Another Big Lie from the Authorities: Innocent People Don't Plead Guilty

Ten years ago, Brian Banks, a high school football star from Los Angeles with a promising future, pleaded "no contest" to raping and kidnapping classmate Wanetta Gibson in a school stairwell. Despite the evidence to the contrary, Banks' attorney advised the youngster to plead "no contest" (which essentially is a guilty plea) with the assurance that he only would get 18 months, as opposed to a possible 41 years if he was found guilty.

Banks and his family did the math and he pleaded, and five years later, he still was in prison. After being released, the girl finally admitted to having lied, but did not want to publicly admit the truth because her mother had sued the Los Angeles School District and got $1.5 million. Having essentially stolen the money in the first place, they did not want to be faced with giving it back.

The various news stories have turned it into something in the human interest category, as though it were a heart-warming account instead of the cold-blooded lie that essentially took a young man's life from him. As I see it, the media is missing the real story, which is this: the entire system of "justice" in California, despite huge holes in the girl's story, was ready to assume that she was telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Why? As in the Duke Lacrosse Case, the various players in the system discarded forensic evidence, timelines, and the very Laws of Time and Space to rush to a judgement of GUILTY, but the rush is not simply a psychological event, but also a legal one, and one can trace a lot of the rush to federal law, and specifically the Violence Against Women Act.

In 1974, Congress passed the Mondale Act and the ultimate result was a huge rash of cases in which authorities were REQUIRED to rush to judgment no matter how outlandish the charges of child abuse and molestation. The Mondale Act and Violence Against Women Act were similar pieces of legislation, in that they promised federal help and money (lots of money) to states that were aggressive in pursuing child abuse/molestation charges and charges of rape and sexual assault against women.

Besides the money, Congress also stipulated that states change how they approach due process and how they viewed evidence. Before the VAWA, for example, many states required that with rape charges, there also be corroborating evidence because it was too easy for people to make false accusations. In order to be in compliance with both the VAWA and the Mondale Act, however, states had to just accept the word of a "victim," no matter how outlandish or dishonest the story might have been. In the Wonderland of federal law, the accusation alone is all the proof the authorities need for conviction.

To the feds and all of the activists that were behind these laws, no story would be considered outlandish, because everyone knew that all men were rapists or potential rapists and that all parents actually were secret child molesters (or at least those parents and men who did not have the proper political connections). We know the results, and they are ugly.

To the Progressive mindset that is behind the modern governing philosophy, both child abuse/molestation and rape were "epidemic" until Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice stepped in to put an end to the violence. Thus, any criticism of these laws or any attempt to restore due process of law or to demand that the rules of evidence actually require real evidence is seen as an attack on women and children.

Without the Mondale Act, there is no McMartin Case, no Little Rascals, no Tonya Craft, and no Creative Frontiers. There is no rash of false accusations of abuse/molestation in child custody cases, no Joal Henke and his "I just remembered" perjury, and James Combs does not plead guilty to a felony for something he never did.

Without the VAWA, there is no Duke Lacrosse Case because the investigation would have been very, very different. And Brian Banks would not have spent five years in prison, and thousands -- yes, thousands -- of other people would not have been falsely accused.

In the United States today, defendants face mountains of charges, courtesy of how prosecutors operate, so that conviction on any one of them can result in decades in prison. People come to understand that the system is stacked against them and that in this country, neither judges nor prosecutors nor those that govern consider innocence to be a legitimate defense.

Despite what one might see on the various "CSI" shows or see on TV or the movies, police no longer do real investigations. In cases of accused rape, sexual assault, child molestation or child abuse, police ARE REQUIRED BY LAW to "investigate" as though the charges are true, which means the bias always is toward "proving" guilt. One should not be at all surprised that this federally-mandated method of "investigation" bleeds off into other cases such as robbery and murder, which guarantees not only that there will be a spate of wrongful convictions, but also that the system will be utterly biased toward keeping such convictions from being overturned, no matter how obvious it might be that the defendants were railroaded. 

As for Brian Banks, a number of people engaged in criminal behavior, beginning with Wanetta Gibson. However, the police and prosecutors engaged in false accusations and false charges, people lied to a grand jury that indicted, and prosecutors lied in court. Banks' attorney encouraged him to accept an outcome at odds with justice, and Gibson and her mother stole more than a million dollars from taxpayers, as did their attorney, who got at least a half-million dollars from the theft.

Unfortunately, false pleas are not limited to just these kinds of cases. I have a good friend who pleaded guilty to a number of things that both he and the prosecutors knew he did not do, but did so because had he not done so, prosecutors would have brought vague charges against him in the federal court in Washington, D.C., and he being a Jewish Republican, did not want to face a jury of mostly African-American Democrats.

That is the system we now have, and it cannot and will not be fixed. No "reforms" will work because too many people make too much money and the voices of justice and responsibility are drowned out by those who dominate our political and legal institutions.

An Open Letter to "Judge" Brian House, Part II

Well, "judge," I see that you have a new Facebook page, this one dedicated to your re-election. Since no one of which I know is running against you, I guess that makes your re-election about as certain as the "re-election" of Kim Il-Sung back in his day. Perhaps that is fitting, since your view of "justice" is about the same as that of a North Korean dictator.

Your "house" logo with all of your qualifications is cute. No doubt, your membership at Peavine Babdist (as we Southerners pronounce "Baptist") Church goes far and I am sure that the church is proud to have a judge, even a corrupt judge like you, and I am sure that the members of that church all sympathized with you when jurors two years ago acquitted Tonya Craft and then told the media that your obviously being in bed with the prosecutors was one of the reasons for their decision.

However, somehow I doubt that your preacher ever has done a sermon on Matthew 23 with you in the congregation, as it might hit too close to home. Yes, when Jesus accuses the pharisees of being like "whitewashed tombs," he might as well be referring to you and the other judges in the LMJC who parade about in their robes, have the bailiffs give the "Oh, yea" announcement, and enter the courts with the fanfare they don't deserve.

You see, "judge," you really are like one of those whitewashed tombs who is full of "hypocrisy and lawlessness" of which Jesus spoke. You regularly break the very rules that the State of Georgia has set for judges, and you don't even try to hide your actions. You claim to be independent, and then do little more than sit in your chair and perform your duties as Buzz's sock puppet.

And don't tell me that isn't true. People see what is happening and they let me know. No, I doubt you accept money under the table, but corruption isn't necessarily about being bought off. No, corruption is the presence of pre-determined outcomes that are presented as the outcomes that happen after there has been careful deliberation.

As I see it, instead of a house for the campaign symbol, you need to show the clean, white exterior of an ancient tomb, like I am showing below:

And, in order to provide truth-in-campaigning, I think the photo below gives the perfect touch:

Furthermore, you might want the following bullet points to go along with all of those wonderful things you put in your "house" logo:

• Speaks with prosecution witnesses before they testify without notifying the defense, which is a violation of the law and a violation of the judicial ethics that govern judges in the State of Georgia;
• Allows the prosecution to introduce knowingly (and obviously) fabricated "evidence" during a trial in order to fill holes in the case;
• Permits prosecutors to engage in disruptive and obnoxious behavior during trials, another breach of judicial ethics;
• Permits the admission of obvious perjury during a trial, including the admission of "I just remembered" testimony from a prosecution witness already proven to be a liar;
• Makes disparaging statements about the defendant and defendant's attorneys during a trial to others in the courtroom, which also is a violation of judicial ethics;
• Has secret (and even not-so-secret) ex parte meetings with prosecutors before and during a trial without notifying the defense, a violation of judicial ethics and an obvious attempt to work closely with prosecutors to rig a trial;
• Permits and even encourages prosecutorial intimidation of defense witnesses in breach of judicial ethics rules;
• Allows for the admission of obviously-false "jailhouse snitch" testimony in court despite the legal prohibition against testimony that knowingly is perjured;
• Orders bailiffs to seize cell phones and computers from people who say they favor the defendant, but permits supporters of the prosecution to have such things;
• Orders security checks for supporters of the defendant, including defense witnesses, but permits prosecution witnesses to enter the courtroom in another entrance without security, and then provides a room for them where they can have laptop computers and cellphones.

This list is partial, and only partial, but it speaks to your corrupt handling of the courtroom and the fundamental dishonesty that is the basis for everything you do. Yet, as I look at the Facebook page, I see "friends" who apparently love corruption.

There is Vickie Scoggins, a belch from a bad onion if ever there were such. (God help that poor horse she is riding in the picture. Enough said.) Scoggins was the "brains" behind the bogus Higgenbottom prosecution in which Alan Norton planned to use testimony from a "snitch" that he knew was outright perjury. Unfortunately for Norton, Scoggins, and you, "judge" House, the defense managed to find a letter that the snitch had written to Higgenbottom claiming that he knew the man was innocent.

Hmmm. You were preparing to put a man on trial knowing that the very "witness" against him already had put into writing that Higgenbottom was innocent. (Mr. Snitch changed his mind, apparently, when the prosecution offered him a nice deal of reduced time, something I am sure that you, "judge" House, knew about.)

As I noted before, I don't think you will have opposition and I'm sure that the good folks at Peavine Babdist and Oakwood Babdist will turn out in droves to vote you another term of corruption on the bench. And I guess a check of the pew Bibles there will find that the pages containing Matthew 23 and similar passages in the Bible have been torn out.

Channel 3, which provided the best coverage of the Tonya Craft case and trial (as opposed to Channel 9, which kissed the posteriors of Chris Arnt, Len Gregor, Tim Deal, Brian House, Sandra Lamb, and Joal Henke and called it "news"), has run an interview with Tonya on the second anniversary of the "not guilty" verdict against her.

As Tonya notes so well, the people who broke the law, committed perjury, and Brian House, who tried to rig the trial, have not been held accountable. Sandra Lamb has enrolled her daughter at Girls Preparatory School, which places every teacher there in danger, given that Lamb and her actress child have no scruples against lying when someone makes them mad.

Joal Henke committed perjury in Judge Marie Williams' court and Hamilton County DA Bill Cox ignored the felony committed in the building where he works. Henke also admited under oath to mortgage fraud, but apparently the U.S. attorney in Chattanooga was too busy pursuing non-crimes to deal with a felon in his midst.

As I see it, the Tonya Craft case presents a perfect picture of "justice" in Northwest Georgia and Hamilton County. The authorities there will move heaven and earth to pursue false charges and to prop up lies and even suborn perjury, but apparently they are incapable of actually going against people who commit real crimes.

By the way, I noticed that that alleged rape at East Ridge Middle School was a hoax, and that was what I thought when I first read the article. Notice that the rape crisis center along with Child Protective Services AND the police were involved. And how much does one wish to bet that the people at the rape crisis center and CPS believed the girl from the beginning?

What we have is a system out of control. Government agencies are full of people who will believe lie after lie and pursue the innocent. It does not just happen in the Chattanooga area, but from what I can tell, Northwest Georgia and Hamilton County are pretty hopeless when it comes to "justice."