Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!

Go Back   Prison Talk > BECOMING INVOLVED > Prison Activism
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Prison Activism What's going on? How to become involved.

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-21-2003, 12:58 PM
shawn123 shawn123 is offline
Registered User

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pittsburgh Pa
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default Never Talk to the Police...written by inmate at SCI Graterford

This article was written by an inmate at SCI-Graterford. The article is from the website www.InnocenceDenied.com This is a new organization that is dedicated to trying to bring exposure and assistance to individuals who are wrongfully and unjustly incarcerated.


An extreme statement that most people will never agree with. Think about it for a little while though, and you will agree it is the truth. More people have been wrongfully convicted, given excessive sentences, and murdered by the states due to coerced, illegal, and false confession elicited by the police than probably live in the entire city of Philadelphia.

The police know that a confession is the quickest, easiest, and most effective way to obtain a conviction in court. In criminal law, the confession evidence is considered to be the most damaging form of evidence produced at trial. In the case of a confession, the trial has already taken place once the confession is secured.

It has been estimated that 80% or more of all criminal convictions are solved by a confession. (See Zimbardo, P.G. (1967). The psychology of police confessions. Psychology today.) Is it any wonder that the police are so attracted to gaining a confession? It is estimated that without confessions, convictions might be reduced by more than 70%. (See Brandon, R. & Davies, C. (1973) Wrongful Imprisonment. London, England: Allen & Unwin Brothers Ltd.)

Since the police know that their conviction rates are dependent upon obtaining confessions, their interrogations are usually not recorded and always conducted in secrecy when possible.

The police are allowed to tell a suspect they have evidence linking them to the crime when non exists or even could exist. They are allowed to minimize the seriousness of the offense to encourage an admission or emphasize how serious the offense was and convey the implicit or explicit impression that not cooperating would be detrimental or even fatal to the suspect. The police routinely incorporate the practice of complete isolation of a suspect and making sure he/she is cut off from all outside contacts that could assist him/her (family, friends, or attorney). They use water and food deprivation as a tool. Often, a suspect is arrested at night when he would normally be sleeping and forced to stay awake for interrogation. Lack of sleep and fatigue add to the wear down process that police have come to understand works extremely well. When there is no surveillance (audio or video) of the interrogation, the suspect has no right to remain silent and often is subjected to physical abuses. After all, at trial, a police officer’s version of using proper procedure will always be believed over the allegations of a suspect who has allegedly gave a confession. If you sign a Miranda form at any time, the police will never allow you to talk to an attorney or get out of their custody since they now have an unchallengeable basis to say you wanted to talk to them, did not ask for an attorney, and that what you say is completely voluntary and willingly given.

At this point, many of you who are familiar with the criminal justice system know that I am relaying the truth. For those of you who are still skeptical or would outright argue against these statements, I ask you to answer one question: Why are the prosecutors, and every court I’ve had an appeal to afraid to address any of the above police practices used in my case? All of these practices were employed against me and condoned by the courts by refusing to address the claims, despite the evidence presented to show I was telling the truth. My case is not isolated. Just ask any of the hundreds of ex-prisoners that have been freed after proving their innocence. How many other untold thousands of innocent individuals are still suffering the same fate? Ask those who have been freed from death row how the police and prosecutors treated them. If you talk to the police, you risk your own life. There are no longer any type of Constitutional rights in an interrogation room. If the police want you, they will get you by any means necessary.

In Florida, at least 38 false or questionable murder confessions have been thrown out by Broward County courts for various reasons since 1990.

Eighteen years ago in Michigan, Eddie Joe Lloyd confessed to a horrific murder. The confession was the only evidence available to the state prosecutor. The judge lamented that Michigan lacked the death penalty so he could not sentence Eddie to death for the crime. Today, DNA has proven that the state’s only evidence was false.

And can we forget the brave ex-governor from Illinois George Ryan, who finally could not live with the sure knowledge that innocent people were being killed. He granted clemency to over 160 death row inmates, some of which had been convicted by false confessions obtained by coercion and torture.

Still in Illinois, Terence Griffin’s murder conviction was thrown out by the Illinois Appellate Court because the coercive tactics used by the Calumet City Police rendered his confession involuntary and unreliable. This case was the 248th Illinois case (71 of which involved murder charges) to unravel because of police misconduct in the interrogation process of suspects.

These are only a small number of isolated cases where a person had compassion, honesty, and integrity to allow the truth to be revealed. In untold thousands of cases Justice truly is blind to the actions and abuse the police inflict to obtain convictions. The innocent victims who sit behind bars (solely because of police overzealousness and incompetence) pray that some day someone will hear them and they are given the chance for vindication.

But, why do innocent individuals confess? When a suspect is guilty, most people believe that it is an internal need, or the actual guilt, that makes the person confess. For the innocent individual, there are numerous psychological and coercive factors that usually play a role.

Many innocent people may have a pre-disposition to confess falsely. Some may want fame and recognition. Others may feel they are protecting a friend or a family member. Many false confessions result from the person’s “unconscious need to expiate guilt over previous transgression through self punishment” (See Kassin, S.M.& Wrightsman, L.S. (1985). Confession Evidence. The psychology of evidence and trial procedure. Pg.77 Beverly Hills: Sage)

For those who do not have a pre-disposition to confess, the police must use more persuasive types of methods, including extreme methods.

Every police interrogator will first create an isolated, closed interaction between himself and the suspect. Then one or more other police participants are introduced into the process. The interrogator will always hint at and give ideas as to what they want to hear. Many will even give specific explicit details to shock the suspect. Those people who have low self-esteem, a lack of assertiveness, and anxiety to being questioned are more susceptible to these coercive tactics. As the interrogation becomes more stressful, most suspect start becoming more concerned with getting out of the police dominated environment, especially when physical abuse, threats, and intimidation are being used, than caring about the answers they are giving to the questions. EVERY suspect has a point of no return that will cause them to say, do, or perform anything requested by the police. The suspect has become so worn down that he needs the immediate gratification of getting out of police custody more than caring about the possible consequences of what must be said or done to achieve the gratification.

There are many other psychological and social factors, including sleep deprivation, refusing water and food, lying about evidence, trying to intimidate the suspect with the officer’s belief in their guilt, etc. Deception and deceit together with other questionable or inappropriate police interrogation and investigative procedures are common in our law enforcement agencies and are continuously employed during the routine interrogation process. In almost all cases of a confession, once the suspect says they are guilty, all other investigation to solve the crime will cease. This insures that the false confession will not be challenged by other evidence that may prove innocence. These deceptions, deceit, coercion, physical abuses, and complete lack of police competence during investigations is regularly condoned and legitimized by our judicial system.

The police don’t care about the truth when a confession solves their cases and lets them move on to the next. When a prosecutor is handed a case with a confession, many don’t care about the truth. Our courts are structured as an adversarial system. Winning the case at any cost is the ultimate goal, the truth be damned. A confession gives the prosecutor an easy win, so can they really be blamed for refusing to examine too closely how the police obtained the easy confession? (I say they should be prosecuted if they use a false confession, but this is a minority opinion.)

So how can we fix this problem of false confessions that lead to innocent individuals being convicted?

There are two procedures that would insure that in 90% of all cases an innocent person could not be convicted on the basis of a false confession.

First, it is imperative that all confessions must be in some way corroborated by independent evidence of a suspect’s guilt. Many innocent people who were tried, convicted, and sentenced on the basis of a false confession alone had absolutely no physical evidence linking them to the crime in question. If a confession does not include at least the discovery of evidence unknown to the police; a description of highly unusual elements of the crime that the police were unaware of and was not reported publicly; or an accurate description of mundane details of the crime scene that are not easily guessed, reported publicly, or known by the suspect by previous knowledge, then the confession should be refused as evidence.

Since such a confession should be seen as the suspect lacking actual knowledge of the crime, and a strong indication of innocence, a court should not allow it to be the basis of a conviction.

Second, is to videotape all interrogations made by the police. In many recent cases, the only reason the police are not still beating and torturing confessions from a suspect is thanks to a videocamera. If a confession is recorded, a court must review the procedures employed by the police. There is then no longer a question of the police version versus the suspect’s version. The recording is the truth.

The police have routinely taken away our Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights during interrogations. A normal citizen can no longer say that my rights protect me. The police say you have none once you become a suspect. It is a sad state our country and justice system has come to when citizens have to fear the police as much as terrorists and actual criminals.

The main reason many wrongful convictions are being overturned today is thanks to DNA testing. A confession cannot be ruled reliable when accepted scientific tests disprove its factual foundation. There are many aggressive innocence projects, groups, and advocates that are using science to prove innocence. Science can now virtually recreate any crime scene. Technology is finally obtaining justice for those who were ignored by the courts for years.

On the other hand, what about those who did not have the benefits of a videocamera during their interrogation? What about those innocent people who can’t use DNA testing to prove their innocence because it does not apply? What about those who are sitting in jail with no evidence against them to show guilt except a forced confession or a police officer’s account of interrogation? If so many people are being freed based on one new scientific test, what does that tell us about the number of truly innocent people that are still awaiting their chance for vindication throughout our nation?

For misdemeanor or lesser felonies, this false conviction is a troubling event and life altering problem. In the case of a life sentence it becomes a tragedy and total destruction of a second innocent life. In the case of a death sentence it is abhorrent, irreversible, and the truest sense of a premeditated murder recorded.

So what is the only true solution available to us that has a 100% guaranteed reliability to not result in a false conviction? Until the laws are changed to truly respect our rights, require evidence to prove guilt, or all interrogations are videotaped by the police, NEVER TALK TO THE POLICE!

I guarantee that every person who is innocent, and still incarcerated, believed it could not happen to them. Until the police are made accountable for their blatant violations of our rights, they are not your friends. They are not protecting the public, but rather victimizing innocent citizens. Until prosecutors actively seek justice, the police can not be trusted.

I would let the police beat me to death before falsely admitting guilt had I but known that the result would be my wrongful conviction for the last sixteen years and counting. If you decide to answer those “couple simple questions” when asked, be prepared to pay with your life.

Darrell Van Mastrigt #AJ-1088
is currently wrongfully and illegally
incarcerated at:
Box 244
Graterford, Pa 19426-0246
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to shawn123 For This Useful Post:
brokenmother (02-23-2014), Lgummo (03-17-2015), nepenthe (07-10-2015)
Sponsored Links
Old 07-30-2003, 10:05 AM
Retired-5 Retired-5 is offline
Account Closed

Join Date: May 2003
Location: central coast of Cali
Posts: 610
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

oh boy, our family learned this lesson the hard way, you are 100% right, don't talk to the police! as a child i sat in the corner for many hours because i didn't tell the truth. my mom sure sang another tune after she sat on a gang member murder jury......
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2003, 10:37 AM
buggles4869's Avatar
buggles4869 buggles4869 is offline
Account Closed

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lost in Oklahoma
Posts: 496
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

I can attest to this post...this is 100% truth! Do NOT talk to the police without a LAWYER present! My son tried explaining what he was 'accused' of and his explanation was edited into a confession. It took me much money and nearly 2 years to get him out of Juvie...He's been home since January and I have instructed ALL my children to NOT talk to the police about anything UNLESS it is an emergency situation. Funny thing is MY FATHER was a police officer during my child hood and he left the force because he felt 'everything had changed'...I never understood what he meant until my adult life....

Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2003, 09:31 PM
~cheenna~'s Avatar
~cheenna~ ~cheenna~ is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: ~East Texas~
Posts: 2,443
Thanks: 0
Thanked 51 Times in 5 Posts

A little over 3 years ago I would have fought you on this point tooth and nail ... OMG .. have I got a new frame of mind now! The "justice" system is a joke from start to finish ... we as a people should be ashamed that by ignorance and trust we allowed all our rights to be legislated away, and they are by no means finished ... we all say here over and over again how "outsiders" just don't know our pain ... well that's not all "outsiders" don't know ... the general public has been duped into believing we are locking up the criminals and all is well ... bull*%#@ ... what the system is creating, in a lot of cases, is deliberate dysfunctional human beings who, upon release, don't have a snow balls chance in h&%# of surviving and when they go back it is because "they" didn't take advantage of all the opportunities presented to them for rehabilitation ... in relation to this article ... there is no real interest if the individual is guilty or not, there is a political motivation to lock up as many as possible, by any means possible ... let the chips fall where they may ...

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away.
Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2003, 05:46 PM
FriscoLady's Avatar
FriscoLady FriscoLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out there somewhere
Posts: 9,629
Thanks: 2,289
Thanked 2,385 Times in 1,088 Posts

When my Mom and Dad were up here with Linda they talked often about their youth in Germany and their old age in the U.S.

My Mom told Linda that she remembers the Gestapo and how very similar their actions are to the "Police" in this country today. Mom said that other than the language she can no longer see a difference between the two countries. Germany 1932 - 1945 and the U.S. present day.

She often advised Linda to not talk what so ever to them.

After my conviction my Mom took a big chance, from what I understand from Linda, she spit in the face of the cop that arrested me. Linda had to do some fast talking to get Mom out of an arrest! For Pete's sake, Mom will be 89 this December! What were they going to do? Pick on an old deeply hurt woman! AGH!

All the govenment wants is more control over the population and they scare us into submission by locking up as many as they can.

I'm not saying there are not some that should be there, oh hell, there were several that I knew inside that I would not want back out on the street! But, I found many that should not have been there at all!

This is the not the country I remember from my youth. When are we going to wake up and oppose these (I cant even think of good word to describe them!) with all our might?

Do not talk to them, do not testify for them, do not cooperate with them!


Last edited by FriscoLady; 07-31-2003 at 05:58 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2003, 03:17 AM
eagle's dove eagle's dove is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wa. U.S.A.
Posts: 111
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

I have always had respect for people in authority over me, that is until recently when my husband and I were both co-ursed into co-operating with the police. Neither one of us were read our rights and my questioning was taped. Following this my husband's public defender refused to talk to me. The jail refused to give me info on my husband's case.The prosecuting attorneys office was nice as pie because they knew my husband's case had no physical evidence to convict him and my testimony was all they had to convict him. They had co-ursed him into a feeble partial confession without an interpreter{ he speaks almost no English.} To this day he does'nt know what hit him the next thing he knew he belonged to theDOC. I even wrote a letter to the judge telling him what had been done. I also told him I was resending my testimony and all the reasons why. needless to say, never heard from his office, my testimony was used and my husband was convicted. The only time they had an interpreter present was at his sentencing and he still did not know his rights. The interpreter was there to tell him what was done in court that day, nothing prior to that day. My husband was scared because he was an illegal alien though when this happened we were married and had applied for a visa and
paid all the fees already. I asked the police officer if he could get an interpreter for my hubby and he said no he does not need one I made signs with my hands and you better be-lieve he knew what I was saying and he said yes he was guilty but it was an accident. A counselor from the prison told me the police said they desperately searched for an interpreter on the court records but could not find one.
This was in Ellensburg, Wa. Yakima, Wa. has a huge Hispanic population and it is only 20-30 minutes away. He did not try very hard.i am also appalled at how when a child is questioned the state employees lead these kids in what to say. The prosecuting attorneys office had said there was a DNA test done on this child and would be used as physical evidence. The same time I wrote the judge I asked the prosecuting attorney's office what the DNA results were and she said I do not think there was one done. I wonder if they did it and it came out neg. or if it was just a bluff? At any rate They blatantly walked all over our rights and deliberately kept me away from him until after the sentence hearing. I even told the judge I was on six different meds for my illnesses and they still used my testimony!! It is a well known fact that Kittitas county is full of predjudice and bias. I was told that most inmates there are Hispanic or Native Americans and not treated very humanely. This makes me hang my head in shame that so much garbage goes on and the justice system turns a blind eye to it all. I am more patriotic than most
but these things are a blatant attack on our human and civil rights set forth in the constitution of our country. the dove
Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2003, 05:19 PM
colinuk colinuk is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: surrey england
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

How wonderful, enlightened people at last.
YES you are all dead right, pity people only see the light when it all goes wonky.
Friscolady you are spot on!!
never give up
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2003, 07:55 AM
shawn123 shawn123 is offline
Registered User

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pittsburgh Pa
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post

Thanks for all the comments. It is nice to know that there are others out their who can see the realities that are pointed out in this article.

Innocence Denied Webmaster

Don't complain--Get involved.
Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2003, 08:54 AM
toi_ama toi_ama is offline
Account Closed

Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Oregon USA
Posts: 4,778
Thanks: 0
Thanked 11 Times in 6 Posts

When I was 15 years old, my friends went off to Vietnam to be slaughtered. I asked why and they told me that it was because Communism was involved and that if we don't fight it "over there" it will come here. (maybe it wasn't Communism, but I was told that) Well, you know how when the towers went down, you remember it like it happened yesterday? I can still, to this day, see the TV set when they showed the headquarters of the Communist party right here in America and talked about the Communist party being allowed to pass out their literature at the University of Oregon------right then, at 15 years old, I saw a naked Emporer, and for the past 43 years, nothing has happened to clothe him. In fact, the other day a politician on TV said the exact words in reference the war in Iraq------"If we don't fight them over there, we'll be fighting them over here". Ya think???? Ya don't think if we spent the amount of money on national security that we're spending on the war in Iraq we'd be more secure here in this country? Now Bush wants even more power to arrest people, whisk them away, and deny them due process here in America. The American people don't even seem to see or care what's happening here. With the powers now in the hands of the government, the same thing can happen here-------and does happen here-------that happened when the SS broke down doors and hauled people off never to be seen again. Your Mom is absolutely right, Frisco Lady. This country claims to be a "free country" but 2,000 of us are locked up and more are being locked up every day. The greatest prison of all is the one between a person's ears, and we've got a huge population locked up in their heads who just can't see past the "wall" to see what's going on in America.

Yes, do not talk to the police. And for heaven's sake, vote that all interrogations MUST be videotaped--------NOT just audiotaped--------nationwide.

Last edited by toi_ama; 09-21-2003 at 09:02 AM..
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2003, 03:12 PM
PRISSY PRISSY is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

This is so real. You grow up being told to trust your authorities and they screw over you like you're nothing. They are real scandelous people and very evil. They have no respect for anyone.
Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2003, 08:42 PM
shawn123 shawn123 is offline
Registered User

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pittsburgh Pa
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post

Thanks for all of the comments. It seems that this article has really struck a chord for many people. It is our most downloaded page on our website.


Don't complain--Get involved.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2004, 01:45 PM
shawn123 shawn123 is offline
Registered User

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Pittsburgh Pa
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Default Interesting Feedback

There is some very interesting feedback on this article on the Crime and Justice forum. Click here to view thread


Don't complain--Get involved.
Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2004, 09:09 AM
Tauliah Tauliah is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Lansing, MI USA
Posts: 140
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Thanks for the extrodinary advice. I shall live by it and teach this truth to my children. I am from Philly originally and I am aware of Mumia Abu Jamal's case which sounds like police injustice also. My husband is considered a political prisoner for similar things. Many people are in prison because of injustices as yours. Philly is notorious for this. Godspeed with help for denied innocence.
Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2004, 10:09 AM
mom mom is offline
Struggling Survivor

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: indiana
Posts: 198
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Proving your point

A majority of our population has no first hand experience with the system. There is a website called From The Wilderness that points out our latest loss of freedom's through the anti-terrorism law.

The "F" Word

Fascism - 1... a. Totalitarianism marked by right-wing dictatorship and bellicose nationalism. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control. - The American Heritage Dictionary.

My fellow Americans:

"On what legal meat does this our Caesar feed?" wrote New York Times Columnist William Safire as he blasted President Bush's November 13 emergency order permitting noncitizens the government has "reason to believe" are terrorists to be tried - inside the U.S - by military tribunals. These trials may be held in secret and the prosecutors do not have to produce evidence if it is "in the interests of national security." And the condemned may then be executed "even if a third of the officers disagree." Safire categorized this as a "dictatorial power to jail or execute aliens." Bush's proclamation is a nullification of the 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. At the same time that Caesar Bush was announcing this edict the Justice Department was announcing - as reported in the AP on November 15 - that it will not disclose the identities or status of more than 1,100 people arrested or detained since September 11th, nor will it continue to release a running tally of those detained.

As the anxiety level rises in you, you think, "Well, I'm a citizen so I don't have anything to worry about."

Try harder to refocus on your Christmas list, Harry Potter and your job.

On October 26th - a date which will live in infamy - the President signed the USA/PATRIOT act, officially known as HR 3162. And you should well note that, according to Representative Ron Paul (R) of Texas - as reported on November 9th by Kelly O'Meara of the Washington Times' Insight Magazine - the bill had not even been printed and members of the House could not read it before they were compelled to vote on it. O'Meara wrote, "Meanwhile, efforts to obtain copies of the new bill were stonewalled even by the committee that wrote it." Most of its provisions have nothing to do with fighting terrorism. Under this so-called anti-terrorist measure:

É Any federal law enforcement agency may enter your home or business when you are not there, collect evidence, not tell you about it, and then use that evidence to convict you of a crime; (This nullifies the 4th Amendment to the Constitution). And, says the ACLU, it doesn't even have to be a terrorism investigation, just a criminal investigation. [Section 213 - The Sneak and Peek provision].

É Any federal law enforcement agency may, if they suspect that you are committing a crime, monitor all of you internet traffic and read your emails. They may also intercept all of your cell phone calls as well. No warrant is required. (This violates the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution) [Section 202 and 216] [See FTW on Carnivore, Vol. IV, No.2 - April 30, 2001].

É The FBI or any other federal law enforcement agency may come to your business and seize any of your business records - if they claim it is connected with a terrorist investigation - and they can arrest you if you tell anyone that they were there. (this violates the First and the Fourth Amendments to the Constitution) [Title II, Section 501]

É The CIA can now operate inside the U.S. and spy on American citizens. And, as directed by AG Ashcroft on November 13, it is also permitted to share its intelligence files with local law enforcement agencies (and vice versa). The CIA has spied on Americans for decades, but the fruits of that spying have never been admissible in court. Now law enforcement will have the ability rewrite the intelligence as a probable cause statement, conduct an investigation and introduce it as evidence. This, from material that was collected outside the rules of search and seizure. (There goes the Exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment). [Titles 2 & 9].

É The foundation for an international secret political police agency is laid by allowing the CIA to receive wiretap information from any local agency and then share it with the intelligence services of any foreign country. [Section 203]

So now a darkness begins to sink over your consciousness. You are mad, first at me, and then you are not quite sure of what to be mad at - but you know you're mad. Reaching through a guilty conscience you check with yourself and beg of your soul the permission to take the position that you never break any laws. None! You're a good citizen of the Homeland, a good German - I mean American. What can you do anyway?

Then I arouse your rage at me even further by telling you that Section 802 of HR 3162 defines domestic terrorism as "activities that - involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States:... and "appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;" or "to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion;"...

Under this definition the blocking of a driveway at a federal building or defending yourself when attacked by good "Germans" at a protest march - while protesting these violations of the Constitution - could instantly make you a "domestic terrorist" and subject to some of the stiffest penalties ever enacted into law.

Next, as you retreat further, covering your ears and mind, shutting out the crime that is being perpetrated by your government - against you - you will lash out at me and say, "Look Ruppert, I read the Bill. There's a ‘Sunset Clause' in it. All this stuff goes away after four years. It's just for the duration of the terrorist emergency."

Not so. Under Section 224 (b) "With respect to any particular foreign intelligence investigation that began before the date on which the provisions referred to in subsection (a) cease to have effect, or with respect to any particular offense or potential offense that began or occurred before the date on which such provisions cease to have effect, such provisions shall continue in effect." In other words, if the government says that their desire to burglarize, or wiretap you or search your files is part of an investigation that started before December 31, 2005, there is no sunset clause. This could be for a "potential" offense. What is a potential offense? Something you thought about? Something you might have thought about?

Now thoroughly uncomfortable you reach for more straw teddy bears. And I, like a hunter smelling victory, will close in on you with words that will both reassure you and make you a grown up. Upon reviewing HR 3162 Congressman Paul said to reporter O'Meara, "Our forefathers would think it's time for a revolution. This is why they revolted in the first place... They revolted against much more mild oppression."

Mao once said that "Revolution is not a dinner party." You squirm in your seat.

OK, The Congressman's noble words stirred you for a moment, made you think of Mel Gibson in "The Patriot." But you realize that you're not Mel Gibson, you're out of shape, you have bills to pay, a vacation coming soon. Reaching again, you realize something. "Wait! This is a law. It was passed. It's proof that there are checks and balances.

I'm coming to get you now.

Beyond The Law

On November 9th, Attorney General Ashcroft announced that he was ordering the Justice Department to begin wiretapping and monitoring attorney-client communications in terrorist cases where the suspect was incarcerated. This was not even discussed in HR 3162. That same day Senator Patrick Leahy (D), Vermont wrote to Ashcroft. He had many questions to ask about what the Justice Department had been doing by violating the trust of Congress and assuming powers which were not authorized by either law or the Constitution. Leahy even quoted a Supreme Court case (U.S. v. Robel): "[T]his concept of "national defense" cannot be deemed an end in itself, justifying any exercise of... power designed to promote such a goal. Implicit in the term ‘national defense' is the notion that defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart... It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of one of those liberties... which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile."

Leahy asked Ashcroft by what authority had he decided - on his own and without judicial review - to nullify the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. He asked for an explanation and some description of the procedural safeguards that Ashcroft would put in place. He asked Ashcroft to appear before the Judiciary committee and to respond in writing by November 13.

His answer came a little late. On November 16, Patrick Leahy received an anthrax letter. And, as of this press time, Ashcroft has not responded in writing.

I've got you now.

Moving up the ladder we come to the Vice President, Dick Cheney. The Washington Post reported on November 9 that all summer a major Constitutional clash had been brewing as the former head of oil giant Halliburton refused to surrender to Congress' investigative arm, the GAO, records from his energy task force. The Post story said, "Comptroller General David M. Walker described the fight as a direct threat to the GAO's reason for being, a separation-of-powers issue that would determine whether the legislative branch could exercise the oversight role envisioned by the founding fathers." But the Sept 11th attacks have changed all that. A planned suit by the GAO against Cheney to get the records of his task force on oil has been put on hold. Cheney's violation of the law goes unchallenged in the goose-stepped march of manufactured polls showing support for the administration. Congressman Henry Waxman (D), CA has blasted Cheney on constitutional grounds but there's little else he can do in the current climate.

And now we come to your President, the guy we started with, by asking what "legal meat" he eats. Apparently he eats anything he damned well pleases. On November 1st, after several months of delays, George W, Bush broke the law himself by changing an Executive Order and declaring that in this national emergency he was going to prevent the release of papers from the Reagan presidency, even though release is mandated by The Presidential Records Act of 1978.

Of what use could these papers be to Osama bin Laden?

These papers would probably shed glaring light on the criminality of the Reagan-Bush (the elder) years of Iran-Contra, the savings and loan plundering of American taxpayers and the hand-over-fist drug dealing by the CIA at the direction of G.H.W. Bush. But now, in violation of the law, you will never see them. Nor will you likely ever see the papers from the 89-93 Bush Presidency, or the Clinton years - not to mention those of the current administration. What a convenient way to cover up criminal actions.

Representatives Jan Schakowsky (D), Ill, and the ever-brave Henry Waxman rose to the challenge and wrote Bush a letter on November 6th. They said in closing, "These provisions clearly violate the intent of the law...The Executive Order violates the intent of Congress and keeps the public in the dark. We urge you to rescind this executive order and instead begin a dialogue with Congress and the public to determine the need for clarification of this law."

Any bets as to who gets the next anthrax letter? Have you noticed that only Democrats have been getting them?

So now you retreat, your decision has been made. Do nothing. This will all go away. In a last gasp of intellectual, pretzel-bending logic you think, "Wait! We still have the Supreme Court."

This is the same Supreme Court that illegally handed George W. Bush the 2000 election. This is the court that stopped and delayed hand counting long enough to prevent the final results from being known. Those results - as buried by the major media in horrendously dishonest stories released last week - were written as supporting the Supreme Court's decision to stop the recounts. And based on that decision, the media recount gave Bush the victory. But, as noted by EXTRA! Editor Jim Naureckas in a November 15 Newsday story, the media found that it was quite possible, by examining rejected ballots, to determine the "clear intent of the voter." Yet none of these ballots were included in the media recount and all of the media organizations recognized that, had those ballots been counted, Al Gore would have won.

As constitutional lawyer Mark H. Levine noted in a December 20, 2000 editorial, what the Supreme Court did was to create a one-case only exception where the "clear intent of the voter" - as dictated by Florida law - was no longer applicable standard. By stopping the hand count and overturning the Florida Supreme Court's correct reading of its own law, it delayed the recount long enough to force a crisis where it could overrule Florida and deliver the election to Bush while thousands of ballots went uncounted.

So much for the Supreme Court.

One of the greatest decisions to ever come out the Supreme Court - when it was one - was rendered in 1866 after the civil war. The case in question was Abraham Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeas corpus in arresting protesters and rioters. As recently quoted in an eloquent November 15 article by David Dietman, an attorney and Ph.D. candidate from Erie Pennsylvania, the Court stated:

"The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government."
- Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. 2 (1866).

So all you have left to put your faith, or your fear, in - as you see it - is the President. You have no faith in yourself, no faith in God, no trust in your fellow citizens and no willingness to experience discomfort. You fail to praise, support and uplift all of the courage that is beginning to reveal itself around you. You draw your blinds and wave your flags hoping for divine intervention before your name or your job comes up on the list. You are a good German, like the Germans who followed Hitler and allowed him to start a war that killed hundreds of millions of people.

And when it is all over, when they come for me, when they come for you, when they come for your job - when history sheds it inevitable light on the criminals that today rule our country - you will say, "I didn't do anything wrong."

Oh yes you did.

Oh yes you did.
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2005, 01:13 AM
Anthony's love

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FLA,USA
Posts: 228
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

the article that you posted above really struck a soft spot in me. it happened to my fiancee who has to endure 2 life sentences and a 30 year sentence for something he did not do. the police beated him into a confession of the crime that happened while he was home alone. the person that committed the crime came to him right after it happened and the police arrested him right on the spot along with the real criminal. there was no evidence linking to him and only one circumstantial evidence. the victim described a totally different person and yet pointed him out as the one that did it and still yet, could not remember the 2nd person (the real criminal). the real criminal said he did it and only got 5 years in prison and let out after 4 years. she was supposed to testify at his trial only she never showed up. the real criminal even admitted to his sister that he didnt do it and yet we cant find her. his public defender wouldnt bring up the issue that he was beated into the confession during trial.we now have 2 appeals going through and can only pray that someone will see the light. my fiancee has a horrible deal and he has to deal with it every day that he has life, that he would never see the outside again or see his family or see the beautiful day that we see on the outside. i pray to god every day that someway and somehow a miracle would happen for him to come home.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2006, 08:17 PM
kj61 kj61 is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: California US
Posts: 44
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

It has been awhile since anyone posted to this thread - perhaps it has moved on to other things, or perhaps it has just 'died' a sad death and been forgotten. Recent events in the news from the federal level down should cause everyone to take this to heart and want to make it public knowledge. It is easy for us, the ones who are suffering most as a result of the system in place, to sit, type and vent our frustrations.

Alas, we are the minority with a 'feeble' voice in all the events and happenings in the world. To get the changes and actions that will be necessary to change these inadequacies and injustices the communication must reach out to more than just us 'few.'

I would be most interested in communicating with anyone caring to discuss further the fallacies and injustices all 'Americans' are being force fed these days.


Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2006, 01:23 PM
JohnsHeart JohnsHeart is offline
Johns Wife Forever

Join Date: May 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 988
Thanks: 0
Thanked 16 Times in 13 Posts

thanks for posting this article!
John was 15 when given a LWOP sentence.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2007, 10:11 AM
getup getup is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: M.S. Lee
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 6 Posts

"Alas, we are the minority with a 'feeble' voice in all the events and happenings in the world. To get the changes and actions that will be necessary to change these inadequacies and injustices the communication must reach out to more than just us 'few.' "


From my personal experience it doesn't matter that you say nothing to the police. I was arrested with no investigation, said nothing to the investigators and was indicted anyway. I went to trial.
At trial even after multiple objections from my attorney, a local volunteer city employee was allowed to be an expert witness. This "expert" gave testimony as to what "I said", and what "several other people said", when questioned if this expert had any of these statments on record, he said "no, I just spoke with them". In my opinion this perjury got me convicted as my trial was circumstantial also. Then upon recieving my answer from appeal I found my trial transcript was heavily altered.
After expressing my concern and trying to obtain a copy of the actual trial tape I recieved a letter from the court reporter that said the trial transcripts were correct, and that they were not in the business of selling or copying tapes. The whole experience has showed me depth of the curruption in our courts. The deeper I dig the further the rabbit hole goes. What do you do, they are the law. Who do you go to when it seems the higher up the ladder the stronger the political bonds. My heart goes out to those who have experienced this type of injustice and recieved life. There really is no opponent than percieving injustice, it's an invisible evil, do as I say not as I do? How about lead by example.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to getup For This Useful Post:
Candice Wenzel (12-20-2013)
Old 12-20-2013, 10:13 AM
Candice Wenzel Candice Wenzel is offline
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Pa
Posts: 1
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts


I hope you still get on here as I keep up with your story as well as my brothers.. You have to get ahold of me so please do!!!!
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Merit Time Bill In New York Manzanita New York Legal Information 198 03-09-2012 11:06 AM
Stat rape case- if convicted where will they be sent? jgi187 Massachusetts General Prison Talk, Introductions & Chit Chat 19 10-13-2006 05:45 AM
Contra Costa County California Sunshine California: County & City Jail Discussions 5 04-10-2006 08:20 PM
my man's brother killed himself today CONWIFE Florida General Prison Talk, Introductions & Chit Chat 47 12-21-2005 03:21 AM

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:57 PM.
Copyright © 2001- 2019 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics