may find me at the local bar or cigar shop doing what I do. Or, you could just join me in freedom land. Your choice.

Nothing to Worry About

03 Sunday May 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Nothing to Worry About

Tags

Baltimore, crime, FDR, Freddie Gray, freedom, government, Jesus, law, Mencken, murder, police, politicians, rednecks, riots, The People

Several years ago I wrote a book I never published – I have not published it yet. The central theme of the text was that worry is a waste of time and that, rather than fretting constantly, one should use one’s time to the best and highest endeavors possible. I think this will lead to a happier life on earth.

Meanwhile, I write here about many subjects I find alarming and which may cause some to fret and worry. My purpose is only to educate and not to burden any with fear. Fear is a funny thing. It’s natural purpose is to use the brain to wake the body in answer to physical danger.

Today fear is usually utilized as a weapon to keep the public in check – see H.L. Mencken on the aim of practical politics. A famous American socialist once (in half truth) declared, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”

Regarding life in the new Amerika, many insist “if you ain’t doing nothing wrong, you ain’t got nothing to worry about.” They especially say this concerning interaction with the police – and especially when it is someone else doing the interacting. This view is usually espoused by a “God-fearing conservative” to the host of a radio program. I have derided this nonsensical assertion time and time again.

The unfolding debacle in Baltimore, Maryland again illustrates the sobering point that the innocent do have something to worry about (or fear).

Twenty-five year old Freddie Gray was chased down and hog-tied by Baltimore police officers for the high crime of making eye contact with the officers. Gray was then thrown into the steel back of a paddy wagon. In violation of police procedures Gray was not seat-belted or otherwise secured. His complaints that he couldn’t breath and his plea for a medical inhaler were ignored. Gray was assaulted and kidnapped.

The cops drove around for a while with Gray bouncing around in the back. Several times they stopped and consulted with other officers. Gray begged for help and was ignored. Each time Gray was re-positioned in unsecured fashion in his rolling torture chamber. By the time the van reached the police station Gray had suffered a broken neck. He died as a result.

At lunch one day last week I listened for a few seconds to one of those right-wing radio shows. The caller or guest was explaining that Gray probably had a pre-existing injury and that injury was the real cause of this demise. The torture during his kidnapping merely added the final straw. Cursing, I turned off the radio. I should have called in and explained the centuries-old law on this point. There is an ancient legal maxim (in torts and in criminal law) that you take your victim as you find them. In civil matters this is known as the “eggshell plaintiff” phenomenon.

A criminal wrongdoer is not relieved of culpability because he happened to choose a weak victim. The fact that a person is predisposed to injury is no excuse for harming the person. A person of conscience knows he shouldn’t harm anyone – weakened or not. This point is lost on the tobacco chewing NASCAR set. Mercifully, it is not foreign to the Maryland State Attorney.

On May 1st, that Attorney, Marilyn J Mosby, charged the criminal officers involved in Gray’s death with various criminal charges, including murder. The free people of Baltimore rightly celebrated in the streets. All to often the police are granted blanket immunity for actions which would land any ordinary citizen in jail.

Mrs. Mosby also concluded that Gray’s arrest and transport was illegal: the police had no reason to believe he committed any crime. He committed no crime. Looking at the police is not a crime. Walking or running away from the police is not a crime (as the police are known to murder people, it might be a good idea). Carrying a pocket knife as Gray did is not a crime. Assault, kidnapping and murder are crimes.

(Brian Rice, criminal police agent. Google/ABCnews.)

In ancient times the police were held to a higher standard than ordinary people due to their positions of power. The common law of old England held that not only was an officer criminally and civilly liable for his mal-actions but, also, any citizen witnessing police misconduct were obliged to take whatever action was necessary to protect the innocent. As such, on rare occasions criminal officers were subject to summary execution in order to preserve the freedoms of the people.

Today, our rodent politicians and the limp-wristed weaklings of society bemoan any action, no matter how justified, which interferes with police activity (right or wrong). The new mantra is “submit and obey” for the people rather than have the police “serve and protect.” These low-minded, soulless beings also share responsibility for deaths such as Gray’s.

In a strange but happy reversal of fate the officers who murdered Gray are facing up to 63 years in prison. This will not help Gray at all but it will set a new precedent that (as should be) the police are not above the law.

Those six criminals in blue and their useless enablers have also stirred up other crimes against society. Following Gray’s murder the oppressed of Baltimore took to the streets to vent their pent-up frustration. This provided cover for gangs of looters and thugs to move in like vultures and riot across the city – causing damage untold. This is a familiar pattern. This pattern demonstrates how upside-down America has become.

In a perfect world the police would leave people like Freddie Gray alone and spend their hours weeding out the ruinous members of the populace given to riot and loot when the opportunity presents itself. The rest of the people would express heartfelt appreciation. We have a long way to go reach this perfect place.

Until then, we must continue our vigilance against the forces of evil. We must live aware of these forces not in fear of them. In the words of Jesus, “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Matthew 10: 28 (KJV).

Baltimore, Applecore…

29 Wednesday Apr 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Baltimore, chaos, civilization, freedom, government, law, police, politicians, riots, Second Amendment, stupid, War

It’s not my normal realm of study but I feel like I should say something about the riots and chaos currently erupting in Baltimore.

The situation in Maryland, evolving night by night, highlights two problems plaguing all of post-modern Amerika. One is the trouble of the militarization of our police forces. The Baltimore police appear to have murdered a man (and I have limited facts to based this assessment on). However, this happens all across the country on a daily basis. It’s part of the War on Freedom.

Naturally, such crimes upset the populace. They become restless. Bereft of a government and society that gives a damn, they take to the streets to protest openly in the only way they can.

Add in a few professional agitators and militants and you have the violence and destruction you see on the nightly news. This spectacle illustrates another problem with our society: that some cannot or will not conduct themselves according to the norms of civilization. One would think they had recently emerged from a cave with an angry conscience and arms conditioned for throwing bricks and bottles.

Caught in the midst of these idiotic forces are the rest of us. Cars and buildings are burned. Lives ruined. Peace disrupted. I have few answers for these evils.

Apparently I am not alone. The best the stupid mayor of Baltimore can come up with is a strategy of giving the lawless “space to destroy.” I suggest the affected property owners and insurance companies add this woman to their list of plaintiffs in their respective civil tort suits. Remember, when you head to the polls come the next election, that this is the best our beloved Democrats and Republicans can do.

The press in Briton, often much more able to report on American issues than the American puppet press, notes that as the city burned, shopkeepers called on the police (who started this war in the first place) to help them and save them from the afore-mentioned cave dwellers. These pleas for help were completely ignored.

The real purpose of the police is to enforce state power. The reason given to the gullible public is to “serve and protect.” When the Sh*t hits the fan, they do neither. They retreat into phalanxs to protect their own and nothing more. You, the innocent, are on your own.

As such, you need to arm yourselves. During the 1990’s era riots in Los Angles some store owners gave up on the police and protected themselves the old fashioned way – with shotguns and rifles. This approach worked perfectly. Those from the caves do not wish to be riddled with bullets and, thus, leave the well armed alone. Another benefit of the Second Amendment.

Rather than rely on moronic politicians and their corrupt police forces, instead put your faith in yourselves and people like Baltimore’s Mother of the Year. Better yet, be like her and directly put an end to whatever of this madness you encounter. Direct intervention is the only way to preserve freedom.

(Fight the power, if you must, but don’t mess with Mama. Google.)

An Unexpected Gift: Christmas at the Supreme Court

22 Wednesday Apr 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Caballes, citizens, Constitution, Courts, crime, de minimis, detention, drugs, Eighth Circuit, Fourth Amendment, freedom, government, guns, libertarian, Liberty, Nebraska, police, probable cause, Rodriguez v. U.S., Supreme Court, Terry v. Ohio, The Nine, traffic, United States, War

Usually my legal and political writings center on the wrongs of government … and rightly so. My assessment of court rulings, of the Supreme Court in particular, are often negative: The Affordable Care [SIC] Act; the end of the Fourth Amendment; etc.

Yesterday, however, a gleam of sunlight emanated from the High Court.

From coast to coast the police are profiling drivers in an attempt to find any reason to arrest otherwise free citizens in the ongoing War on Freedom. A simply traffic stop, for something as innocuous as driving on the shoulder of the road, is used to extend the parameters of the stop to facilitate a deeper investigation. This investigation is aimed at discovering illegal drugs, guns, or cash. The initial routine stop is a pretext for a subsequent felony search, in the absence of probable cause to suspect any felony has been committed. In plain words, the stop is a fishing expedition.

In Rodriguez vs. United States, 575 U.S. __, Slip Opinion No. 13–9972 (April 21, 2015), the Court declared these after-the-fact exploratory searches illegal.

Denny Rodriguez was stopped by a Nebraska law enforcement officer for temporarily driving his SUV on the shoulder of a road. The officer checked Rodriguez’s license and issued a warning regarding his road departure. Things then got out of hand and out of Constitutional bounds:

Officer Struble, a K–9 officer, stopped petitioner Rodriguez for driving
on a highway shoulder, a violation of Nebraska law. After Struble attended
to everything relating to the stop, including, inter alia, checking
the driver’s licenses of Rodriguez and his passenger and issuing a
warning for the traffic offense, he asked Rodriguez for permission to
walk his dog around the vehicle. When Rodriguez refused, Struble
detained him until a second officer arrived. Struble then retrieved
his dog, who alerted to the presence of drugs in the vehicle. The ensuing
search revealed methamphetamine. Seven or eight minutes
elapsed from the time Struble issued the written warning until the
dog alerted.
Rodriguez was indicted on federal drug charges. He moved to suppress
the evidence seized from the vehicle on the ground, among others,
that Struble had prolonged the traffic stop without reasonable
suspicion in order to conduct the dog sniff. The Magistrate Judge
recommended denial of the motion. He found no reasonable suspicion
supporting detention once Struble issued the written warning. Under
Eighth Circuit precedent, however, he concluded that prolonging
the stop by “seven to eight minutes” for the dog sniff was only a de
minimis intrusion on Rodriguez’s Fourth Amendment rights and was
for that reason permissible. The District Court then denied the motion
to suppress. Rodriguez entered a conditional guilty plea and was
sentenced to five years in prison. The Eighth Circuit affirmed. Noting
that the seven or eight minute delay was an acceptable “de minimis
intrusion on Rodriguez’s personal liberty,” the court declined to
reach the question whether Struble had reasonable suspicion to continue
Rodriguez’s detention after issuing the written warning.

Courts have, for eons it seems, held “de minimis” or short deprivations of liberty acceptable in the War on Freedom. I and a minority of libertarian legal scholars hold that any deprivation without cause (and the War itself) is illegal. In an amazing turn of events the Court has agreed – in part.

“In Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U. S. 405 (2005), this Court held that a dog sniff conducted during a lawful traffic stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment’s proscription of
unreasonable seizures. This case presents the question whether the Fourth Amendment tolerates a dog sniff conducted after completion of a traffic stop.” Rodriguez, Slip Op. at 1.

I do not agree with Caballes but I am more than willing to take what the Court offers with Rodriguez:

“We hold that a police stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made violates the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures. A seizure justified only by a police-observed traffic violation, therefore, “become[s] unlawful if it is prolonged beyond the time reasonably required to complete th[e] mission” of issuing a ticket for the violation.” Id.

“A seizure for a traffic violation justifies a police investigation of that violation. ‘[A] relatively brief encounter,’ a routine traffic stop is ‘more analogous to a so-called Terry
stop . . . than to a formal arrest.’” Id, at 5. This is true so long as the stop is for a violation of a valid law (few and far between).

However, “[t]he scope of the detention must be carefully tailored to its underlying justification.” Id. Such justification goes only with the underlying traffic stop. “A dog sniff, by contrast, is a measure aimed at detecting evidence of ordinary [non-traffic related] criminal wrongdoing.” Id, at 6.

The presence of overt indications of attendant criminal activity – the smell of marijuana, contraband plainly visible to an officer, etc. – may give rise to a further search, investigation or detention. Concerns for “officer safety,” as nebulous a concept as may be imagined, may also justify a stop beyond what would ordinarily be necessary. Absent these factors further detention is untenable. Id, at 9.

Thus, the next time you are stopped for a simply traffic violation and you receive either a warning or a ticket, you are free to go at the conclusion of the incident. You may deny an officer’s request for additional harassment citing Rodriguez. Mind you, the police are as likely to comply with this ruling as they currently comply with the Constitution itself.

(Nothing to worry about. Google.)

Should you be foolish to argue the old “ain’t doing nothing wrong, ain’t got nothing to worry about,” then, please, don’t be troubled when you find yourself surrounded one night by gun-wielding officers with attack dogs. Even if trouble arises, and you live through it, maybe The Nine will eventually smile on you. Then I can happily write here about your case.

Tidbits, 3/22/2015

22 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Tidbits, 3/22/2015

Tags

America, Arizona, crime, death row, freedom, government, justice, material witness, military, Oregon, police, Posse Comitatus, wrongful conviction

I’ve got a few new interesting items in the hopper as well as some old ends that need to be tied up. For now, a few newsworthy tidbits:

A man in Oregon has been in jail for two and a half years even though he is not accused of committing a crime. He is believed to be the longest held material witness in modern history. I have directly encountered this phenomenon before though never to this extreme.

A woman in Arizona was recently released from prison after serves 22 years for a wrongful conviction – 22 years on death row – for a crime she didn’t commit. I’m writing a chapter-length article on this one. Stay tuned. The Sword of God people are surely disappointed in this turn of events though not as disappointed as God is in them and their “swords.”

People everywhere are suffering similar tragedies. Keep voting for all those liars and maniacs… Based on these stories I may revise How to Interact With the Police.

Two months ago I wrote Police State America whereby I recounted the militarization of our police and the trappings of Program 1033. Now, it seems those police agencies are no longer content with machine guns and tanks. Now they want A-10 fighter bombers in their arsenal. I hope this is a hoax but this is 21st Century Amerika… A-10s would do a great job stopping private drones over the National. These and other Posse Comitatus violations continue unabated.

(Essex County, MA SWAT Team. Google.)

In real news … March Madness continues full swing!

Police State America: A Permanent Standing Army in Our Midst

28 Wednesday Jan 2015

Posted by perrinlovett in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

ACLU, Alexander Hamilton, America, Anti-Federalists, Britain, Caesar, Congress, Federalist Papers, freedom, law, Natural Law, NDAA, police, Posse Comitatus, Robert Yates, Second Amendment, standing army, Thomas Jefferson

Sunday I re-posted a popular column on the Posse Comitatus Act, enacted in 1878 to deter a standing army. It did not work, as I noted in that article. That piece briefly examined the use of the actual, federal military to combat drugs, terror, churches, etc. Here, I want to delve into a growing trend, the development of a psuedo-military, based entirely within our society. I’m writing about the militarization of our domestic police force.

This trend has resulted in a paramilitary police as well-trained and equipped as our national army. Barney Fife has been replaced by an armored, machine gun wielding storm-trooper.

Barney was a goofy, good-natured fellow with one bullet (in his pocket):

(Then. Google Images.)

The new masked face of law enforcement more resembles Darth Vader than a peace officer:

(Now. Google Images.)

William Grigg is far and away the best chronicler of modern, martial law enforcement. Just pick any one of his humorous and shocking articles on police state abuse: Article Archive at lewrockwell.com. Be forewarned, like a Pringles, just one won’t be enough.

I too have written short news notes on this phenomenon, none as good as Will’s.

Here’s a picture of a platoon of “officers” on the hunt for Boston Bombing patsy Dzhokhar Tsarnaev:

(Google Images.)

French police in similar fashion:

(Google, DailyMail, UK.)

The Pose Comitatus Act (“PCA”) reads, in its entirety: “Whoever, except in cases and circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.” 18 U.S.C. § 1385.

There has never been a prosecution under the PCA. Considering the constant creation of exceptions to the Act and the fact that the police are not a direct portion of the Army nor the Air Force, the militarization trend will not run afoul of the watered-down letter of the law. However, it violates the spirit of the law in horrific fashion.

At the end of the Roman Republic, more than twenty centuries ago, Gauis Curio attempted to disarm Caesar’s returning army in order to preserve domestic tranquility. See: Caesar, The Gallic War, Loeb Classical Library, 587 (Harvard U. Press, 2000). As you know, Caesar “crossed the Rubicon” and the Empire shortly thereafter commenced.

In early America the fear of armed military forces present in everyday life was of grave concern to our Founding Fathers. Beginning the Declaration of Independence with a nod to Natural Law, Thomas Jefferson listed the first grievance against the King that “He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature. … He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power.” Dec. Independence, para. 13 – 14 (1776).

In The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton, himself not the greatest proponent of freedom, railed against the standing army as “unsupported by any precise or intelligible designations of reasons.” The Federalist, No. 27 (Hamilton). “Their existence, however, from the very terms of the proposition, is, at most, problematical and uncertain. ” The Federalist, No. 8 (Hamilton).

A more concise explanation was set forth by Robert Yates: “The liberties of a people are in danger from a large standing army, not only because the rulers may employ them for the purposes of supporting themselves in any usurpations of power, which they may see proper to exercise, but there is great hazard, that an army will subvert the forms of the government, under whose authority, they are raised, and establish one, according to the pleasure of their leader.” The Anti-Federalist, No. 10 (Brutus [Yates]).

“Brutus” described the plight of both Rome and Britain under the rule of a standing army. “Julius Cesar … changed [Rome] from a free republic, whose fame had sounded, and is still celebrated by all the world, into that of the most absolute despotism. A standing army effected this change, and a standing army supported it through a succession of ages, which are marked in the annals of history, with the most horrid cruelties, bloodshed, and carnage; — The most devilish, beastly, and unnatural vices, that ever punished or disgraced human nature.” Anti-Federalist, No. 10 (Yates).

“The same army, that in Britain, vindicated the liberties of that people from the encroachments and despotism of a tyrant king, assisted Cromwell, their General, in wresting from the people, that liberty they had so dearly earned.” Id.

The Forty-Fifth Congress considered several issues in developing the PCA: a standing army versus a militia; limited central government; and, the proper (if any) uses for an army within the confines of the territory of the Republic. Rep. Abram S. Hewitt of New York commented on the subject: “If you want to fan communism, increase your standing army and you will have enough of it.” 7 Cong. Rec. H. 3538 (1878).

Numerous examples of Constitutional violations by federal troops aiding tax agents, governors, sheriffs, and district attorneys in Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, and New York were cited to Congress. Other related troubles occurred all across the country. The problem was national in scope.

Senator Benjamin Hill of Georgia remarked, “A posse comitatus is a wholly different thing from an army; it is different in every respect from an army…” 7 Cong. Rec. 4246. He continued, “it never was lawful, it never shall be lawful, to employ the army as a posse comitatus until you destroy the distinction between civil power and the military power in this country.” Id.

Today we see the destruction of that distinction. The police appear one and the same with the military – same tactics, same equipment.

The military equipment utilized by our police largely comes from the The Law Enforcement Support Office (LESO) under the 1033 program (National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 1997 (“NDAA”) (FY 1997)). “This law allows transfer of excess Department of Defense property that might otherwise be destroyed to law enforcement agencies across the United States and its territories.”

Since 1997 the program has transferred over $5 BILLION worth of military equipment to the police agencies of America – $450 million in 2013 alone. Again, the various, yearly NDAA provide Congressional cover which allows potential PCA violations to occur unabated.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) recently released a report which examined program 1033 and several examples of police militarization in the news. Kara Dansky, An MRAP Is Not a Blanket, ACLU, (12/02/2014).

Ms. Dansky recounted the police responses in Ferguson, MO and the horrific maiming of baby Bou Bou Phonesavanh in rural Georgia. The then 18 month old had “his chest ripped open and his face torn off by a flashbang grenade that police officers … threw into his crib during a paramilitary raid.” Id. The attack was part of a drug raid based on an erroneous tip from an informant – Bou Bou was not a suspect.

The Phonesavanh family faces over $1 Million in medical expenses as a result of this unnecessary, indefensible terror attack. ABC News. Look at the picture below (unpleasant).

Bou Bou is making a recovery but the police involved will not help with his recovery. UK Daily Mail. And, of course, they will face no charges for their evil acts. AJC.com.

(The fears of the Founding Fathers realized. ABC News.)

Baby Bou Bou’s ordeal blows apart the oft-repeated idiot’s argument that “if you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.” These SS-style atrocities are oft-repeated as well – in every corner of America.

Echoing the Founding Fathers, the ACLU piece ends: “Militarized policing is dangerous, and American communities deserve better.” We’re not likely to get better any time soon. In 1980 there were approximately 3,000 paramilitary SWAT team raids in America; now there are more than 80,000 per year. Michael Synder, 10 Facts About The Growing SWAT Team Raids In America…. Over one-third of those raids are erroneous. Id. Will Grigg has an endless supply of horror stories about the needless, often deadly attacks on innocent Americans.

Yes, there are circumstances which warrant overwhelming police force, but they are few and far between. Anymore, SWAT teams are deployed for anything and everything – from traffic offenses to searches for teenagers.

The worst part of this is the near complete acceptance of these tactics by the American public. In the immediate wake of the Boston False Flag Bombing the entire city of Bay Area dutifully sheltered in place while a veritable army combed the streets looking for one man. Travel was restricted, homes were searched without warrants, businesses closed, and millions willingly surrendered their freedoms.

It is my theory that the bombing was conducted as part of a test – designed to gauge the public’s willingness to accept a police state. If I am correct, the experiment was a total success. This scenario could likely be played out anywhere. Your local police department (certainly your State) likely has the resources – the tanks, guns, training – to carry out a similar invasion. The odds are you will shelter and comply as told too.

As I have written previously, the Second Amendment was crafted to ensure the people’s ability to resist, with arms, martial tyranny. In addition to our lack of adequate arms and lack of resolve, we now have in our midst a formidable adversary. This mixture is very dangerous indeed.