Wednesday, November 29, 2017
Sunday, November 26, 2017
It was clear, the Virginia Supreme Court had broken the law by introducing false evidence into the written decision by Justice Cleo Powell. The court had rewritten history by writing that the Blacksburg police department was in charge of the investigation on April 16, 2007. The Virginia Tech police department was in charge and the police chiefs of both departments had testified to that fact under oath. Unfortunately, no one in legal or political establishments in Richmond cared—the wagons were circled to protect Justice Powell. The power elite in Richmond were protecting one of their own.
Discouraged, I asked some colleagues at the FBI if there was any merit to my argument and evidence.
The answer was “yes.” They described the introduction of factual evidence into a Supreme Court decision as grounds for charges of public corruption and encouraged me to take my case to the FBI Richmond office. I then talked with an FBI special agent who investigates public corruption in a major U.S. city. He said, “Absolutely, this needs to be investigated.”
In April 2015, I met with an FBI Special Agent in Richmond for over an hour and laid out my case. He explained he did not handle public corruption, but would hand my complaint over to those who do.
In February 2016, I received a call from the FBI telling me that they have accepted the complaint and an investigation had been opened. The fact the complaint has been accepted means the lawyers at the Bureau’s office in Richmond believe it has merit.
Furthermore, a source at the FBI in Quantico told me he believes that because a Virginia Supreme Court Justice is the target, the complaint was probably run by the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. before it was accepted.
I was also told to be patient; it may take a year or more for the Bureau to investigate and to make a decision as to whether or not to indict the Justice.
I have heard nothing more. (To be continued)
Wednesday, November 22, 2017
Before I challenged the Virginia Supreme Court’s introduction of false evidence into one of their decision to throw out the jury verdict in the Pryde and Peterson lawsuit against Virginia Tech I ran my evidence by several Virginia lawyers. All agreed I was right, the law had been broken; all said my complaint would go nowhere—I was pissing in the wind. None of the lawyers would allow me to refer to them by name.
One ultra-conservative lawyer, who agrees with the Supreme Court’s decision, acknowledged that the decision contains a factual lie. To paraphrase him, the plaintiffs would have gotten a fairer hearing from the Mississippi Supreme Court. That court does a better job of protecting citizens from the excesses of incompetent government and business leaders.
The apparent corruption of the legal process by the Virginia Supreme Court is evidence of why elections count and what the packing of a court can do to deny citizen’s their rights to a fair trial and hearing in a court of law. (To be continued)
Saturday, November 18, 2017
Surely someone must be interested in the Virginia Supreme Court re-writing history and in so doing breaking the law. Unfortunately, I would be proven wrong again.
On January 19, 2015 I wrote the Virginia Attorney General laying out my evidence and asking him to investigate whether or not Justice Powell and the Virginia Supreme Court had broken the law.
The following are excerpts from my letter to Virginia Attorney General Herring:
I have filed a complaint with the judicial inquiry and review commission against Virginia Supreme Court Justice Cleo E. Powell. The complaint centers on a major factual error in her October 31, 2013 decision to throw out the jury verdict holding Virginia Tech liable in the Pryde and Peterson lawsuit against the school. (my complaint and the evidence are attached).
Justice Powell wrote that the Blacksburg police were in charge of the investigation of the killings on April 16, 2007, but in fact it was the Virginia Tech Police Department. I have been involved in and teach intelligence and crime analysis for nearly 50 years. … this is a stunning factual error … if one of my students made this mistake i would flunk him or her.
Both Blacksburg Police Chief Kim Crannis and Virginia Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum testified under oath that it was the Virginia Tech Police who were in charge. (the testimony is included in the complaint.)
The question arises how could such an error of this magnitude make it into the Supreme Court’s decision when the evidence before the court states the opposite? Indeed, there are at least five references in the testimony that the Virginia Tech Police Department was in charge.
It is against the law to introduce false evidence or facts in a court of law. It must certainly be against the law to feed false facts to a Supreme Court Justice; facts that are contained in a ruling involving the worst school shooting in this nation’s history. The error is so great that it casts doubt on the court’s integrity, objectivity, and truthfulness.
I am not accusing Justice Powell and the court of being untruthful, but I am arguing that for this ruling to stand uncorrected is tantamount to condoning factual errors at the highest level of the state’s judiciary.
Because of the factual error in the Pryde and Peterson decision, there is a very real possibility that the two families’ civil rights were violated. There is also the possibility of some form of public corruption in the form of undue influence on the court.
I am asking that the Attorney General’s Office investigate whether or not there is a civil rights violation and how a factual error on that scale could make it into a major Virginia Supreme Court decision.
It is now more than three years later, and I have not received response. I cannot help but wonder, if I had introduced false evidence in a court proceeding at any level, would that court, the Virginia Supreme Court, the Virginia Inquiry and Judicial Review Commission, and the Virginia Attorney General’s office yawn and look the other way? I don’t think so, but then I am not a member of the legal profession, so there is no one to protect me. (To be continued)
Wednesday, November 15, 2017
Larry David’s shtick on a recent Saturday Night Live, “Pick-up lines in Hitler’s concentration camps,” crossed the bounds of human decency in such a way that it is hard to find the words to express my disgust and repulsions.
I have always admired Larry David’s offbeat humor, but his attempt to make a joke about people about to be gassed is beyond disgusting. In fact, I don’t know whether there is a word in the English language to describe the repugnance of what he said.
Some 6 million Jews died and another 11 million people lost their lives Nazi camps. Where is there any humor in this?
Polish poet and Nobel Prize winner, Czesław Miłosz lived in Warsaw during the war and witnessed the massacre of thousands of Jews in the Warsaw ghetto. Milosz wrote:
“In the spring of 1943, on a beautiful quiet night, a country night in the outskirts of Warsaw, standing on the balcony, we could hear screaming from the ghetto…. This screaming gave us goose pimples. They were the screams of thousands of people being murdered. It travelled through the silent spaces of the city from among a red glow of fires, under indifferent stars, into the benevolent silence of gardens in which plants laboriously emitted oxygen, the air was fragrant, and a man felt that it was good to be alive. There was something particularly cruel in this peace of the night, whose beauty and human crime struck the heart simultaneously. We did not look each other in the eye.”
There is no humor in people being massacred in camps, schools, churches, Charlottesville, or shopping malls. There is nothing funny, absolutely nothing, in Mr. David’s shameful comedy. (To be continued)
Monday, November 13, 2017
On January 17, 2015, I filed a complaint against Virginia Supreme Court Justice Powell and the Virginia Supreme Court with the Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission. I included my evidence (see earlier posts) to support my contention that the law had been broken and that Justice Powell had probably broken the two Canons of Judicial Conduct cited above. Here is the response I got:
Mr. David Cariens
Kilmarnock, Va. 22482
Dear Mr. Cariens:
This is in response to your complaint to the judicial inquiry and review commission, dated January 17, 2015, alleging that a justice issued an erroneous opinion in an appeal. The commission has no authority to review a judge’s rulings and decisions.
s/Robert Q. Harris
The problem with Mr. Harris’ response is that the Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission does have the right to investigate whether or not someone, in this case a Justice of the Supreme Court, has broken the law.
What we appear to have is another example of the “good ole boy and good ole girl” network willing to watch each other’s backs. (To be continued)