Cry Havoc and Let Slip the Dogs of War

By Rich Kozlovich

Act Three, scene one of William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar: "Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war".  In the middle ages the word havoc was used to give permission for armies to loot, plunder and usually rape in any town they conquered, and that's what's happening with local and federal prosecutors and State's Attorney's General....and more.

An article by Timothy Cama entitled, Exxon allies cry foul over law firm in climate probe, states:

Exxon Mobil Corp.’s allies are crying foul over the role of a law firm involved in the fight over the oil giant's history with climate change.  State attorneys general are looking into allegations Exxon knew its past stance denying climate change was wrong and committed fraud.  

But the investigation by the U.S. Virgin Islands is being conducted by Cohen Milstein Sellers and Toll, a Washington, D.C. law firm with an entire practice dedicated to helping state attorneys general with complex litigation.Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker (I) gave authority to Cohen Milstein attorney Linda Singer to investigate — on his behalf — whether Exxon committed fraud, in violation of territorial law....

From Exxon Mobil's point of view - and I think rightly so - “It’s a blueprint for how to shakedown and harass scores of individuals and groups who cannot afford to protect their rights against an abusive government lawsuit."......The author goes on to quote the prosecutor as saying in Exxon violated the anti-racketeering law of the territory of the Virgin Islands.  Really?

What I find unique is the company does no business in the Virgin Islands, so how can they be violating Virgin Island's anti-racketeering laws?  And using a legal theory that conduct outside the jurisdiction of the Virgin Islands impacts the health and well being of Virgin Islanders puts them in a position to prosecute anyone in the world for anything the prosecutors dislike.  Right?  Did I miss something there?

This whole thing about hiring outside attorneys may be problematic and needs to be dealt with, but corrupt thinking is the real issue.  The belief that  prosecutors can abuse their power to prosecute political enemies for political gain when there is no criminal behavior.

Former Ted Stevens case is one example of the corruption of the system by government prosecutors, where at least eight of whom were guilty of prosecutorial misconduct....and this is a trend all over the country today.  

In an article by Erin Fuchs she writes regarding the Stevens case:

 "former prosecutor Sidney Powell .......argues that the forces that helped destroy Marsh were part of an increasingly rabid and unethical Justice Department that evolved after the collapse of Enron. The main problem with the Justice Department, she argues, is what one judge called "an epidemic of Brady violations in the land."....." federal prosecutors often break the so-called Brady rule, which requires them to turn over evidence that could work in the defendant's favor during the discovery phase of a case (when each side of a case turns over evidence to the other)."

The case was overturned but by then Stevens lost his re-election bid to retain his Senate seat, which  Marc Sheppard called a hijacked election.  Sheppard goes on to say: "And that appears to be but the tip of the corrupt iceberg.  Allegations also include witness relocation, failure to forward evidence to the FBI, improper investigation revelations and much more."

And what happened to these prosecutor's clearly illegal actions?

"Two prosecutors engaged in “reckless professional misconduct.” One received a 40-day suspension without pay; the other, a 15-day suspension without pay — “punishment” that pales next to the misconduct.....One supervisor in the department’s Public Integrity Section was found to have “exercised poor judgment by failing to supervise certain aspects of the disclosure process.” There was no punishment at all for the most senior prosecutor in the case.

This article goes on to say:

The department has said that such misconduct happens only rarely. But most times the defense does not find out when prosecutors hold back exculpatory evidence. The Innocence Project has shown in recent years that there is widespread injustice in our system and many wrongful convictions.

Then there was the case of Republican Representative Tom Delay who was accused of violating Texas campaign laws by Ronnie Earle, "the hyperpartisan Democratic prosecutor", who was the chief prosecutor of Travis County, Texas.

This article in the National Review states:

Knowing that his indictment was doomed, Mr. Earle scrambled to convene a new grand jury in order to secure additional charges. The second grand jury refused to cooperate and rejected Mr. Earle’s plea for a second indictment, issuing what is called a “no bill,” meaning a formal refusal to indict based on the evidence presented.  

Under normal Texas procedure, a no-bill document is made public on the day it is issued; Mr. Earle schemed to keep the grand jury’s rejection of his case secret until he could convene yet another grand jury.  

He found a brand-new one that had just been seated and, with the statute of limitations hanging over his head, wrung out of them indictments on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering after only a few hours of presenting his evidence. The refusal of the second grand jury to indict was kept secret until the third grand jury had done so.

This took 11 years and didn't get resolved until Third District Justice dismissed the case "finding... what is in theory a prosecution but is in fact a persecution."

What happened to Ronnie Earle?  In 2005 Tom Delay's legal team subpoenaed Earle saying, "I am determined to put on record the steps taken by you and your staff to obtain a replacement indictment against my client, Tom DeLay". 

In 2007 he retired as a prosecutor and then in 2010 had a failed run for pubic office.  In short - as far as I can tell, nothing has happened to him, when he should have been wearing prison orange. 

Probably the biggest and best known case involves Governor Scott Walker in Wisconsin where Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm, launched his infamous John Doe investigations, where they harassed and persecuted perfectly honest conservative citizens for exercising their Constitutional rights.  Not only were the prosecutors corrupt, the corruption was shared with Wisconsin's judiciary.   These John Doe investigations violently invaded people's homes as if they were drug dealers.

David French in his article, Wisconsin’s Shame: ‘I Thought It Was a Home Invasion’ he states:

As if the home invasion, the appropriation of private property, and the verbal abuse weren’t enough, next came ominous warnings. Don’t call your lawyer. Don’t tell anyone about this raid. Not even your mother, your father, or your closest friends. The entire neighborhood could see the police around their house, but they had to remain silent. This was not the “right to remain silent” as uttered by every cop on every legal drama on television — the right against self-incrimination. They couldn’t mount a public defense if they wanted — or even offer an explanation to family and friends.

As for Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm,....he's running for re-election and claiming his John Doe investigations were of the highest ethics and principles.  You may wish to review the 354 part series of Wisconsin's Secret War by Watchdog.org.

This corrupt thinking isn't just against public officials.

Michael Nifong was the prosecutor, in Durham County, North Carolina who prosecuted six Duke University lacrosse players. I remember reading at the time that Nifong wanted to continue in office for at least one more term in order to get his retirement benefits. He also had a strong black contingent he felt he had to appease in order to be reelected. This case was to be his “gold mine of free advertising” to promote his reelection.

This was clearly a racial case, and initially he had total and complete support from the leftist media and academia. The woman, who was a stripper and black, claimed she was raped by six white members of the 2005–2006 Duke Lacrosse team. Therefore the boys were white, they were rich, and they must be punished. Guilt or innocence was immaterial. The only problem was that the stripper who made the claims lied, and the boys really were innocent.

 But they were white, they were rich, and they must be punished.

As time went by it became clear that Nifong was also lying. He tried to hide, twist or manipulate the evidence, and after an investigation into his conduct was started the charges were dropped, and he was later referred to as a “rogue” prosecutor. Later he had his license to practice law stripped, he pleaded guilty to 27 of 32 charges against him, involving "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation." Outrageously, he only served ‘one day’ in jail and was fined $500.00. The players families incurred $3 million in legal bills.

When he was sued by the families of the Duke players he actually asked the “state attorney general's office and the Administrative Office of the Courts to pay his legal fees and help defend him, but both offices refused on the grounds that Nifong's actions involved "fraud, corruption (and) malice."  “In response, Nifong's attorney quoted Nifong as saying, "I don't know why I continue to expect people to do the right thing."

All of a sudden “the right thing” became extremely important to him. It didn’t bother him that these boys would have spent years in prison if found guilty, and if they hadn’t been from wealthy families they would have. It is clear that the courts, the prosecutors and the police can’t be trusted to “do the right thing”.  The "right thing" would have been for him to have gone to jail for a lot more than one day.  A lot more.

This kind of thing is nothing more than abuse of power by government officials, and it goes beyond prosecutors.  The EPA the Wildlife Service, and the Corp of Army Engineers are equally guilty of violating fundamental Constitutional rights using the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act as two obvious examples.  These prosecutors and government bureaucrats have been unleashed by their leftist masters as their "dogs of war" crying "havoc" on the nation's citizens.