Daily news, documents and intelligence about Offshore Financial Centers and those who conduct business in them that you will not find anywhere else.
RSS Feed Print
An End to Delusional Group Think.
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 6/29/2002 5:09:12 PM

By: David Marchant

A perfect system does not exist.

It is stupid beyond belief to point to examples of apparent injustice and hold it out as proof that a whole system is corrupt.

By such logic, you could tally up every mistake that each and every one of us has ever made in our lives and use it as an argument that we are all useless.

Like every other legal system, the one that exists in the United States is far from perfect.

However, when measured against others, it more than holds its own.

For example, it is far more efficient and corruption-free than the legal systems of St. Vincent, Panama, Grenada, Antigua, etc., etc.

In my experience, the people who tend to think little of the U.S. legal system are crooks who have been held accountable by it.

Funnily enough, those that win (including myself) think that, while it has its flaws, it works better than most.

Internal Administrator
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011
Joined: 10/12/2010
Posts: 5780

Posted: 6/29/2002 11:54:18 AM

By: K J R

It sems some people on this message board are deluded about the availability of justice in the United States

This site listed above should put an end to such delusions.


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/3/2002 7:00:27 AM

By: David Marchant


In the past, you have posted messages showing that you are a staunch supporter of high yield investment schemes and you, therefore, believe that people can become rich while sitting at home watching repeats of "I Love Lucy" on television while magic dust is sprinkled on their investments offshore to make them grow exponentially.

You also once claimed to have earned 30 per cent per month from an investment scheme.

While there undoubtedly are many people 'who may know something I don't', the above is proof enough that you are not one of them.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/2/2002 11:36:50 PM

By: edwardkirelius

Come now David its getting that way in the USA or have you not noticed yet.Everything goes through one bank ,thanks to Rockerfeller and his cronies ,equally as corrupt as other banks you mentioned perhaps even more so. I am sure you feel quite secure with Dick and George and Tony at the helm in the old country. I am sure they are honorable men, perhaps smoked some dope with old Bill but rest assured they did not inhale, what would their moms think....?And then we have the goons in Canada being told how to topple this country here ,read ,David, observe look at the sky and the chemicals decending on populated areas from unmarked military planes come on get with the program...Read the latest book Death in the air by Dr Leonard Horowitz don't just slag me off there may be somebody who may know something you don't. Ed

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/2/2002 9:01:58 PM

By: David Marchant

I agree with the person who told him to either try to change the system or leave, rather than moan about it.

What makes me laugh about all of the Americans who bad mouth their country endlessly is that they appear to have no idea about the rest of the world.

I suggest that they all go and live in Montenegro to be next to their crooked banks and see what life is like there.

Or go and live in an offshore center where expatriates are generally afraid to say boo to a goose for fear of having their work permit revoked or not renewed.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/2/2002 8:00:27 PM

By: Edward Kirelius

I am in total agreement with this person , i feel also that the person who asked him to leave this country needs to start reading that means turning off the price is right and getting informed about the country he lives in and the depth of corruption that not only resides in the US but around this world ,.Turn your TV off, unplug from main stream media or better yet start reading, between the lines of what THEY are telling you ,or do you just believe you can fight the war on terror with terror and that George, Dick and Tony and others are honorable men and have the best of intentions for the peoples of this world ,my friend if you do you may be in for a large regret....Nam ipsa scientia polestas est

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/1/2002 9:53:58 AM

By: K J R

I come from a relatively small town. In the 1980's an attorney by the name of Craig James (R) ran for US Congresscritter from our congressional district and won!

He even won a second term of office after which he retired.

Refusing to go along to get along he ever received any significant committee assignments and the the amount of corruption as he put it "made him want to puke is guts out."

Only when enough people get pissed off about their government that it reaches "critical mass" will ANYTHING chamge. You can tell me to leave this country all you'd like but leaving will not change it.

As for yourself you are one of the reasons evil succeeds. As you do nothing.

I have a good life, I have personally never had ANY run-in with the IRS, BUT I have seen that agency and others and I have seen corrupt prosecutors and corrupt judges ruin the lives of friends.

Your attitude will not change until it happens to you arsomeone near and dear to you.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 6/30/2002 2:45:24 PM

By: NewStudent

Perhaps as a "Yank", I can better empathize with your position. Unfortunately, I have no compassion for the complainer who initiates no changes. Run for the difference. Make the difference.

Until then, post the conspiracy theories and the "US Govt sucks because one of their agencies won't leave me alone" on another board.

Survival of the fittest is completely appropos to world politics. I'm very happy to be an American. If your not, leave.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 6/30/2002 1:47:09 PM

By: K J R

Perhaps as "Brit" you cannot relate to what it has been like for me as an American to find out I was lied to by our public school system.

That the government most Americans think they have is NOT what they've been brainwashed into thinking it is.

When Kruschev pounded his shoe on the podium and said whe will bury you from within. He knew something that most American's did not.

That is the fate of America was alread accomplished as a goal in the minds of the power elite. the same power elite that financed the communist revolution in 1917.

What they could not accomplish in the United States by war they have accomplished by coercion of our public officials by economic/monetary policy/banking/social engineering and societal programing through the public school system.

The American attorneys whom I know that avoided going into trial practice did so more often that not because their personal integrity in general would have been at stake.

Go long to get along is the name of the game when your going to practice in the same circuit for years to come.

An email from a new friend recently brought up a subject matter I've noticed since traveling abroad. I'm going to pose it as a question: "Why are Americans hated by so many people around the world?" Is because of our culture, our attitude, or the heinous acts our federal government has commited against other countries?

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/8/2002 5:30:29 PM

By: Mr. Anonymous

So, what is the *solution* you are advocating. Since we are not The Almighty, we don't know who is really right or wrong in any controversy. The best we can do is put the facts before a judge and jury (and ultimately, an appellate court) and let them decide.

To do otherwise invites anarchy. If there is proof that a judgment was corruptly obtained, it can be overturned by presenting that evidence to the court of appeals. Otherwise, EVERYBODY who loses a case will simply claim "corruption" and seek to avoid the effect of the judgment. Or, as they say in prison, "Everybody is really innocent."

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/8/2002 5:02:07 PM

By: K J R

Well,... now that the discussion has gone totally offfpoint like a conversations between a group of chipmunks suffering from A.D.D. Let me see if I can bring it back on point.

First it seems that SOME chipmunks posting to this board seem to think that because I post messages critical of the "system" that I should leave. It would seem that THEY need to develope a more tolerant attitude. Secondly everything I've ever posted to this board has been true, correct and accurate. People would do better to learn how to personally cope with unpopular truth than to counter with debating technique that do not address the issue.

How does one correct a wrong in demoncratic society without pointing out to enough people to gain a majority to accomplish the change? There is one other way and that is for the wrong to effect enough of those people or their families personally. So how many people are going to have to be damaged by the system before those who eventually will be damaged but have not yet decide to do something about it?

I've personally not yet been damaged. But I have a friend who is about to be. He is about to lose his livelyhood to a corrupt court judges court order for and action where he was following the letter of the law as written.

Something else I would like to clarify is that I do not sit around and gripe and bitch.

Over the last year and a half I've taken my business from start-up to earning over $350,000 per year.

Partly because of diligent work, discipline, alot of ingenuity. I also though have to give credit where credit is do and let David know I for one am glad he maintains this site. As this web site does provide a kind of a "map of the mine field" if there could ever be one.

I don't earn enough money to just sit around and complain.

But I do feel strongly enough about some important issues to demand attention to the things that need to stop if prosperity is going remain available to those willing to do what it takes to obtain it.

When enough people find that they can not find remedy in the courts sociaty gets turned upside down. Remember the Rodney King riots when the cops were equited in the state courts?
Remember the jury nullification of OJ Simpson's criminal trial?

They were both the result of a corrupt judiciary. We are fast losing our ability to find remedy against government actors who overstep their authority and violate what few rights we still have left.

But because I bring this to people's attention I'm painted as the bad guy...

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/7/2002 2:01:58 PM

By: David Marchant

There's nothing stopping you from making money, other than the limitations of your own talents, judgment and capacity for work.

The easiest thing in the world is to blame your problems on everyone else.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/7/2002 1:24:50 PM

By: Edward Kirelius

Yes this is true to a certain point however the ones that created the money ,the wars and general manipulation of countries and governments and peoples there in, still have their pockets full and will always If one were fortunate to be with people who knew the game and were able to dodge the bullets ,i am sure one could become wealthy.Somewhat....but putting our hard earned money into rrsps ,mutual funds, stocks and bonds and all the basic garbage that is presented to the masses to secure a happy future is not going to contribute to our prosperity in the long run.This is based on what i know now. Should you know differently i am willing to listen...Ed

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/6/2002 1:44:56 PM

By: David Marchant

The way to accumulate wealth is through talent, judgment, luck and, above all else, hard work.

That is not restricted to one class or group of people. It is open to everyone.

There is no magic dust that rich people have access to that guarantees their wealth.

Rich people go bust and poor people become wealthy all the time.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/5/2002 9:41:43 PM

By: Edwars kirelius

If you chose to read ,and perhaps listen to others, you may formulate ideas and concepts that may give you a broader scope of this world and the way it operates .I have never professed to be experienced in the world of investments as you so communicated,but i do know one thing the money world is a club that depending on who you are ,you may ascend to higher levels within the club but only if you are of the right metal this has been my personal experience and also of people in my circle.....

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/3/2002 8:36:57 AM

By: fininv

K.J.R. & Edward Kirelius,

Did ya'll Howl at the Moon prior to the invention of the internet by thoroughly corrupt Americans, who have ne'er known any semblance of justice, which permit message boards such as this?????????

The Moral Basis of Capitalism
By Robert Tracinski

With the fall of communism and the alleged end of the "era of big government," many commentators and politicians grudgingly acknowledge the practical value of capitalism. The free market, they concede, is the best system for producing wealth and promoting prosperity; the private economy, in Bill Clinton's words, is the "primary engine of growth."

But this has not led to the triumph of capitalism. Quite the opposite: Federal taxes as a percentage of gross domestic product are at their highest rate since the Second World War; antitrust assaults on the market's winners are growing; the regulations on the federal register continue to expand by 60,000 pages per year; even the Republicans' recent tax cut proposal would only mandate a minor decrease in the projected growth of government revenues. By practically every measure, government interference in the free market is growing.

If capitalism is recognized as the only practical economic system—then why is it losing out to state control? The reason is that no one, neither on the left nor the right, is willing to defend capitalism as moral. Thus, both sides agree, whatever the practical value of capitalism, morality requires that the free market be reigned in by government regulations. The only disagreement between the two sides is over the number of regulations and the rate of their growth.

What no one has grasped yet is that capitalism is not just practical but also moral. Capitalism is the only system that fully allows and encourages the virtues necessary for human life. It is the only system that safeguards the freedom of the independent mind and recognizes the sanctity of the individual.

Every product that sustains and improves human life is made possible by the thinking of the world's creators and producers. We enjoy an abundance of food because scientists have discovered more efficient methods of agriculture, such as fertilization and crop rotation. We enjoy a lifespan double that of the pre-industrial era thanks to advances in medical technology, from antibiotics to X-rays to biotechnology, discovered by doctors and medical researchers. We enjoy the comfort of air conditioning, the speed of airline transportation, the easy access to information made possible by the World Wide Web—because scientists and inventors have made the crucial mental connections necessary to create these products.

Most people recognize the right of scientists and engineers to be free to ask questions, to pursue new ideas, and to create new innovations. But at the same time, most people ignore the third man who is essential to human progress: the businessman. The businessman is the one who takes the achievements of the scientists and engineers out of the realm of theory and turns them into reality; he takes their ideas off the chalkboards and out of the laboratories and puts them onto the store shelves.

Behind the activities of the businessman there is a process of rational inquiry every bit as important as that of the scientist or inventor. The businessman has to figure out how to find and train workers who will produce a quality product; he has to discover how to cut costs to make the product affordable; he has to determine how best to market and distribute his product so that it reaches its potential buyers; and he has to figure out how to finance his venture in a way that will best feed future growth. All of these issues—and many others—depend on the mind of the businessman. If he is not left free to think, the venture loses money and its product goes out of existence.

The businessman has to have an unwavering dedication to thinking, not only in solving these problems, but also in dealing with others. He has to use reason to persuade investors, employees, and suppliers that his venture is a profitable one. If he cannot, the investors take their money elsewhere, the best employees leave for better opportunities, and the suppliers will give preference to more credit-worthy customers.

The businessman's dedication to thought, persuasion, and reason is a virtue—a virtue that our lives and prosperity depend on. The only way to respect this virtue is to leave the businessman free to act on his own judgment. That is precisely what capitalism does. The essence of capitalism is that it bans the use of physical force and fraud in men's economic relationships. All decisions are to be left to the "free market"—that is, to the un-coerced decisions of buyers and sellers, manufacturers and distributors, employers and employees. The first rule of capitalism is that everyone has a right to dispose of his own life and property according to his own judgment.

Government regulation, by contrast, operates by thwarting the businessman's thinking, subordinating his judgment to the decrees of government officials. These officials do not have to consider the long-term results—only what is politically expedient. They do not have to back their decisions with their own money or effort—they dispose of the lives and property of others. And most important, they do not have to persuade their victims—they impose their will, not by reason, but by physical force.

The government regulator does not merely show contempt for the minds of his victims; he also shows contempt for their personal goals and values.

In a free-market economy, everyone is driven by his own ambitions for wealth and success. That's what "free trade" means: that no one may demand the work, effort, or money of another without offering to trade something of value in return. If both partners to the trade don't expect to gain, they are free to go elsewhere. In Adam Smith's famous formulation, the rule of capitalism is that every trade occurs "by mutual consent and to mutual advantage."

It is common to condemn this approach as selfish—yet to say that people are acting selfishly is to say that they take their own lives seriously, that they are exercising their right to pursue their own happiness. By contrast, project what it would mean to exterminate self-interest and force everyone to work for goals mandated by the state. It would mean, for example, that a young student's goal to have a career as a neurosurgeon must be sacrificed because some bureaucrat decrees that there are "too many" specialists in that field. Such a system is based on the premise that no one owns his own life, that the individual is merely a tool to be exploited for the ends of "society." And since "society" consists of nothing more than a group of individuals, this means that some men are to be sacrificed for the sake of others—those who claim to be "society's" representatives. For examples, see the history of the Soviet Union.

A system that sacrifices the self to "society" is a system of slavery—and a system that sacrifices thinking to coercion is a system of brutality. This is the essence of any anti-capitalist system, whether communist or fascist. And "mixed" systems, such as today's regulatory and welfare state, merely unleash the same evils on a smaller scale.

Only capitalism renounces these evils entirely. Only capitalism is fully true to the moral ideal stated in the Declaration of Independence: the individual's right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Only capitalism protects the individual's freedom of thought and his right to his own life.

Only when these ideals are once again taken seriously will we be able to recognize capitalism, not as a "necessary evil," but as a moral ideal.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/11/2002 8:04:03 AM

By: K J R

For those of you who believe their is nothing that can be done except to sit around and complain, I'm presenting you today with the opportunity to do so much more than just sit around.

Complaining does do some good if it is focused in the right areas. For instance if it is to create awareness such as what I have beeen attempting on this message board. Now what I'd like to do is refocus the complaining to the US Congress Ethic Committee regarding the denial of do process to Ohio Congressman James Traficant. For whom the real reason for his indictment is his past/recent/current attempts at reforming thr Grand Jury Process to where it once again is a protection guaranteed by the Bill of Rights rather than a tool for indictment which it has become.

This is basically just PART of the corrupt trial Trafficant underwent this spring.

---------- begin clip & paste complaint ----------

Judge Leslie Brooks Wells is married to Cleveland Attorney Charles Clarke. Attorney Charles Clarke is a partner in the firm of Squires, Sanders and Dempsey. In 28 U.S.C. 455(b)(4), it is clear that Judges who have spouses who have a financial interest in a party to the proceeding should recuse themselves.

Squire, Sanders and Dempsey represented the Cafaro Companies in matters regarding patents and for the purpose of lobbying. Since owners and officers of the Cafaro Companies were witnesses and recipients of plea agreements and immunity agreements (bribes under 18 U.S.C. sec 201) in the matter of US v. Traficant, Judge Wells should have disqualified herself under the statute and the case should have been assigned to another Judge who could be unbiased This conflict of interest between Judge wells and her husbands firm, and clients, if not obvious to Judge Wells on its face, was apparently even brought to the Judges attention, in a different case before Judge Wells at the same time (See ex parte suspension of Ohio Attorney Elsebeth Baumgartner because she was claiming that the same corruption existed in Ohio that Traficant was claiming).

Obviously Judge Wells did not recuse herself and the following Kangaroo Court ensued. What are our courts doing ignoring the facts and the law? Who else is involved in this corruption besides this Judge? Since when does a firm get its own special, personal judge?

This Judge needs to be impeached and anyone in Congress who has received any money from or given money to the Cafaro Companies, or any of their agents, whether directly or indirectly through grants, political donations, etc., including but not limited Congressman Gephart, and Congressman Kennedy (and family), need to be investigated. Furthermore, this law firm needs to be investigated for its questionable connections to Judge Wells and the Cafaro group. This corruption in big business, government, and the courts must be stopped now. America depends on it and we are tired of this continuing farce. Impeach Judge Leslie Brooks Wells now!

The Judiciary, the Standards of Official Conduct, and Government Reform needs to be apprised of the Judicial Misconduct and the Committee must immediately investigate the matter in US v. Traficant, and insist that any sentencing for Traficant be stayed until a proper investigation can be completed. Finally, the U.S. Prosecuting Attorney, needs to be investigated for his own misconduct in this matter.

If we wrongly imprison one person due to judicial and prosecutorial misconduct and obvious due process violations, then our entire justice system is no better than those we condemn around the world. If Congress turns its head, then it is no better than the despots we target as terrorists. When the imprisoning involves a Congressman who has been speaking against government corruption, the issues becomes one of
national security.

----------- end clip & paste complaint -----------

Congressman Traficant is going before the Ethics Committee July 15. Those in charge of this hearing need to know that the public is outraged at the lack of due process granted Traficant and the rest of everyday Americans.

The above complaint is being sent to all the fax numbers enclosed (especially to John Culbertson who is Traficant's legislative assistant and who will be present at the July 15 hearings). We want to make sure those hearing the ethics complaint also know that the courts are being bombarded with complaints by the public (sometimes Congress is the last to know).

This complaint project may be the most IMPORTANT and EFFECTIVE process in which you can be involved in your life. Many people simply don't get involved because they figure, and correctly so, "What is the use?" Well, this project is getting results and will continue to get results or WE WOULDN'T WASTE OUR TIME! WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE NOR DO YOU.

On the following web site are two brand new complaints that can be sent to the Judge in Traficant's case who should be impeached. See Complaint numbers 6 and 7 at:

Send a complaint from the web site or a variation of the complaint above to the following fax numbers... it will help Traficant and to teach federal judges that they are accountable for their actions.

People should fax letters and call in as well. The committees should receive daily calls. All persons involved should also call talk radio programs and such and spread the word. Make sure however, that something is in writing so they cannot later deny it.

Organizations should issue press releases calling for investigations and stating the facts clearly.
Copies of these releases should be sent to 202-225-3719.

Here are the fax numbers Fax numbers where the above complaint should be sent:

Hon. James Sensenbrenner
House Judiciary Committee
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-7682 fax

Hon. Dan Burton
Government Reform Committee
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-3974 fax

Hon. Joel Hefley
House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
HT2 The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-7392 fax

By Mail:
Administrative Office of U.S. Courts
One Columbus Circle, NE
Washington, DC 20544

U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-6216

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/9/2002 11:54:34 AM

By: Mr. Anonymous

Additionally, your website is about the most hysterical, non-objective bunch of crap that I've seen in a long time.

More of the "Back to the Gold Standard!" crap from somebody who doesn't have the slightest inkling why we left the gold standard (or quit sacrificing virgins to the volcanos) in the first place.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/8/2002 10:48:31 PM

By: Mr. Anonymous

Also, the jury had PLENTY of evidence to find in favor of Simpson. The prosecution's best witness was Mark Furman, a proven racist who turned out to be a poor liar as well. If anything, the Simpson case validated the legitimacy of the courts, i.e., twelve people weren't buffalo'd by the media into finding a black celebrity guilty of killing a white girl/golddigger.

You may not agree with the verdict, but you were NOT there and you do NOT know what happened. You hate judges, but apparently you aren't content to let juries do their job either. What you really want is for people to determine their own responsibility -- which of course they will ALWAYS decide in their favor.

Go away; your arguments are as poor as your prose.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/8/2002 10:07:53 PM

By: NewStudent

“First it seems that SOME chipmunks posting to this board seem to think that because I post messages critical of the "system" that I should leave. It would seem that THEY need to develope a more tolerant attitude.”

Wait a minute…isn’t tolerance what you’re rallying against? Against a society that’s essentially become “tolerant” of the current legal system? Make up your mind.

“How does one correct a wrong in demoncratic society without pointing out to enough people to gain a majority to accomplish the change? There is one other way and that is for the wrong to effect enough of those people or their families personally.”

Are you suggesting that you might be orchestrating the next Civil War?

“Something else I would like to clarify is that I do not sit around and gripe and bitch.”

See your previous post.

“Over the last year and a half I've taken my business from start-up to earning over $350,000 per year.”

What was that about chipmunks wavering from the point of the original post?

“But I do feel strongly enough about some important issues to demand attention to the things that need to stop if prosperity is going remain available to those willing to do what it takes to obtain it.”

Perserverance and determination are omnipotent. As long as we stay “tolerant” of the current system that has allowed you and your business to grow to 350k a year, prosperity will always be available to those who wish to work for it.

“Remember the Rodney King riots when the cops were equited in the state courts?
Remember the jury nullification of OJ Simpson's criminal trial?

They were both the result of a corrupt judiciary.”

Interesting conclusion. Both of those cases support expert lawyering far before lending any credence to judiciary corruptness. (O.J.? What did any subset of society gain by letting him go free?)

“We are fast losing our ability to find remedy against government actors who overstep their authority and violate what few rights we still have left.”

What rights have you lost? You haven’t mentioned any yet.

"But because I bring this to people's attention I'm painted as the bad guy..."


Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/8/2002 9:27:57 PM

By: David Marchant

The O.J. Simpson verdict was not down to corruption. It was down to 12 morons not having much of a clue about anything.

There is a significant difference.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/12/2002 1:04:20 PM

By: fininv

If former Ohio Congressman James Traficant has any credibility with his Ohio Voters, he can follow in Washington, DC Mayor Marion Barry's footsteps, and return to his esteemed position despite an "Unjust" criminal conviction.

However, I suspect Congressman Traficant was elected, as were most US representatives, by less than 25 percent of the eligible electorate otherwise known as "Representation by lack of Participation".

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/12/2002 12:11:24 PM

By: Mr. Anonymous

Bitch, bitch, bitch. You just can't stomach the fact that the jury found against him across the board.

As far as Jerry Spence goes, his reputation for attempting to mislead and improperly inflame juries is legendary, and it's just sour grapes for him that judges don't let him do everything he wants.

Go away. Your arguments are tripe and tiring, and they have little popular support.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/12/2002 12:48:52 AM

By: K J R & Additional Authority

Attorney Gerry Spence On Judges

Gerry Spence says the following about judges in his book, "O.J. The Last Word," beginning on page 170, "Night after night on the talk shows, I heard criticism being leveled at Judge Ito. But I took a different position, born of years spent enduring the relentless abuse of tyrant judges, from having seen my clients' rights placed in severe jeopardy at the hands of blockheads in robes whose only claim to judicial excellence was their ability to scream and shout and intimidate everyone who came before them. Ask trial lawyers who have been around the block even once, and they will tell you that many judges are mammal eating monsters that feed on lawyers and their cases, trample over justice, and spew their venom randomly over the courtroom because they do not possess the intelligence or judicial temperament to preside over a fair trial.

"Courtroom are frightening places. Nothing grows in a courtroom--no pretty pansies, no little children laughing and playing. A courtroom is a deadly place. People die in courtrooms, killed by words. If you wake up someday in a courtroom and long to tell your story to someone who can hear and understand you, someone who will give a damn, who will give you a just hearing, you will be shocked. You want to tell the jury that you are being railroaded? You aren't allowed to speak. Your lawyer isn't, either. Perhaps he can sputter. He can object. He can bow and scrape before the judge. If he's not too frightened of the despot up there, he can crowd into the half hour, arbitrarily allowed by the judge, an opening statement that should take at least two hours.

"I have seen those judges pace back and forth across that little stage up there, smirking, peering down, hollering, interrupting. I have seen them nail lawyers to podiums like goats tied to a stake, or banish them to counsel table like lepers. Your lawyer can't communicate tied to a stake or banished to a tabletop. I see judge who, the day before they ascended to the bench, couldn't ask the first intelligent question on voir dire, but who, the day after, sat up there as a judge, carrying on a voir dire, carrying on voir dire for the litigants that, if I had conducted it, would have been adjudged as gross malpractice. Often the result is the selection of a jury riddled with prejudice or jurors who are predisposed to convict. I watch judges bullying prospective jurors into saying what the judge wishes them to say. I hear them read instructions to the jury that are critical to justice but that no one, not even the lawyer who submitted the instructions, can understand. I, and every other lawyer who has practiced more than a few years, have endured their intemperance, which so often leads to error and pain and injustice. I see them rule one way one day and another way another day, depending on what they had for breakfast. God help you if you come before such a judge after he has had a bad night under the connubial covers."

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/12/2002 12:11:33 AM

By: K J R

To read more go here:

The Indictment against Jim Traficant(41 pages)

What's wrong with the Indictment against Jim Traficant (11 pages)

> Several leaps of logic here.

> Did Judge Wells' husband represent the Cafaro Companies
> directly, or was he just one of many partners in a big
> law firm?

Does not make any ethical difference the connection remains.

> Is there ANY evidence that this connection lead to the
> prosecutor's decision to prosecute Traficant?

The motivation to prosecute Trafficant is politically punitive for the co sponsoring and writing of the legislation passed in 1998 known as the Tax-payer Bill of Rights Act. And because he has been working on gathering support for legislation to reverse the Grand Jury process to what it used to be prior to 1903. That being a Constitutional protection rather than a prosecutorial weapon. Believe it or not, when the Bill of rights was written, a prosecutor was not allowed to set foot in a grand jury court room while in session. The courts and the congress since 1903 have changed a MAJOR billof right protection against state abuse into a rubberstamp of whatever the prosecutor wants. Remember Webb Hubble? His cat was lucky to excape indictment!

How else does one get indicted on five counts of conspiracy without a co-conspirator being named in the indictment?

> Didn't the JURY find Traficant guilty?

Yes and one juror also said they voted against Trafficant because they "felt" he was being mean to the judge and they liked the judge better. No doubt if you don't like loud obnoxious but humorous congresscritters with bad toupe`s then your probably not going to like Trafficant. He represented himself Pro Se`. Which is something he did before becoming a Congresscritter 10+ years ago. He ran for congress after he ebat the DOJ in federal court Pro Se`10 more than years ago. So yes there are plenty of negative motivations in addition to the 1 minute speechs every morning on the House Floor ranting about the abuses of power of the federal government.

> This certainly isn't the case you want to hold out as an
> example of a judge's conflict of interest.

What's not meantioned yet is the evidence and witnesses that were prevented from being heard by the jury.

What's not being meantioned is the coercion of friends and former employees on drumbed up charges to force them to lie.

It's too bad they were not as loyal to him as Susan McDugal was to Bill Clinton. McDugal spent considerable time in the pound for not agreeing to liefor the governemnt in there prosecution of Whitewater and attempts to implicate Clinton.

I am closely connected with the law firm that recently wrote his appeals. Had he used this firm to begin with they would had broken most of the bogus counts in the Grand Jury Indictment before the trial even started. They came to him in the beginnig offering free services. Now after they have chewed him up and spat him out he came to them to write the appeal.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/11/2002 6:02:40 PM

By: NewStudent

That's exactly correct...a JURY found JT guilty, and they found him guilty on ALL TEN counts brought against him! How could one judge's conflict span such a smorgasbord of charges:

One count of violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute
Four counts of conspiracy to violate the Hobbs Acts (the federal bribery statute)
One count of obstruction of justice
One count of conspiracy to defraud the United States
Two counts of filing false tax returns, in 1998 and 1999
One count of seeking and receiving illegal gratuities

It is clear that you neither research, study, analyze, understand, comprehend, or in any way contemplate the nonsense that streams from your keyboard.

The most surprising thing to me is that the extreme weakness of mind that you display is usually more the catalyst for the promotion of religious cults or HYIP's versus being the crutch for a convicted felon.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/11/2002 3:57:03 PM

By: Mr. Anonymous

Several leaps of logic here.

Did Judge Wells' husband represent the Cafaro Companies directly, or was he just one of many partners in a big law firm?

Is there ANY evidence that this connection lead to the prosecutor's decision to prosecute Traficant?

Didn't the JURY find Traficant guilty?

This certainly isn't the case you want to hold out as an example of a judge's conflict of interest.

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/14/2002 6:37:16 PM

By: K J R

Their responses may seem cynical but having talked with friends who are from Youngstown Ohio. They address the situation from rhe following perspective.

Show me a congressman who isn't corrupt?!
and / or - He may be a corrupt congressman, but he's our corrupt congressman!

The intersting thing to note for anyone who has taken the time to read the indictment and what's wrong with the indictment is that the things he is accused of doing for the supposed bribes are the very things a congresscritters are expected to do on behalf of constituents.

Why uis it no one had any comments about how the government has rendered the a 5th amendment protection (indictment by Grand Jury) into an abusive weapon of the state?

I can't be the only person who has taken the time to look at the history of the legal system even a little bit?

Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 7/14/2002 6:15:32 PM

By: K J R

Truth is never popular

and of course once again the only reply is from someone who dares not address the points of an argument but simply degrade people for being at varience with their own unsupported opinion.


Jump to different Forum... 

We hunt for red flags in high-value, cross-border finance by monitoring offshore and onshore courts, regulatory actions, offering documents, and other sources - and email you the results.

View Recent Digests

Cayman Court Secrecy: A Huge Red Flag for Foreign Investors & Clients
David Marchant
As any fule kno, the biggest enemy of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and other forms of financial crime is transparency, while their best friend is secrecy. That's why the unprecedented mass sealing of cases that's taking place at the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands is repugnant to anyone with a genuine concern for financial crime.