TO DIE FOR--DIE HARDER

The controversial issue of capitol punishment has invigorated proponents and opponents alike. But both sides of every gut wrenching political issue inherently possesses a compromising element of subjectivity that has the potential to interfere with the advancement of specific and objective analysis. Put two people in a room who represent both sides of the death penalty issue and tell them they cannot come out until there is mutual agreement from both; then wait for the sun to burn itself out. People with strong emotional attachments to certain issues will almost always find a way to interpret information in a way that re-affirms their beliefs, even when it is in direct contradiction to fact.  

There are many sincere and decent people—on both sides of the ideological spectrum who are opposed to the death penalty. I consider it an honorable position. My personal opinion might even surprise some. But it was not my personal opinion that motivated me to write about the Troy Davis case. In fact it had nothing to do with it what so ever and there in lies the reason for this follow up.

As a 25 year veteran of law enforcement and an expert in the workings of the criminal justice system, myself and over a dozen courts including the Supreme Court, know all too well what folly was at play in the events leading up to the Troy Davis execution. It is not necessarily the fault then of inexperienced people who have no reason to know any better to feel otherwise. For me and many others reading this, it is nothing new or novel, just the same old tried and true ploy by death penalty opponents to muddy the waters of certainty years after the fact. It happens nearly every time someone is scheduled to be put to death. It’s always been curious to me that new and revealing evidence seems to materialize time and time again just after the execution date is set for a convicted murderer. Twenty years later startling new facts immerge that cast a doubt about the doomed man’s guilt. The problem with this is that most courts have already heard every type of sudden recantation and testimony switcharoo in last ditch efforts at evidentiary hearings and know it for what it is. It is almost always the result of a law firm or investigations agency soliciting any original witness who is willing to alter their original sworn testimony in order to keep the convicted from being executed.

As mentioned before, In the Davis case, 7 out of 34 (one reader missed this earlier) witnesses for the state allegedly recanted their sworn testimony at an evidentiary hearing last year. In the courts minutes, as I read them, the recantations were not remotely believable and only irrelevant portions of their original testimony were altered. A feeble attempt at a confession was not allowed due to its complete lack of credibility. The court itself described the so called recantations as, “nothing more then smoke and mirrors”. More then a dozen different courts looked into the trial documents, witness statements and physical evidence and came to the same conclusion. There was zero uncertainty or ambiguity about each courts decision.  

Death penalty opponents often operate under an, “ends justifies the means mentality.” Throwing around a lot of red herrings, emotions and race based quips to prevent an execution is ok if it is successful at preventing an execution. But is that conduct then justified? Do death penalty opponents need to construct such tactics to express their beliefs? What about the honest, sincere but less schooled people who watch the news and believe such balderdash to be true? Are they not collateral damage of this ploy? If law abiding, hard working, tax paying, charitable people have the evening news as their sole method of staying informed have they been done a disservice? It is insulting to a civilized people and we owe them nothing less then the facts, unobstructed by deceit or misdirection. I know better because I’ve been a cog in the criminal justice machine forever and I know very well it is not perfect: Far from it. But do less exposed people deserve any less then the chance to make up their minds based on real facts? If the citizens of this country reach conclusions about such important societal matters based upon Hollywood docudramas and tainted news stories then we are in a dire state.

On a final note, Troy Davis was not the only convicted murderer put to death last Wednesday. The other death penalty “victim” was Lawrence Brewer. Brewer was the racist goon who infamously tied a black man, James Byrd to the back of a truck and dragged him to death in Texas. Like Davis, Brewer also claimed he was “innocent” because he claimed one of his buddies had cut Byrd’s throat before they dragged his body around. Forensic evidence directly contradicted this and several courts of review concluded likewise.

We did not hear much of anything from death penalty opponents about the Byrd execution. Where was the cry for clemency? Did death penalty protestors fail to adequately staff their events roster or is executing a human being less egregious when the one being put to death is less sympathetic in the eyes of the media?

TO DIE FOR

Every now and then I watch in sheer horror as the liberal media machine commits an act of such egregious injustice to the truth and to the citzenry that I want to puke my guts out and dive off into the abyss. It’s no secret that network media producers commonly provide Joe and Jane citizen with precisely the news that they want them to see, packaged and slanted in custom design to provoke a pre-determined opinion and conclusion. And many times, as in the case with the Solyndra debacle, they simply don’t report a major story at all if its not possible to do so in a manner that casts a complimentary light on their beloved liberal constituents, the Democratic Party and Obama. They will only acquiesce and reluctantly report these unflattering stories after they have successfully broken free from the confines of network media exclusion and achieve significant exposure to the mainstream public through other means.

But possibly the most heinous, inexcusable and sickening thing to watch from these Marxist masqueraders is when they take a highly charged emotional issue like the death penalty and the recent execution of convicted cop killer Troy Davis and warp the story into a whooped up, fictional circus, replete with lies, misinformation and a complete and total disregard for jurisprudence, professional integrity or common human decency.

If you knew nothing more then what you watched on any network news program, you would conclude this; in 1989 Troy Davis, a black man, was quite possibly wrongfully convicted of killing a police officer. You would be led to believe that testimony from witnesses was coerced from the police and several actually later recanted their statements. You would think there was no physical evidence and now, 22 years later, an innocent man is being put to death simply because he was black and in the wrong place at the wrong time. If you believed this and also believe that NBC Anchorman Brian Williams is the epitome of fair and objective reporting, stop here and hit the delete button right now because the following paragraphs will be hard for you to read. You will be confronted with some actual facts from the case shortly and we know all too well how facts can wreak havoc with your personal philosophies and feel good beliefs.

Recent polls show that 59% of Americans believe that an innocent man has been executed in the last five years. I wonder how they come to that conclusion. There is more credible evidence that the earth is flat then that an innocent person has been executed in this country in the past 50 years, much less the past five. Citizens don’t read trial transcripts and have no way of knowing the truth. They certainly won’t get it from the major news reporting agencies; they are too busy whipping up racial division to be bothered with the facts.

It is nearly impossible for someone to receive the death penalty these days, unless you do something crazy like shoot a cop in full view of dozens of witnesses in a Burger King parking lot, shortly after shooting another person in the face in a passing car after a party. That’s what Troy Davis did in August 1989.

Davis’s trial lasted two weeks with 34 witnesses for the state and six for the defense. The jury of seven blacks and five whites took less than two hours to convict Davis of Officer Mark MacPhail’s murder as well as various other crimes. He was sentenced to death two days later.

Now 22 years later, the New York Times and Time magazine both have proclaimed that there was no, “physical evidence” connecting Davis to the crime.

Davis pulled out a gun and shot two strangers in public that night. What might one suspect would be available in the way of physical evidence in a case like that? I guess it would have been nice if shell casings from both shootings were located and matched. Oh wait—they were…..and they did. That’s called physical evidence. The majority of the evidence though against Davis was eyewitness testimony. That tends to be the case when you shoot someone in a busy fast food parking lot.

Many of the eye witnesses in this case did not consist simply of strangers. Several of the eyewitnesses knew Davis personally. The majority of them established the following:

Two tall, young black men were harassing a vagrant in the Burger King parking lot, one in a yellow shirt and the other in a white Batman shirt. The one in the white shirt used a brown revolver to pistol-whip the vagrant. When a cop yelled at him to stop, the man in the white shirt ran, then wheeled around and shot the cop, walked over to his body and shot him again, smiling.

Every eye witness described the shooter as wearing a white shirt, some said it was a white shirt with writing and some identified it specifically as a white Batman shirt. Not one witness said the man in the yellow shirt was involved at all.

Several of Davis’ friends testified-without recantation- that he was the one in the white shirt. Several eye witnesses, both acquaintances and strangers, specifically identified Davis at the one who shot Officer MacPhail.

Now the media would have you believe that seven of the nine witnesses against Davis at the trial have recanted. First of all, the state presented 34 witnesses against Davis—not nine—which should give you an idea how unencumbered the media is about the importance of facts in their reporting.

Of the recantations offered, three were friends of Davis who made minor or unbelievable modifications to their trial testimony. One alleged recantation was not a recantation at all, but rather reiterated all relevant parts of her trial testimony, which included a direct identification of Davis as the shooter. Only two of the seven alleged “recantations” (out of 34) actually recanted anything of value, and those two affidavits were discounted by the court because Davis himself refused to allow the affiants to testify at the post-trial evidentiary hearing!

More then a dozen courts have looked at Davis’ case and refused to overturn the death sentence. Death penalty opponents and liberal media reporters have fixated on Davis’ race of course, so it is not surprising that they failed to mention that all of the above witnesses are themselves African American, as was the first man Davis shot that night.

Davis is about as innocent as every other executed man since 1960.

So there it is. If there is a shred of human decency remaining in the network media I cannot find it. How can a body of people who purport to be professional news presenters engage in such despicable conduct? They knew every bit of the information I just shared with you and specifically chose to omit it from their story lines. It creates more viewership if they can churn up some good old fashioned racial conflict and class warfare, even when it isn’t there.

Where is the moral indignation out there? This type of attempted manipulation by the media propagandists should not be tolerated in a free society. It should be immediately and effectively smashed wherever it raises its oppressive head. Is the truth today nothing more then just collateral damage in the liberal crusade on moral relevancy? Network news made every effort to successfully return this sociopathic killer to the streets as a free man. Half of the sobbing woman that had cameras shoved in their face were about 3 years old when the murder actually took place, yet they have been convinced to be downright angry at the injustice of something they know absolutely nothing about. NBC even managed to find an activist who blamed George Bush for the murder and insinuated that he should be executed! Bare naked lunacy does good TV make.

The progressive socialist movement is pulling hard on our moral anchor folks. It’s happening right in front of you and me. Every day a new normal is being introduced to us in eye dropper doses of indoctrination toward creating an America that is an ideologically amorphous and unrecognizable country. I think Edmond Burke’s warning bears repeating; “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

How true……………..

COCA-COLA 1 SOCIALISM 0

France is a country that seen its share of dire moments. They are generally acknowledged as experts in the practice of surrendering their country to raiding hordes and the United States has developed a knack for getting it back for them, accepting a good provincial Cabernet and a statue as thanks. But nowadays France and the U.S. currently share a common condition; they are both deep in debt. But Being French means never having to put down your arrogance and display some common sense so they decided to take an American icon—Coca-Cola and hold them hostage in a knee jerk socialist attempt to generate revenue.

Instead of the French addressing the multiple layers of bureaucratic fat clinging to their various levels of government, Prime Minister Francois Fillon has come to the obvious conclusion that among all of the austerity measures available to him, one of the most effective ways to replenish the government bank account would be to tax sugared sodas by a miniscule one cent per can. It’s not polite to just come out and just say to the French citizens that we need more money and so we are going to just take it from you when you buy a soda. No...Taking a page out of the Obama style of, heads I win, tails you lose playbook, Fillon is putting a health spin on his cash grab, figuring citizens will forgo the Coca-Cola and opt for the more nutritious more expensive alternatives.

Fillon’s statements appear to be an enigma in that he wishes to tax Coca-Cola drinks, one cent per can, in order to generate revenue for the flailing economy. He’s counting on his fat over indulging soda fiends to buy a heck of a lot of soda to make a scant impact on their dire fiscal condition, yet he declares this a national health referendum on the ever increasing waistlines of the French citizenry.

The French Coca- Cola affiliate took the opportunity to blow the whistle on this blatant socialist cash grab’s logic gap and did this in the best possible way for capitalists to get their point across—by threatening to withhold money. Coca-Cola said that it would have to rethink a new 17 million euro production-line investment in light if this stigmatization of their product.

The French, mistaking corporate expenditures for some kind of entitlement, immediately freaked out, apparently forgetting that the presence of a private company isn’t a public right. One of the French officials actually went so far as to suggest to the soda giant that they “make more efforts on non-sugar beverages.”

The union representatives for the Coca-Cola employees were nervous and scared, worried about the future of their plant. It was a sober reminder that no matter how much power unions attempt to wield, they’re dead in the absence of a host company.

Socialism doesn’t happen without consequences. When a government decides to harass or tax a business, that company might just decide one day to move to a more friendly environment. At one cent a can, I think we all see just how expensive socialism risks being. France may have to surrender yet again.

DYSTOPIA

                       

Many years ago back in college, a Political Science Professor assigned us to read George Orwell’s classic fiction novel “1984”.  The quick read for those who have not enjoyed this classic tome tells of a society ruled by totalitarian dictatorship that decries individuality and promotes forced oppressive government rule. The citizens of this society are subjected to the socially progressive, highly controlled policies of the government for the greater good of the masses. In this society called Oceana, the government controls your mind, monitors your every move, rewrites history and fabricates news to suit their needs and grants special privileges to the elite party members. Everyone is forced to revere and worship the mythical leader of this socialist society, Big Brother. There is a plot involving a guy who rebels so go read the book. It was a depressing, dark world to live in from my perspective back then but it was just a book and the story was fictional. I had no political or life experience to that point and I assigned no real significance to the book. So it follows that I could never have imagined that thirty years later I would see Orwell’s fictional world become a reality.

Shortly after Barrack Hussein Obama became the President of the United States, the White House launched a first of its kind effort to get people to snitch on those who expressed opposition to the Emperor through a new official e-mail, flag@whitehouse.gov, and a web page on the official White House site. The site didn’t last two weeks, thanks to an outcry of anger and disgust over the idea that the president would be so petty and so paranoid as to need an official informant bureau in the White House. The site came down around the same time that the Emperor quit fighting with Fox News, having lost on all fronts to control public opinion.

Apparently he did not learn a lesson from that episode of tattle tale tyranny. The Emperor’s re-election campaign has now set up a website ostensibly to defend him against false attacks and correct any misinformation about the president from the opposition and hold them accountable. Does anybody actually believe these people anymore? It appears obvious its real purpose is to smear republicans and trounce dissenters.

The website is called “AttackWatch.com” and one look reveals exactly where the real intent lies. Has anyone ever seen the federal government solicit followers to do opposition research for it? If you have followed the recent federal raid of the Gibson Guitar factory by the armed Federal Fish and Game personnel, then you now know without ambiguity that the Emperor’s practice has been to select, isolate and demonize a target and these "problem" companies or groups are always either non-union or republican supporters. In fact, Obama enlisted the help of his attack buddy Attorney General Eric Holder to create a “Blog Squad”, an in house group that participates on websites to influence public opinion using your tax dollars. How positively Orwellian.

Obama knows that his last chance to salvage some success at this point is to indoctrinate as many of you as possible to believe non-sense and self contradictory ideas such as his job creation illusion. It shall be so simply because the Emperor asserts it, and people like me who are not afraid to point out the obvious shall be silenced by the regime. The aim, I’m sure is to inspire liberals—who hate the Emperor’s enemies far more than they love the Emperor, to get charged up and get involved.

This type of behavior would have been denounced if George W. Bush had done anything of the sort and this egregious act of political paranoia would have been broadcast repeatedly through the major television networks. Bush would have drawn the same Orwellian comparison and I would be writing the same thing about him as I am the Emperor. This puts Obama in a class right along with Richard Nixon and his sad state of political paranoia.

Leaders lead. There will always be conflict and obstacles and there will always be detractors and critics on both sides of the political fence. Mr. President, get rid of the hubris, show some humility and courage and please stop behaving like an overwhelmed underappreciated local government management employee. We have plenty of those thanks. Stop blaming others when bad news arrives, eat some crow, take a shot or two to the chin and show us you can take it. Get some dirt under your fingernails and make me proud to be an American again. I don’t have to agree with your agenda, but please don’t put the great citizens of this country in a position to be ashamed of you because you show no personal responsibility or character. Big Brother, stop with the spy sites and the blame throwing. Get up tomorrow, look in the mirror, and in the words of the late Michael Jackson…………….Make that change……………

AN OLD MAN

One warm Sunday morning, several weeks ago, I set out for a bike ride along the American River Parkway bike trail; a ride that proved to be quite memorable. Over the years I’ve come to recognize through lessons learned and lessons lost that sometimes life’s quirky trail of chance and circumstance leads us into situations of random happenstance that hold keys to understanding and provides us with much needed reminders about where the value lies. The difference I’ve found between the lessons learned and the lessons lost is simply understanding when one is standing in front of you.

While cycling west toward Sacramento I came upon a small but growing group of cyclist who were all stopped and bunched up against some red netting that was stretched across the bike trail underneath Watt Avenue. I may have muttered something under my breath and begrudgingly came to a stop, annoyed about this unnecessary disruption to my workout. I moved up next to the other cyclists and could see they were talking with a man standing on the other side of the netting. Apparently the World Masters Track and Field Championships were in progress and the marathon event was being run in part on the parkway bike trail. The bike trail was closed and traffic was being redirected up a dirt hill onto the gravel levy for a 2 mile detour. This didn’t go over well with any of the cyclists, myself included, and we were not a hundred percent in love with the thought of riding our expensive, highly tuned, precisely aligned bikes on gravel. But after a few snorts of disgruntled mumbling and some petty whining from the group, everyone resigned themselves to the inconvenience and went about their way up the hill and onto the levy. For some reason I chose to hang back a minute and let my fellow crybabies get out ahead of me.

I engaged in some brief small talk with the man guarding the net. During our chat I happened to glance down the bike trail and saw what I thought was a person off in the distance, possibly a male. I could scarcely detect that he was moving slowly toward us. Very slowly. He showed very little if any arm movement to indicate a running or even walking stride and I grew curious.  As he grew closer it was clear he was an older man. In what seemed like an eternity he finally made it to where we were standing and as he approached us I could not believe my eyes. He was short gentleman with very tan weathered skin that sagged in several areas on his frail looking frame. He was wearing loose fitting nylon running shorts and a tank top that draped over his shoulders that had long ago surrendered to time. He stooped over slightly as he stood and wore a well travelled baseball cap which covered maybe six grey hairs. His skin looked to be paper thin with the occasional bruise splotch here and there. His lurch gave the false appearance of an aborted fall and the fingers on his left hand were out of alignment and overlapped. He had band aids on his forearms and some type of tape wrap on his right knee. But the thing that stood out the most was what he had on his chest; a race bib. This frail elderly man, held together with band aids and tape was a marathon competitor and he was 92 years old!  He came up to us and vigorously shook both our hands. His eyes were sparkling with excitement and he flashed a smile so wide he could have swallowed his own face. He offered us his gracious appreciation for coming out to support him and wished us a great day. I stood there like a telephone pole and could manage only a pleasant response and a nod in return. With a full smile and a wave he turned and resumed his excruciatingly slow journey back in the same direction he came, presumably toward a finish line. A finish line he would probably not see for awhile. Eventually he disappeared into the distance and I rode away. He will never know what he did for me that day.

A respected mentor from long ago once told me to never underestimate the value of the journey, because the finish line is just a myth. I had a few years yet to grow before I could appreciate what he said. But he was right. That old man on the bike trail had figured it out long ago. His celebration of the journey was clearly evident through his smile and his eyes and to anyone keen enough to notice, there was also a lesson. It’s an over used, under practiced cliché about smelling the roses and I will be the first to confess I’ve flown by my share of them looking for the mythical finish line. I am one who needs the occasional shot across the bow to snap me back into the right frame of mind. The turmoil and conflict so prevalent today in local, national and world events in addition to our constant daily grinds to stay afloat has made it so easy for us to forget our journey and focus more narrowly on events which we cannot control or affect. How many times in our lives do we have the good fortune to have such an important and vital experience thrown into our paths in such a way that we get it?

I never considered for a second whether this old man was a conservative or liberal; Repub or Demo; I never wondered what religion he practiced, if any and what gender he preferred, if any. I did not think about weather he was a brain surgeon or homeless. All I could absorb at that moment of contact with this gentleman was his tremendous vigor with the here and now. His next step was by no means guaranteed to him and it was evident from just a moment’s time in his presence that he not only knew it but embraced it.

The old man probably crossed the line later that day, but the line he crossed was probably no more significant to him then a suggestion to call it a day. He knew well that he had not reached the finish line. And he knew that if the day ever came that he let the finish line come to him, he would have nowhere left to run and his journey would be over.  

I don’t let a day go by without reminding myself of that old man on the bike trail and how my contact with him helped me better define and appreciate my journey. I could be that old man myself someday in the not to distant future. What a lucky man I would be if it were so.

 I cycled 70 miles that day, all part of a carefully crafted workout plan to achieve an ultimate personal goal this November; to get to the finish line as fast as possible. I hope I never get there.