A cesspool of Judicial Corruption

FORTY-NINE roland's opinion

I am categorically accusing agents within the United States Government of criminal conspiracy! This conspiracy has been ongoing for many years in the name of "justice"–which is a pretext because it involves the denial of justice to the American people by depriving U.S. citizens their civil rights. Unbelievable, radical? You be the judge because the conspiracy is provable. Most people would rather hug the illusion that the “American System of justice” is fair and honorable–yes, it was when it started out over two hundred years ago. But, what if there were proof that rogue elements within the System have now taken over and are operating outside the law? What if our Constitution is being or has already been overthrown and we are slowly becoming a police state? What if these rogue elements are conspiring to overthrow freedom in America.

These are serious charges and one must not take them lightly. Certainly, the culprits will make every attempt to destroy my credibility. I am the father of an innocent man who was falsely accused and wrongfully convicted of crimes that he did not commit and, in fact, crimes that never occurred. My son, David Roland Hinkson, is sitting in prison–as I write this book–a victim wrongfully imprisoned.

David is a charismatic person, who became one of the many "Targeted Individuals" in the U.S. who, because of his political speech, has been singled out to be eliminated by the conspirators. The conspirators fear that individuals such as David who are willing to speak out against corruption will foment an opposition against them and their dirty deeds that will foil their plans to turn America into a socialist nation.

As David’s father, I am aware that some will automatically consider me both biased and non-objective. Regardless I can't close my eyes to the truth that I have seen. But nothing will silence me. Therefore I have presented the cold, hard facts and will let you judge whether the system is broken.

This story of treachery, deception and crime by officials shows how our government manipulated the conviction of my son, David Roland Hinkson. I welcome any credible evidence that disproves the allegations I make here. I have researched diligently and believe the statements made here are accurate, but I have tried not to overstate the enormity of my discovery of this conspiracy. I ask the reader to consider this: Is there a crime more cowardly than one orchestrated (or conspired) by agents of an all powerful government against helpless victims?

Not only did David's Government set him up for a ruin, but it denied him a fair trial. With arms and legs chained, stuffed into a dungeon he had to try to overcome the assumption of guilt.

The named people identified in this book entered into a conspiracy and did falsely accuse him while he stood before the so-called bar of justice. He had believed that the rule of law prevailed in America. He believed that there was truly a "Presumption of Innocence" that worked for him; and he would prevail if he could show that those who made salacious allegations against him were liars and should be prosecuted or impeached.

Now he has learned that the "Presumption of Governmental Regularity and Correctness" has replaced the Presumption of Innocence. He now understands that he is the victim of the corrupt, broken legal system which now operates in the Country of his birth. He is learning first hand a hard lesson as to how the system really works but has paid an extremely high price to gain that knowledge.
If only we had the benefit of 20-20 hindsight while we were facing the future, we could have made many adjustments in the way his case was presented which could have at least showcased the corruption and would have proven there was no truth in the allegations against him.

We learned that during the middle of his trial Judge Tallman willfully lied from the bench about the content of the official file that the government gave him. Then based on that lie the Judge made a finding of fact which was false and issued a ruling denying the admission of a critical piece of evidence that would have set David free. His excuse for was that it would “confuse the jury.” The record is clear that the judge lied, but there seems to be no forum to overcome his deception, so David’s is destined to spend 43 years in prison at SuperMax (U.S.P., Florence, Colorado).

David, founder and sole owner of WaterOz, employed over 40 people between the years 2000-2003. He had every right to sue the government agents of the IRS and Justice Department for racketeering because they were conspiring to bring false criminal charges against him through a baseless grand jury indictment. His reward was to begin his journey through hell.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Nancy Cook actually encouraged a witness to lie to the grand jury–which is the crime of subordination of perjury. But the government has never charged her with a crime.

Not only was it disruptive to David's life, his work and his employees to be constantly scrutinized, but it was disconcerting that a federal prosecutor was actively advocating for and encouraging witnesses to tell lies against him under oath.

The grand jury disbanded without bringing a True Bill against David, but, the US Attorney used fraud and a rubber stamp with the grand jury foreman’s signature to create a fraudulent, “superseding indictment” to give the appearance of legitimate charges against him. With this fraudulent document, began an odyssey of epic proportions.

Central to the issue of vindictive prosecution is the government’s continued pursuit of claims that agents in the government knew or had reason to know they were not true. If they had reason to know the stories were not true, they had a duty to investigate and determine the truth. It's prosecutorial misconduct for a prosecutor to use perjured testimony. A prosecutor who does so acts arbitrarily and capriciously and violates the due process rights of the accused.

The Court also must be condemned for its failure to exercise its supervisory powers to demand that the prosecutor correct the record. A prosecutor who discovers perjury by a grand jury witness after indictment is required to inform the defendant, the trial court and the grand jury of the perjury so that the grand jury may reconsider its decision to indict the accused. Justice and law require that they tell the jurors when they know a witness is lying.

The widespread pattern of such misconduct in a case, especially the consideration of perjured testimony, requires the trial court to use its supervisory authority to declare a mistrial whenever discovered. However, in David’s Case the Judge refused.

Prosecutors, of course, want to get a conviction–few even care if the accused is innocent even though prosecutors have a dual role and swore to uphold the Constitutional rights of the individual while prosecuting and to do justice. But prosecutors have developed the attitude that if defendants are wrongfully convicted, “it's not my problem; they can always appeal."

By law, prosecutors may not speak to jurors outside the presence of the grand jury. Nor can they withhold exculpatory evidence which would show that the accused in not guilty. Cases of abuse have come before the courts where prosecutors presented perjured testimony, and questioned a witness outside the presence of the grand jury and then failed to inform the grand jury that the testimony was exculpatory. Other cases include failing to inform the grand jury of its authority to subpoena witnesses, operating under a conflict of interest, misstating the law and misstating the facts on cross-examination of a witness. But remember, under Title 5 of the United States Code, judges, prosecutors and even investigators are all allowed to receive payments for convictions they participate in obtaining–which is legalized bribery.

Let me remind you of what Justice Sutherland of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit said:

The prosecutor's duty is to protect the fundamental fairness of judicial proceedings. That assumes special importance when he [the prosecutor] is presenting evidence to a grand jury . . . and that the costs of continued unchecked prosecutorial misconduct before the grand jury are particularly substantial because there the prosecutor operates without the check of a judge or a trained legal adversary, and is virtually immune from public scrutiny.

The prosecutor's abuse of his special relationship to the grand jury poses an enormous risk to defendants as well. For while in theory a trial provides the defendant with a full opportunity to contest and disprove the charges against him, in practice, the handing up of an indictment will often have a devastating personal and professional impact that a later dismissal or acquittal can never undo.

Where the potential for abuse is so great, and the consequences of a mistaken indictment so serious, the ethical responsibilities of the prosecutor, and the obligation of the judiciary to protect against even the appearance of unfairness, are correspondingly heightened.
David's case is a good example of such abuse. It has cost David and his family in excess of four million dollars, so far, paid for his defense. It was likely that the trend of his growing company, which was only grossing three million dollars a year, could now be astronomical. Worst of all–an inventor, who truly is a creative man, innocent of the charges against him has spent seven years in the most sever conditions of incarceration in the United State and is facing a virtual life sentence.

David was detained by federal agents under a fraudulently obtained detention order based on the perjured testimony of an FBI agent who repeated as hearsay, what Marianna Raff supposedly told him was true because she said her two brothers in Mexico had done “this” before. The use of such perjured testimony from a former disgruntled employees who had a vendetta against David, when the FBI agent did not bother to conduct an independent investigation to verify what had been said, was obstruction of justice, a separate crime committed by the FBI agent.

Not only did they imprison David falsely for seventeen months on this testimony alone, but the entire United States of America was at risk from a potential terrorist attack by these two men until the FBI finally checked them out. During this 17 month period there were two unsolved murders of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, one in Baltimore, MD and one in Seattle, Washington. If these two brothers of Raff had done this before, Agent Long, who was on the Northwest Task Force for Anti-Terrorism, had an absolute duty to his country to investigate these two as persons of interest.

The fact that FBI Agent Long did not do so for seventeen months, and then only after repeated demands by David’s attorney, is proof that Agent Long knew all along that these two individuals did not pose a threat to the U.S. Nor would they have been people that David had contacted as potential hit-men. This means that the government’s story of why they held David in detention from April 9, 2003, was bogus and fraudulent.

They never should have held David in jail before his trial. Yet, one of the government’s objectives in destroying a "targeted individual" was to isolate the individual and prevent that person from participating in his on defense. Thus, the FBI had to invent an excuse to make it appear that David was the equivalent of a terrorist who was likely to order the murder of other federal officials if they didn't lock him up.

The government has consistently interfered with David’s housing while in jail by directing the Ada County Jail to periodically move him to solitary confinement, and to reassign him to higher levels of security and to restrict his living privileges. The obvious intent of his captors was to increase his level of stress, cause greater isolation and induce a psychological breakdown. These people threatened David's physical safety when they put him in cell with a dangerous individual who strangled another inmate to unconsciousness, in David's presence (after the strangler had demanded money from David).

David who is gentle and nonviolent, was incredibly stressed. In custody, they denied him nearly all privileges or rights under the Constitution. They denied him any opportunity to assist in his own defense. The official spin by the authorities was that they were protecting him from others.

"In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution" - Thomas Jefferson

FIFTY conclusion

The myriad of facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information in the chapters, stories and commentaries contained in this book range from cutting edge hard news and comment to extreme and unusual perspectives. Uncomfortable material has not been swept under the rug. The truth has not been censored or logic skewed with contorted rhetoric. These things reflect the world as it now is - for better and worse. I present multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information included to help the reader see the overall plan to destroy political dissidents and the politically incorrect in America. As with all controversies, I stand ready to post any and all rebuttals and responses from people mentioned in the material.

Journalism is (or used to be) the profession of gathering and presenting a broad panorama of news about the events of our times and presenting it to readers for their own consideration. It is believed that intelligence, judgment and wisdom of the readers will help them discern for themselves among the data which appears in this book and to judge what is valid and worthy–or otherwise.

The idea of a free press in America is one that I and my colleagues hold in the highest regard. We believe in bringing our site visitors and program listeners the widest possible array of information that comes to our attention. We have great trust and respect for the American people, and our worldwide audience, and believe them to be fully-capable of making their own decisions and discerning their own realities.

Among the vast information included in this work for your consideration, there will doubtless be some you find useless and possibly offensive, but we believe you will be perceptive enough to realize that even the stories you disagree with have some value in terms of promoting your own further self-definition and insight.

We are not going to censor the news and information contained in this book, for that is for you to do. We strongly recommend not "assuming" anything. Read, consider, and make your own informed decisions.

People "assumed" the Warren Commission report was accurate. It was not. Chief Justice Earl Warren never should have allowed himself to be associated with the investigation of the Kennedy Assignation because he was the one person who needed to be free of preconceived notions in the event that the commission determined that there was a person to prosecute; unless, of course, the result was pre-determined and known from the beginning that the one-man, one-bullet theory would prevail. With Lee Harvey Oswald dead, there was no one to prosecute so that Earl Warren would never have to sit on the review of a case. And thus, he was free to hold the investigation with the commission in his name–merely theater for the masses.

People "assumed" the Federal Government would never conduct biochemical experiments on the general populace. But it did, by the score. People "assumed" once that the world was flat.

As you may recall, the definition of "assume" is "Ass U Me."

INDEX

A

B

C
Z

1 TITLE 5 > PART III > Subpart C > CHAPTER 45 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 4502 to § 4502. General provisions. (a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, a cash award under this subchapter may not exceed $10,000.

(b) When the head of an agency certifies to the Office of Personnel Management that the suggestion, invention, superior accomplishment, or other meritorious effort for which the award is proposed is highly exceptional and unusually outstanding, a cash award in excess of $10,000 but not in excess of $25,000 may be granted with the approval of the Office.

(c) A cash award under this subchapter is in addition to the regular pay of the recipient. Acceptance of a cash award under this subchapter constitutes an agreement that the use by the government of an idea, method, or device for which the award is made does not form the basis of a further claim of any nature against the government by the employee, his heirs, or assigns.

(d) A cash award to, and expense for the honorary recognition of, an employee may be paid from the fund or appropriation available to the activity primarily benefiting or the various activities benefiting. The head of the agency concerned determines the amount to be paid by each activity for an agency award under section 4503 of this title. The President determines the amount to be paid by each activity for a Presidential award under section 4504 of this title.

(e) The Office of Personnel Management may by regulation permit agencies to grant employees time off from duty, without loss of pay or charge to leave, as an award in recognition of superior accomplishment or other personal effort that contributes to the quality, efficiency, or economy of government operations.

(f) The Secretary of Defense may grant a cash award under subsection (b) of this section without regard to the requirements for certification and approval provided in that subsection.