Prosecutors Revolt Against Constitution

Prosecutors Revolt Against Constitution

Late last year, South Carolina State Supreme Court Justice Donald Beatty joined Kozinski. At a state solicitors’ convention in Myrtle Beach, Beatty cautioned that prosecutors in the state have been “getting away with too much for too long.”

He added, “The court will no longer overlook unethical conduct, such as witness tampering, selective and retaliatory prosecutions, perjury and suppression of evidence. You better follow the rules or we are coming after you and will make an example. The pendulum has been swinging in the wrong direction for too long and now it’s going in the other direction.

Your bar licenses will be in jeopardy. We will take your license.” [ reference article below ]


Bully Cry Babies / South Carolina 

The reaction by Prosecutors and those who support their abuse was to throw a bully hissy fit. You know, when bullies are taken down a notch they cry like big babies.

  • Other prosecutors around the state jumped on, and now at least 13 of the head prosecutors in the state’s 16 judicial districts, along with South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, are asking for Beatty’s to be recused from criminal cases. This would presumably end his career as a state supreme court justice. [ reference article below ]

The United States and its laws of justice are being undermined by Prosecutors through-out the nation who have sworn to uphold the Constitution. Before the Great Bar at the Judgement Seat of God these Prosecutors will be held accountable for every careless word of oath and accusation they have declared.

But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned. ~ God (Matthew 12:36-37)


Seattle / King County Washington State Prosecutors

By

In a blistering opinion, five federal appeals court judges accused two King County prosecutors of conspiring to hide evidence and allowing a witness to make false statements on the stand.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to offer any relief to Joshua Frost, who was sentenced to 55 years for his part in a string of robberies in 2003. But Judge Alex Kozinski and four others said in an opinion released this week that the prosecutors’ actions were “troubling” and needed to be revealed. – The Seattle Times

 


 City of Enumclaw / King County Court Culture of Corruption
City of Enumclaw Detective Grant McCall turned the recorder on and off at will as he scripted out the false accusation and Prosecutor Dan Satterberg and Team gave their approval to the set-up.
Let Police plant evidence, drop drugs or script out, word-for-word what to say in an accusation – King County Prosecutors are all over it like flys to dung. In fact, the King County Prosecutor Mark Larson, Prosecutor Jason Simmons, Prosecutor Rich Anderson, Prosecutor Lisa Johnson not only allowed witnesses to make false statements they entice, enpowered and encouraged those who opposed Timothy Williams to knowingly lie. Just as Enumclaw Detective Grant McCall had done King County Prosecutors inflamed further lies.

No wonder King County Prosecutor David Seaver told the Appeals Court to block any investigation into the actions of the City of Enumclaw Detective Grant McCall’s proxy attack upon Timothy Williams.

Naturally, the Court of Appeals upheld the King County Court Culture of Corruption against Christian Preacher Timothy Williams via destroying Sound Doctrine Church, WinePress Publishing, and The Salt Shaker Christian Bookstore.

Let the reader be reminded of the statement above: “In a blistering opinion, five federal appeals court judges accused two King County prosecutors of conspiring to hide evidence and allowing a witness to make false statements on the stand.”

This is exactly what the personally appointed by King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg team of King County Prosecutor Mark Larson, Prosecutor Jason Simmons, Prosecutor Rich Anderson, Prosecutor Lisa Johnson did. Indeed, King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg signed off on this set-up from start to finish.

Enumclaw Detective Grant McCall and Prosecutor Dan Satterberg

 

King County Prosecutors are so lawless, giving zero respect to the Constitution and Bill of Rights that they literally scripted out, tantamount to planting drugs, a false accusation.

So contemptuous are King County Prosecutors for the rule of law and the Constitution that in the proxy-prosecution of Timothy Williams (Sound Doctrine Church, WinePress Publishing, Salt Shaker Christian Bookstore) they didn’t even bother to present any evidence. None!

King County Courts and King County Prosecutors, notably King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg presented to the jury ZERO evidence a crime had been committed. [ see hardtruth.us for evidence ]

Fact is, King County didn’t even BOTHER presenting any evidence. King County Courts kicked off the JURY anyone who stated that evidence should be required for a guilty verdict.

Further facts, among many further facts, King County Court System and King County Prosecutors REFUSED to investigate.

Judge Lori K. Smith, King County Prosecutor Mark Larson, Prosecutor Jason Simmons, Prosecutor Rich Anderson, Prosecutor Lisa Johnson, Prosecutor Dan Satterberg, King County Courts, King County Culture of Court Corruption

_____________________________________________________________________
enumclaw.com ~ opinion unto righteousness ~ timothy williams
[proverbs 18:2]

Concept of Enumclaw.com

Article Reference

(archives.gov)—By Radley Balko March 7, 2014
I’ve addressed the problem of prosecutorial misconduct here a few times before — both its prevalence, and the fact that misbehaving prosecutors are rarely sanctioned or disciplined. Recently (or perhaps the better word is finally), some judges have begun to speak out about the problem including, most notably, Alex Kozinski, the influential judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

Late last year, South Carolina State Supreme Court Justice Donald Beatty joined Kozinski. At a state solicitors’ convention in Myrtle Beach, Beatty cautioned that prosecutors in the state have been “getting away with too much for too long.” He added, “The court will no longer overlook unethical conduct, such as witness tampering, selective and retaliatory prosecutions, perjury and suppression of evidence. You better follow the rules or we are coming after you and will make an example. The pendulum has been swinging in the wrong direction for too long and now it’s going in the other direction. Your bar licenses will be in jeopardy. We will take your license.”

You’d think that there’s little here with which a conscientious prosecutor could quarrel. At most, a prosecutor might argue that Beatty exaggerated the extent of misconduct in South Carolina. (I don’t know if that’s true, only that that’s a conceivable response.) But that prosecutors shouldn’t suborn perjury, shouldn’t retaliate against political opponents, shouldn’t suppress evidence, and that those who do should be disciplined — these don’t seem like controversial things to say. If most prosecutors are following the rules, you’d think they’d have little to fear, and in fact would want their rogue colleagues identified and sanctioned.

The state’s prosecutors didn’t see it that way. Beatty singled out South Carolina’s 9th Judicial District in particular. There’s a good reason for that: He noted in his talk that two prosecutors from that district, overseen by Solicitor Scarlett Wilson, had already been suspended for misconduct and at the time of his talk, another complaint was pending. A recent complaint by the state’s association of criminal defense lawyers recently laid out a list of other complaints (PDF) against Wilson’s office. (You can read Wilson’s response here.)

But Wilson took personal offense at Beatty’s comments. She accused him of bias and sent a letter asking him to recuse himself from criminal cases that come out of her district. In one sense, Wilson is unquestionably correct. Beatty is biased. He’s clearly biased against prosecutors who commit misconduct. But that’s a bias you probably want in a judge, particularly one that sits on a state supreme court. It’s also a bias that isn’t nearly common enough in judges. (Not only do most judges not name misbehaving prosecutors in public, they don’t even name them in court opinions.)

Other prosecutors around the state jumped on, and now at least 13 of the head prosecutors in the state’s 16 judicial districts, along with South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, are asking for Beatty’s to be recused from criminal cases. This would presumably end his career as a state supreme court justice.

Over at the Connecticut Law Tribune, the public defender who writes under the pseudonym “Gideon” comments on this mess:

Why, then, is it so inappropriate for Justice Beatty to remind stewards of justice that their charge includes not only securing convictions, but also maintaining the integrity of the criminal justice system? What is so particularly offensive about the justice making his opinion known? Certainly no one would argue that there are two competing opinions to be had here; there is no pro-suppression of exculpatory evidence lobby. So is it merely the petulance of being chided in public?

This isn’t an unusual occurrence, however. Prosecutors in San Diego have long used a state law to “disqualify” pro-defense judges. Just a few months ago, they boycotted a superior court judge because he issued a few too many rulings upholding the Fourth Amendment, in favor of defendants. They claim that these statements and rulings evince an underlying bias that these judges have, making them unfit to be neutral and detached magistrates in criminal court.

Also in Santa Clara County, Calif., where a few years ago former district attorney Delores Carr responded to a series of scandals in which her office failed to expose exculpatory evidence, and one of her assistants was sanctioned, by boycotting the judge who ruled against her, and then attempting to restrict the power of the state bar to discipline prosecutors. (Something the bar rarely does, anyway.)

In these days when the media and the masses equate every arrest with guilt and every acquittal with a mistaken jury and a technicality in the law, these incidents show that some prosecutors aren’t above playing to these base sentiments, or worse, actually believe these very things.

Why else would a judge who sides with a defendant and his Fourth Amendment rights be unfit to sit in criminal court? Why else would it be grounds to disqualify a judge for reminding prosecutors of their ethical obligation?

Justice Beatty’s remarks are troubling, but not for the reasons the attorney general of South Carolina thinks. They’re troubling because they reveal that prosecutors there engage in witness tampering, retaliatory and selective prosecutions and even perjury. They’re troubling because they reveal that perhaps the South Carolina Supreme Court has been aware of this unethical conduct but has heretofore turned a blind eye to it (“no longer overlook…”). They’re troubling because they reveal that justice in South Carolina isn’t what justice should be and some want to keep it that way.

One more example: Recently in Arizona, the state’s supreme court recommended adopting an ethics rule that would require prosecutors to disclose “new, credible, and material evidence” of a wrongful conviction, make that information available to the convicted and then “undertake further investigation or make reasonable efforts to cause an investigation, to determine whether the defendant was convicted of an offense that the defendant did not commit.”

This seems like a pretty sensible guideline. Yet the office of Maricopa County Attorney William Montgomery opposed it. Why? According to a comment Montgomery’s office submitted to the court, because there’s “no convincing evidence that Arizona has a ‘problem’ of wrongful convictions” or that “prosecutors have failed to take corrective action when appropriate.” In a debate a couple of weeks ago, Montgomery reiterated his opposition. He said he already follows the rule, and so he was insulted that anyone would suggest an ethical guideline would be necessary to hold him to it.

Of course, even if Montgomery himself always follows the proposed rule, he isn’t the only prosecutor in Arizona. Nor will he be the last prosecutor in Maricopa County. Certainly he can’t believe that every current and future prosecutor in Arizona will now and always do the right thing when presented with evidence of a wrongful conviction. Perhaps it’s true that only the rare, rogue, isolated prosecutor would hide, obscure, or sit on such evidence. But if disclosure of that evidence is the right thing to do, it’s difficult to understand why anyone would oppose giving the state bar a way to discipline that prosecutor, rare, rogue, isolated as he may be.

The most plausible explanation for all of these stories is that a significant number of prosecutors just don’t want to be held accountable to anyone but themselves. I suppose a lot of us would like to have that sort of protection in our jobs. But few of us do. And the rest of us don’t hold positions that give us the power to to ruin someone’s life with criminal charges, to convince a jury to put someone in prison or to ask the state to put someone to death.