Friday, October 17, 2008

The Enforcement Arm of the Robber State

Tie him to the Whipping Post: Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman apparently sees nothing amiss in sending his thugs to steal the life savings of a seriously ill, law-abiding elderly couple.

As the economy collapses, credit lines become constricted, and tax revenues are choked off, we can expect local representatives of the parasite class (commonly called "government") to become perversely creative in finding new ways to extract money from productive people. For parasites looking to feast on the wealth of others, the liberty-devouring fraud called the War on Drugs offers a particularly rich menu of possibilities.

As we've discussed before, Police and Sheriff's departments in many jurisdictions are robbing people blind in the name of civil asset forfeiture, an officially sanctioned form of robbery in which cash or property is deemed "guilty" of involvement in narcotics trafficking.

It's not necessary to prove that a crime has been committed, or even to arrest or charge an individual with a criminal offense. All that is required is for an officer to assert some "nexus" between the coveted money or property, and then a civil procedure begins in which the onus is placed on the victim to prove that both he and his property are innocent.

Law enforcement bodies across the nation are engorging themselves on the corrupt proceeds of such plunder. Tom Allman, Sheriff of California's Mendocino County, recently advanced this depraved science by devising a way to seize both property and the money belonging to people who have explicit government permission to cultivate and use marijuana for medical purposes.

Allman, it must first be understood, insists that even though "a marijuana plant that's legal looks just like a marijuana plant that's illegal," his Sheriff's Department carefully discriminates between the legal cultivation of medical marijuana, and that grown for illicit "commercial" use. He also claims that "I have friends who benefit from medical marijuana."

Allman also takes offense when his department is accused of exceeding its mandate by seizing medical marijuana. "The Sheriff's Office focuses its eradication efforts on commercial marijuana operations," Allman insisted in an essay-length letter published in the October 10 Ukiah Daily Journal. "We do not target legitimate medical marijuana patients or their caregivers."

In fact, Sheriff Allman continued, his department actually protected legitimate medical marijuana crops from violent criminals who would poach them and sell them illegally:
"Recently our office arrested eight Sacramento area young people who drove to Mendocino County for the sole purpose of stealing marijuana. All eight were arrested within an hour of the crime. Investigation into a series of violent marijuana robberies on the Coast has resulted in the arrest of more out-of-county criminals."

"The citizens of Mendocino County can be proud of the work our detectives put into these cases," concluded Allman in the kind of self-congratulatory plug that's
de rigueur in official communiques from the governing class.

To be fair,
the September 19 marijuana robbery was a serious property crime, in which six large plants -- each of which was valued at $3,000 -- were stolen at gun point from 57-year-old Laytonville resident Richard Weaver, who cultivated them for medical use. This was an example of that rarest and most unexpected of things, a government agency actually acting in defense of an individual's person and property.

However, Allman's heroic deputies didn't bestir themselves to solve an even more egregious armed robbery involving medical marijuana that took place in Philo the following Wednesday. That crime involved the seizure of 17 marijuana plants and over $80,000 in cash. As was the case with the Laytonville heist, the victims of the second crime had legally cultivated their plants for their personal medical needs.

Where Mr. Weaver was a sick man on the wrong side of 50 confronted by eight armed, college-age men, the victims in Philo were Lester and Mary Smith, both of whom are in their ninth decade and suffer from a variety of afflictions, from severe arthritis to heart disease.

Mary is confined to a wheelchair, and Lester, a World War II veteran, is immobilized by two bad hips and suffers from frequent chest pains that make it nearly impossible to breathe.
The pitiless thugs who attacked the Smiths on September 24 not only took away their indispensable pain medication -- for which they had obtained the appropriate prescription, and the necessary growing permit -- but stole their life savings as well.

It's difficult to conceive of a personality so utterly surrendered to criminal appetites that it would commit such an act.
Since Sheriff Allman is so eager to throw laurels at the feet of his intrepid detectives, one might expect him to deploy them in pursuit of the fiends who assaulted Lester and Mary Smith.

"Let every brush be beaten; let every stone be capsized; let no clue elude your vigilant gaze," one imagines Sheriff Allman commanding his eager detectives, assuming that he favors the over-ripe diction typical of a hero from a 19th Century
Penny Dreadful serial. "Darken not the door of this Sheriff's Office again until you hold, within the unyielding grasp of incarnate Justice, those responsible for reducing this venerable couple to their present undeserved state of penury!"

One would expect Sheriff Allman to issue a command of that sort to his detectives, albeit in less florid language. One would be wrong.
You see, the perpetrators who robbed the Smiths at gunpoint were Allman's deputies, so having the detectives build a case about them would pose some interesting problems in workplace etiquette.

"Four of these guys [the deputies] came in here, big as barnyard bulls, hollering real loud, accusing us of growing marijuana to sell," Lester Smith told
Pro Libertate in a telephone interview. "They do everything they can to scare you and get you frustrated." Smith lives near three grandchildren who rent properties from him. One of them is his 31-year-old granddaughter Yolanda, who was the victim of a lengthy, abusive harangue by one of the heroic deputies.

"The trailer is nearby, and I could hear him yelling at her," Lester recounts. "He kept screaming at her, `Your grandpa gives you pot to sell for money!' and she kept telling him that I don't. This went on for a long time, and he eventually made her cry and even throw up. She told me that she was convinced that if she just told him what he wanted to hear, he'd leave her alone, so she eventually said `yes.' But I never did anything of the kind; we have a prescription, my daughter got the permit, and we grow marijuana here only to use as medicine."

The only "legal" justification for seizing anything from the Smiths would necessarily involve some kind of criminal charges. Yet neither Smith nor his wife, nor any of their children or in-laws, has been charged with a crime. So even by the terms of what Sheriff Allman calls the "law," this incident is nothing more than felonious armed robbery, carried out under the color of supposed authority.

Not long ago, Mary Smith received a $52,000 inheritance. And roughly a year ago Lester started to withdraw money from his bank accounts in anticipation of the economic catastrophe now in full flower. When Congress passed the Plutocrat Bailout and Economic Dictatorship Act two weeks ago, Lester cashed in his CDs. When the Sheriff's deputies arrived to conduct their little robbery, the Smiths had $81,000 in the family safe, and then tore up another $51,000 in medicinal marijuana plants.

Casing out fresh victims?
Officers from the Mendocino County Sheriff's Department prowl the rural highways of beautiful northern California.

This is a total haul of $132,000, which is pretty impressive for just a couple hours' worth of government "work."
Lester and Mary have to wait until next March 3 to begin the long, painful, and expensive process of trying to recover the money Allman's department stole from them.

Both of them are approaching ninety years of age and in very poor health, which makes it exceptionally unlikely that they will ever get their money back. This suggests the thugs who robbed them must have cased out their target very carefully. It wouldn't suprise me to learn that they got a heads-up from a
spitzel at the local bank. (When I suggested this possibility to Lester, he dismissed it right away.)

Interestingly, Allman and his homiez at the DA's office didn't attach the Smith's minuscule checking account, which they could have done had they really believed that the elderly couple were "drug peddlers." But with their savings now being used to keep the Sheriff's Department supplied with donuts, Lester and Mary now have nothing but their Social Security checks and the $600 he gets from renting properties to his three grandchildren.

The Smiths are a couple who had saved nearly everything they earned that wasn't spent on necessities. They are children of the Great Depression, who were making preparations to deal with the Greater Depression (Lester indicated to me that he was planning on buying gold).

Stricken with years and left helpless by disease, they were an easy target for a predatory law "enforcement" agency.
This kind of thing is going to become very commonplace.

Sheriff Allman, you'll recall, admits that he can't tell the difference between a "legal" marijuana plant and an "illegal" one. Clear-headed people will have exactly the same problem in trying to find a moral distinction separating the gang of private sector thugs who robbed Richard Weaver, and the government-authorized gang that terrorized and robbed Lester and Mary Smith.

The gang that attacked Weaver
behaved very much like a police unit: They gathered intelligence about Mendocino County's legal marijuana gardens, coordinated their movements via radio, and carried firearms to compel their victims to submit. As far as I can tell, the only substantive differences between these two robberies were, first, that the crooks who robbed Weaver had a much smaller take, and second, their heist was unsuccessful, because it was foiled by the intervention of a much larger, better equipped, and more ruthless gang.

Sheriff Bubba's new toy: Georgia's Cobb County Police Department recently paid $45,000 -- anybody wanna bet that the funds came from an asset forfeiture fund? -- to refurbish this $500,000 "Peacekeeper" light armor vehicle, which was donated -- anybody wanna bet through the Pentagon's LESO program? -- to the department.

Once again, we're driven to contemplate
the wisdom of Albert Jay Nock from his magisterial book, Our Enemy, The State:

"Everyone knows that the State claims and exercises [a] monopoly of crime ... and that it makes this monopoly as strict as it can. It forbids private murder, but itself organizes murder on a colossal scale. It punishes private theft, but itself lays unscrupulous hands on anything it wants, whether the property of citizen or of alien.... Of all the crimes that are committed for gain or revenge, there is not one that we have not seen it commit – murder, mayhem, arson, robbery, fraud, criminal collusion and connivance."

In ways too numerous to chronicle (I'm doing my best, and falling behind badly), the local police in our country are rapidly becoming the most serious criminal threat we face. This is because common crooks, when repelled, will retreat and seek other victims, but criminals in State-issued costumes will summon sufficient force to visit exemplary violence upon those who resist.

This is
not an argument against righteous resistance, but rather a sober tactical assessment of the enforcement arm of an Enemy that has dropped any pretense of acting on behalf of the public good.

A personal note....

Recently, in reply to a very kind inquiry about Korrin's health and our family's circumstances, I described at length some of the challenges we have recently experienced.

In response I've received an enormous outpouring of kindness from many of you who take the time to read what I publish in this space.

I earnestly wish there were words adequate to convey my gratitude for your concern, your prayers, and also the many acts of generosity that have been made toward me and our family. Thank you, all of you, very much.

More timely than ever, and it's available now.

Dum spiro, pugno!


Anonymous said...

I know that those of your readers here who have seen my comments in the past may well find many of them to be 'extreme'. But I'm not a 20 year old hot head - I'm a 49 year old man who has been reading about these very kinds of things long before I discovered Will's blog - he's just more eloquent than most in presenting these perspectives.

I will say this though, it is situations like the one described here that have been going on for more than a decade that have lead me to the position that - I will never convict someone of killing a government parasite.

Not a cop, not a family court judge, not the lowly clerk - they all live off of dollars derived from gov't violence and they should have no quarter from retribution of such acts.

They may attempt to rationalize their conduct, but they have been systemically removed so many layers from the violent acts that enable them that they can no longer see the connection.

It will not be through the taking out of top layers, not that the shrub doesn't richly deserve it, but rather through engendering fear in the bottom that will change the system.

When the work-a-day gov't employee is too scared to show up for their job for fear of violence that the system will crumble top to bottom. And as it does, those at the top who deserve retribution the most will no longer be able to rely on the underlings who will be too scared to continue to protect them.

The only good bureaucrat is one who is stretching a rope . . . there are no others.

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Anonymous said...

kinda off topic... but I was wondering... are you following the political situation in Bolivia?

William N. Grigg said...

I'm keeping Bolivia within my peripheral vision, as it were.

Washington's up to something there....

Anonymous said...

Studies out of Sweden prove marijuana is a cancer preventer. But only use the drugs prescribed by your for profit physician. We wouldn't want anyone to get the "munchies" or watch the home shopping network for 3 hours and not realize it. There is a good documentary called "The Drug War-The Last White Hope". It's probably time to leave this wannabe fifth reich banana republic.

Anonymous said...

"Government is actually the worst failure of civilized man. There has never been a really good one. And even those that are most tolerable are arbitrary, cruel, grasping and unintelligent." HL Mencken

Mimi said...

Mr. Grigg,
After your September 29 account of the blending of police and military, this is a terrifying entry. How in the WORLD can we put a stop to this--or will citizens start to vanish in the night as non-Americans do now?

Anonymous said...

you know, when the israelites chose Saul as king, we lost the last example of what a people, with a codified law, could accomplish without being a state.

i think many tribes, including the american indians, fall into a different boat. i could be wrong.


is there a defense fund for the couple you described?


Anonymous said...


the answer to your may not like:

1) prayer...the weapon of choice--working with govt to fix itself is not working.

2) pray that God's will be done, and not what you think should be done (that's a tough one).

3) educate your friends.

i think what we are seeing in our days is the construction of the very foundation of the one world govt. i always thought it would be accomplished by a gun. funny, i now believe it to be financial. ...and it makes so much sense.

somewhere along the line, we need to be careful. something sinister is going to present itself. i don't think the mark of the beast will be a physical mark, but a spiritual one. a physical mark makes no sense. so...somewhere along the line we're, or our posterity, are gonna be faced with a decision as to whether or not we will accept a "system". i think our decision will determine the spiritual mark we receive. i'm including verse 2 for context only.

Rev 7: 2-3

2: And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,

3: Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

the best thing you can do is to prepare.

and lastly, if things start to look good, and then become great, "do not be afraid...cause you are in the lyceum...and you are already dead!!!" just kidding. be careful cuz God's calling his own home when no one has a reason to need Him.


Tom Bionic said...

I wonder what the stats are for assets seized on drug charges that actually lead to a charging of a crime?
How about to jury trials?
Guilty verdicts?

As a "rule" of thinking about these things I generally try to reserve judgement until I feel like I have all the facts, or at least, the closest semblance that I can get from a government and media that seems to be full on "stealth fascists". In some cases, even not so stealthy...

If 50% of what you report is true, we are in more trouble than I think we are...

Any thoughts on the Lehman bros. CDS settlement on the 21st?

Word on the "street" is that Ambac is the principle holder and they wont be able to cover.

Anonymous said...

Saw an ad for this (below) on tv the other day- I don't even know what to think. At least they're getting started young...

Trigger your child’s excitement for sirens and squad cars and inspire get-up-and-go activity with this role-playing police officer’s helmet and motorcycle-styled handlebar. The adjustable helmet has colored lights, a flip-up visor and a microphone that amplifies your child’s voice – that’s sure to stop “lawbreakers” in their tracks! A grip of the motorcycle handlebars encourages your little guy to burn off all of that pent-up energy, leaving it up to your child’s growing imagination – and little legs! – to navigate the way. Control buttons activate flashing light patterns, siren, horn and revving sounds. Your little long-arm of the law will be in “hot pursuit” with 30 different mission sequences to respond to. Mission-inspired music and loads of action phrases like, “Search and rescue in progress!” and “ Set up a road block!” encourage hours of make believe that’s never the same adventure twice.


Anonymous said...

Jesse Trentadue’s Quest for Truth

Source:Rise Up Rochester blog

October 17, 2008

New developments in the near fourteen year quest to determine the actual truth behind the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing can be attributed to the tireless work of attorney, Jesse Trentadue. Trentadue, a former Marine, began his personal mission in an attempt to uncover the cause of his brother’s death. Jesse’s brother Kenny Trentadue was murdered, or rather, “suicided” in a federal penitentiary under alarmingly mysterious circumstances, after he was mistaken for Richard Guthrie, a member of the Aryan Republican Army and Midwest Bank Robbers, whose exact role in the Oklahoma City bombing is still fully unknown. Kenny Trentadue was another forgotten victim of the OKBOMB, as the FBI liked to call it. Jesse Trentadue, since then, has become the legal and informational vanguard for other victims of the bombings, such as Jannie Coverdale, who lost her two young grandsons in the blast, and has herself fought the FBI, DOJ and almost every other federal agency you can think of to find the truth. Trentadue has been instrumental in having unreleased documents made public through the eroding Freedom of Information Act,

as well as other litigious methods. His work is ceaseless and justifiably driven. A few of the more astounding recent breakthroughs that Trentadue has made involve the CIA, FBI and BOP (Bureau of Prisons). Talk about alphabet soup. This kind is poison.

On September 25, 2008 Trentadue won a ruling, which he had sought for over a year and a half to depose, on video, federal inmates David Paul Hammer and Terry Nichols. Nichols, who was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for his still unknown role in the bombing, says he is ready to tell all. Yet, the DOJ, FBI and BOP have made this task almost impossible, claiming that such as deposition would be detrimental to prison security.

Image via Wikipedia

This is also the claim made by these agencies about deposing Hammer. Hammer, who is currently on Death Row in Terre Haute, Indiana, was housed in a cell next to the elusive and mysterious Timothy McVeigh for the last couple years of McVeigh’s life. Hammer, who wrote the book Secrets Worth Dying For, was the recipient of some of McVeigh’s “final” confessions. These include his corroborated claims of being an agent of the government during the planning and execution of the bombing. Secrets Worth Dying for is one of the most chilling books on OKC and one which is worth reading for anyone with an interest in this case. Hammer recently told me that a new edition of the book will be released on April 19, 2009 and will contain further verified information regarding the exact role of Timothy “Lone Truck Bomber” McVeigh. Trentadue finally won his suit to depose these men on video, says that he believes the government will appeal this ruling. What do they have to hide?

On October 10, 2008, Trentadue, an unbelievably brave man, filed a complaint with the US district court of Utah, against the CIA, claiming that since December of 2006, the CIA has continuously withheld information which they were compelled by law, via the FOIA, to release to Trentadue. Information which was requested but which has to this date, been withheld concern the CIA’s investigation and/or involvement in OKC, information regarding German National Andreas Strassmier’s role as an informant/ agent in the bombing, and the nature of his exact relationship with McVeigh and the Aryan Republican Army/ Midwest bank robbers. The difficulty in attaining this protected information was also previously encountered by several others, including McVeigh and Nichols own defense attorneys. Yet, Trentadue is not trying to defend these men or their actions. He is trying to find out the truth of his brothers gruesome murder. Trentadue has demanded in his filing that all information concerning “all investigations into the CIA’s role, involvement with or connection to the Murrah Building Bombing whether through employees, informants, operatives or other means” be turned over ASAP. He also has been fighting to obtain similar records from the FBI, and ATF. His last letter, written to officials at the CIA, written March 2008 concluded with the line “I hope there will be no need for me to sue in order to obtain these records.” This should be interesting, to say the least.

Finally, on October 12, 2008 Trentadue filed another Freedom of Information Act to obtain records from the FBI. He has now requested copies of all surveillance video tapes which are related to OKC, including all surveillance tapes from in and around the Murrah building from the dates of April 15- April 19, which include the interior and exterior cameras of the Regency Apartments, located across from the Murrah, security camera on the west side of the Murrah and one on the south of the Journal Records building. (Anyone having 9/11 Pentagon déjà vous?) Included in these OKC surveillance video tapes is one which is mentioned in a Secret Service memo. It is stated in this memo that one of these videos contained: [s]ecurity video tapes from the area [that] show the [Ryder] truck detonation 3 minutes and 6 seconds after the SUSPECTS exited the truck.” Unless the Secret Service is ill informed on the use of grammar, the word SUSPECTS clearly implies a massive cover-up or worse. Trentadue is also requesting all reports which reference the FBI’s seizure of these tapes and the chain of possession with which they were handled in their eventual disappearance from the FBI’s (and others) files. Furthermore, Trentadue is asking for all video tape and records which can illuminate the truck, known to be at the site of the bombing, which was traveling behind McVeigh when he was arrested by Trooper Charlie Hangar in Perry, Oklahoma, an hour after the blast. Hangar had dashboard video equipment in his patrol car, but somehow this was mysteriously turned off until after Hangar had actually arrested McVeigh.

We wish Trentadue the best of luck. We hope he knows that all OKC researchers, as well as anyone interested in uncovering these types of governmental abuses, are holding their breaths while they wait for the eventual release of these documents and tapes. God Speed, Jesse Trentadue.

Bob said...

Oh my God.

Teaching little rugrats to become members of the lawless "law enforcement" arm of the great, wise, and oh-so-rotten state.

Anonymous said...

An unmarked police cruiser is called a stealth sty. Anyone with a triple digit IQ is turned down from the police farce. Wanna get away with murder? Become a police officer. Evil smelly dopesmokers are coming for your children sign over all your rights to be safe. Keep me safe mommygov *sniffle*.

liberranter said...

Will, I'm sure that this piece is on par with your always-first-rate exposes of the regime's crimes. However, after the first couple of paragraphs I found myself so consumed with rage that I just couldn't bring myself to finish it. One question keeps racing through my mind: When will the brainless sheep that now populate this nation once inhabited by freedom-loving, independent citizens stand up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and put an end to this nightmare?

Anonymous @ 6:20PM said:

I will say this though, it is situations like the one described here that have been going on for more than a decade that have lead me to the position that - I will never convict someone of killing a government parasite.

Sadly, you and I, or indeed anyone who is clearly a lover of liberty and constitutional law will NEVER get the chance to sit on a jury in today's Amerika unless we perjure our way through voire dire (how Tom Eddlem survived the process to become empaneled as a federal juror is still a mystery to me). The organs of the ruling elite who are masquerading as officers of the court and who control the whole charade know damned well that informed citizens eager to defend their rights will not for a second hesitate to acquit a citizen charged with killing an agent of the State, especially if said citizen clearly acted in self-defense against said agent's predatory advances against life and property. Ergo, the "prime directive" for the "justice system" is to purge courtrooms of anyone who believes in liberty or the rule of law.

Anonymous said...

I lived just north of Mendocino County a couple of years ago but being born and raised a "flatlander" soon tired of always having to walk either up or down hill. Numerous armed robber state enforcement agencies were present in the small town where I resided. The list included the Sheriff's department, state police, DNR and national forest gestapo. I addition to making sure that not a single stick or rock was removed from the vast king's forest, some of them were kept busy fighting an alleged crack "epidemic" and discovering illegal gardens. Rumor had it that some of the plants found (stolen) were never turned as evidence but sold to supplement law enforcement police pay. This was just a rumor, mind you, although the government people did seem to live far better than the ordinary peasants in the community.

liberranter said...

Anonymous @8:40AM said:

[S]ome of the[State's armed parasites] were kept busy fighting an alleged crack "epidemic" and discovering illegal gardens.

Here in my little corner of NW Tucson, out in the middle of the Sonora Desert, the local county sheriff's department opened up a new pig sty two years ago shortly after I moved here, ostensibly to combat a "meth invasion" that the county sheriff claimed was plaguing the area. The existence of meth labs in isolated mobile homes, barns, and other rural structures supposedly justified this massive waste of stolen taxpayer dollars, and the local mouthpieces for the State disguising themselves as newspapers echoed the meth story, with the pig sty's presence supposedly welcomed by large numbers of local citizens (I know most of my neighbors within a five-mile radius, and NOT ONE wants anything whatsoever to do with local "law enforcement.") Funny thing, though: NOT ONE "meth lab" has been raided or closed down in this part of the county in the last two years (at least not according to the very same local news media that loudly trumpet the State's every "victory" in the WoD). NOT ONE arrest has been made locally for meth production or distribution, and NOT ONE haul of meth or its raw ingredients has been registered or added to the "war booty" list of which local "law enforcement" is so proud.

Said county sheriff's deputies have, however, been quite earnest in shaking down local motorists for non-speeding and non-reckless driving "violations" and openly brag about how they have added to the county's general revenues through "motor vehicle citations" over the same two-year period in northwestern Pima County.

The creative lengths to which these mafiosi will go to enrich their masters (and themselves) have still not been fully reached.

Anonymous said...

Funny thing is that if we all
obeyed the law to the letter
the local law enforcement agencies
would go broke.

This is one reason they are ever
busy looking for new ways to extort us.

The latest example here in Houston,
Texas is Red Light Cameras.
These new cameras, which the Police
Chief says are needed to save lives,
are generating revenue in the
neighborhood of 10 or more millions
per year. Also, it has now been
shown that Red Light Cameras
actually cause accidents. The
accompanying fatality rates and
stats have not changed.

Britain is now a surveilance state.
We are not far behind.

How long untill we will not be able to
turn off our new Federally mandated
digital TV's.

Anonymous said...

"The creative lengths to which these mafiosi will go to enrich their masters (and themselves) have still not been fully reached."

Mark Twain commented on this topic over 100 years ago. From his book, "Roughing It"...


Four months later the following item appeared in the same paper (the Enterprise). In this item the name of one of the city officers above referred to (Deputy Marshal Jack Williams) occurs again:

ROBBERY AND DESPERATE AFFRAY.--On Tuesday night, a German named Charles Hurtzal, engineer in a mill at Silver City, came to this place, and visited the hurdy-gurdy house on B street. The music, dancing and Teutonic maidens awakened memories of Faderland until our German friend was carried away with rapture. He evidently had money, and was spending if freely. Late in the evening Jack Williams and Andy Blessington invited him down stairs to take a cup of coffee. Williams proposed a game of cards and went up stairs to procure a deck, but not finding any returned. On the stairway he met the German, and drawing his pistol knocked him down and rifled his pockets of some seventy dollars. Hurtzal dared give no alarm, as he was told, with a pistol at his head, if he made any noise or exposed them, they would blow his brains out. So effectually was he frightened that he made no complaint, until his friends forced him. Yesterday a warrant was issued, but the culprits had disappeared.

This efficient city officer, Jack Williams, had the common reputation of being a burglar, a highwayman and a desperado. It was said that he had several times drawn his revolver and levied money contributions on citizens at dead of night in the public streets of Virginia.


Mr. Twain also had some interesting observations regarding jury selection in Virginia City in those days. To read about it, click here and go to paragraph six.

Anonymous said...

They used to get people in the CCCP (Soviet Union) by watching them all day. They knew sooner or later a law would be broken because there were so many of them. Laws are strangling this once great republic. It angers me we could be so much more in this country than some reheated USSR imitation.

dixiedog said...

Sorry Will, for going off-topic, but you said everything that could possibly be said about enforcement tentacles of robber states, whether they be in Mendocino County or anywhere else, so I decided to throw in some different scraps for our insatiable appetite.

So on with my somewhat incongruous commenting, otherwise known as "blowing of steam"...

I was recently reading God's Word and, Will, it's verses like Ecclesiastes 1:18:

For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief.

...among others, that make me absolutely certain of the inerrancy of the entire Good Book. In fact, the entire book of Ecclesiastes is profound, IMO. Ergo, ignorance really is bliss, at least for a season. Many in my family and friends I've spoke with think I'm always negative in my outlook and overly pessimistic about this country and life in general. Sure, I reckon so, but another way to look at it is that a pessimist is a well-informed optimist. My optimism is not what others view as optimism and vice versa.

Anyway, back to the contemporary, albeit imminently predictable, political/economic drivel.

What a surprise. WND's Farah is also now finally seeing the futility of pretending to be this so-called "United" States and leans toward breakup and dissolution. Nothing new here, I've thought this was the only feasible way, albeit remote, for Americans to retain some semblance of liberty for a long time, sigh. Break up into compatible, like-minded clans. The country is way too polarized and hopelessly divisive these days. But, what does that matter anyway since the whole world is quickly spiraling headlong into a global financial (and, by extension, political) dictatorship in due time.

This article by Devvy Kidd reinforces what I've suspected about Sarah Palin after seeing clips of her ushered onto the stage at the RNC in conjunction with reading excerpts about her life. I began thinking "narcissist" and "self-aggrandizing" humanoid. Sure enough, a resident of Wasilla, quoted from the article above, stated, "SP is a populist and an extreme narcissist."

No surprise there. One can read folk like a book with trivial effort, if they would be a bit more cynical. It's also a damning indictment against women being in power positions. Almost without exception, they cannot separate their emotions from the day-to-day grind. Ergo, she'd be very likely more dangerous than McInsane.

But as the Hegelian dialectic forever churns onward, the McInsane campaign will play out and disperse and we'll see the election of the "transformational figure" known as "Hope Change" take his seat at the imperial throne.

We now find out that Biden has squeaked, oh so carefully, about how America's enemies will likely "test" Hope Change's administration with a "crisis" within the first 6 months.

If he's serious about that warning, we can easily deduce that Hope Change is really just laying the scapegoat foundation down for a future planned increase in repression of some sort (because of a likely societal upheaval being kindled by the economic hardship) from Leviathan within the first 6 months and the 50 Leviathanettes dutifully obliging their assistance, of course.

Interesting (but soon to be dreadful) times are afoot, indeed.

Anonymous said...

Just a question-anyone know what Biden is talking about in the event that dixiedog referred to? About "testing" Obama...a "generated crisis"? If that isn't scary... !

Anonymous said...

Dixie, I'd rather be informed and depressed than stupid and oblivious. I have always wondered if really stupid people get depressed, hehe.

Anonymous said...

Check out this video of a cop stopping to ask directions at a house, then shooting the family pet who runs up to greet him. On private property even.

scroll about 5 minutes into the newscast.

Anonymous said...

As A martial art's instructor for 19 years I can say everyone absolutly has the right to defend them-self from police aggression. Untill the people come to an understanding that it is O.K. to use force from an attack we will continue to see a rise in law-enforcement abuse. When the people begin to use there right there will be a noticeable drop in law-enforcement abuse.

Anonymous said...

if you cant do the time thendont do the crime. protecting a drug user/abuser/pusher is no better than telling them that they are a vicitm of society. maybe you should have to go to the hospitol or the morgue with a parent and help them identify the body of the teen age son/daughter. there is a reason that there are such harsh penalties attatched to the production and or sale of all drugs,inc. pot. Maybe they wont do it anymore...... pot does not have any medical property other than a mild sedative, it does not cure anything, I've had this same conversation with teenage kids who think that it should be legalized, and the story is the same all the time, it will be easier for them to get. if you want to sell drugs, then be prepared to loose all of your belongings, and hopefully all of your freedom.

William N. Grigg said...

Where was the "crime" committed in the story related above? If you had read it carefully you might have noticed that nobody was even charged with a crime, let alone prosecuted for and convicted of one.

Nobody was "selling" drugs; this story involved an elderly couple with valid medical prescriptions to grow marijuana for use as a palliative (the husband uses it for tea, rather than smoking it).

In case you haven't noticed, it's easier to buy "illegal" drugs than it is to find an honest police officer. The "war on drugs" simply serves as a price support program for drug dealers and a huge public works program for donut-devourers, SWAT thugs, and politically ambitious prosecutors.

Anonymous said...

piss off you meaningless little moron. there are far more good police officers than ther are bad, and you are judging the mass by a few. If you think it is so easy to be a police officer, take the test and put on the badge, otherwise shut the hell up, but i suspect that you are nothing more than a little boy that could not hack it in any other job, so you critcize for a living. move to california where they appreciate egotistical, arrogant and ignorant people like you.

William N. Grigg said...

First and most importantly, there is a question pending here that you aren't answering; re-read (or, more likely, given your dismal spelling, have read to you) the first line of my comment directly above.

You're either too obtuse to understand the facts of the case presented above, or incurably dishonest and determined to misrepresent them, or -- most likely -- both.

There are many good police officers, but most of what good police officers do has nothing to do with protecting individual rights and everything to do with revenue extraction.

Unlike yourself, I don't cower in anonymity; my name, likeness, and contact info are all in the public record. If you want me to shut up, you're going to have to man up and do the job yourself.

So -- drop me a line, if you'd like, at WNGrigg [at] MSN [dot] com, and I'll give you personalized directions so that you can come here and make me shut up, if you'd care to.

Anonymous said...

WG said

In case you haven't noticed, it's easier to buy "illegal" drugs than it is to find an honest police officer......

I guess I can see how that comment could be taken wrong, and the big boy wanna fight me cuz i dont agree with him...I never threatened you, but you felt it necessary to escalate the situation with your " you cant make me attitude ". On the other hand, it is easier to find the tooth fairy than it is to find a jounalist that does not have a tabloid mentality.

without law, there is lawlessness and blessed are the pecemakers. kind of funny that St. Christopher is the gaurdian of all police officers, and who watches out for you and your kind, Harvey Birdman, attorney at law.

this is kinda fun, insult me again and lets see how long it takes me to come back with a smart ass comment.

i will give you credit though, i cant wait to get on my computer durring the day, this gives me something to look foreward to.

William N. Grigg said...

You keep missing the point, despite the fact that it's quite huge and placed conveniently near to you.

I'll repeat it again in the form of a question put as simply as possible, a courtesy I offer to those who display mental shortcomings of the sort from which you obviously suffer:

What evidence can you provide that the elderly couple described in my essay was involved in drug dealing, given that they were never charged with that offense (or any other)?

Anything of substance presented in your initial comment was based on the assumption that an actual crime was committed by that couple. They've never been charged with one, yet -- in defiance of the expectations cultivated by your illiterate truculence and substandard thinking -- you tacitly lay claim to something akin to omniscience by insisting that we should simply consider that couple to be guilty of some grave offense.

Incidentally, I'm happy to keep you tied up at the computer all day, hunting painfully at the keyboard for the appropriate letters with which to spell out (incorrectly, in most cases) your sub-adolescent thoughts. Assuming you're an LEO of some kind, I think that's by far the most productive and socially redemptive use of your time.

And yes, you're still invited to come and make me "shut the hell up" in person, as you so bravely did from behind the security of on-line anonymity, which is hardly a gesture worthy of either St. Christopher or the estimable Harvey Birdman, esq.

Anonymous said...

you are a idiot, by the way I checked the spelling and I spelled it right. You are missing the point, you did not say anything in that paragraph about a particular police officer, you stated that it was easier to buy drugs than it was to find a honest police officer. I realize that you have a higher education than I and can use your fancy words of wit..... and please show me where i siad i was going to make you shut up? What is this, are you threatening to use violence against me for not believing the same was as you, i repeat you are not only a idiot, you are a hypocrite.

William N. Grigg said...

"...please show me where i siad i was going to make you shut up?"

Aren't you the author of the words below? --

If you think it is so easy to be a police officer, take the test and put on the badge, otherwise shut the hell up....

The possibility of being blamed, erroneously, for comments made by someone else is just one of the many disadvantages of posting anonymously.

It's not difficult at all to become a police officer, and relatively easy to retain that job despite demonstrated incompetence and malice. It can be a difficult and dangerous job, but in terms of actual on-the-job mortality it's not even in the top dozen or so most dangerous occupations.

But again, I must bring the discussion back to this specific case, in which two elderly people were robbed, at gunpoint, of their life savings by deputy sheriffs without even the pretense of legal sanction. In a case such as this, how can we possibly sympathize with the assailants rather than the victims, irrespective of the costumes and fancy jewelry the assailants wear?

Anonymous said...

If you think it is so easy to be a police officer, take the test and put on the badge, otherwise shut the hell up....

I did say it and still fail to see where i said i was going to make you shut the way....less than three percent of all people that apply to be police officers are takes a higher level of morality and integrity for a police officer than it does for the president. any idiot with a pen can be a author and as long as you have mindless slugs that are afraid to say anything back to you that will buy your crap. Now back to the crux of your original blog was about how the government can take your stuff if you break the law, laws that are applied even if you dont beleive in them.. hell you even have a moron that advocates killing gov. officials.

William N. Grigg said...

First of all, the point of the initial essay here was that it's common for innocent people to have their money and property stolen by the police without being charged with a crime, much less convicted of one. The couple above was never charged with breaking any law whatsoever, and their case is actually quite typical.

Are we clear on that? Must I dumb this down a bit more? Or do you assume that anyone on the receiving end of police violence is, by that fact alone, to be considered a criminal?

Incidentally, if the Clinton and Bush regimes have taught us anything, it's that the moral hurdles one has to clear in order to be president aren't demanding at all. And I'm inclined to think that the washout rate among would-be police attests to the dismal nature of the recruiting pool, rather than the exalted standards of the profession.

Anonymous said...

i guess that would be your opinion, and you are certainley entitled to it, but i would put the integrity of 90 percent of all police officers above you. if you knew anything about criminal cases, you would know that the police can not just take property without due process for the purpose of assest forfieture. police do not and can not determine that the property is controband for the pupose of asset forfieture. that is why there is criminal proceedings, you know court, not the police. the days of mayberry when andy was the cop and the judge are over. there are so many oversight groups for law enforcement that it isnt even funny. you live under a rock, and as long as nothing disturbs the rock, you are fine and dandy, but other than that, the world is out to get you.

William N. Grigg said...

First of all, we're discussing civil asset forfeiture, not the criminal variety, which means that -- contrary to what you just wrote -- there are no "criminal proceedings" involved.

Many police departments and sheriff's offices conduct civil forfeiture proceedings themselves, without bothering to go through a court of any kind.

Secondly, in cases of this sort the property itself is found "guilty" under the in rem doctrine, and the burden is placed on the victims of officially sanctioned police theft to prove that they obtained their property legally.

In the case mentioned above, the elderly couple who had their life savings jacked by the local blue light gang can't contest the case until next March.

The thugs justified the seizure of medical marijuana by claiming to have "evidence" that the couple was dealing marijuana, yet -- now, PAY ATTENTION, my easily distracted interlocutor -- NO CHARGES WERE FILED.

In the meantime, they've got to live on a few hundred dollars a month, while Sheriff Lobo and his little piggies are wallowing in donuts.

This kind of thing is very common. It has corrupted entire departments in many cities and states across the country.

Any LEO with so much as a particle of integrity would be condemning this common practice at the top of his lungs. Apart from the heroic folks at LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition), we've heard nothing but silence, punctuated by the occasional contented burp.

Anonymous said...

once again, you do not know what you are talking about, the POLICE are not a civil entity, they are a criminal entity, they do not serve for the purpose of civil proceddings,( other than court orders and civil paper services) they would have had to had probable cause or atleast articuable suspicion(both of which are criminal hearings) to get the warrant to seize the property. I do not know of a single police or sheriffs department that acts as a collection agency for the courts for the purpose of generating funds. Has any of you in this mind trust ever thought about doing a public information request for the report? Is there the slighteset possibilty that there is more to this story than you have been told? Is it possible that any of three were selling medical grade pot? you want to talk about violence now, you have people on this site, right now that think that it is ok to kill police officers, you know guys that have wives, kids and life away from the PD, that go to work the same as the rest of us, but since they wear a badge, their life is worth less? I ask you why you thought it was necessary to tell people that you can bench 400 pounds and you have guns, are you not kinda promoting the fact that you have the ability to become violent if required to do so, not much different than a police officer. when police officer serves a warrant, they are loud and fast, much akin to a bull in a china shop, becasue they have to have the element of suprise to reduce the likleyhood of use of force, which protects the suspects as well as the cops. how many more police officers are killed every year by citizens? I suspect that you can already tell me how many people were killed by law enforcement, but i guess that doesnt matter. If all law enforcement just packed up and moved on, where would you be? I suspect that most people are the same and that they just want to have a cop around when they need him/her, by the way, I have been shot at, I do know what it is like to have somebody I dont know try to take my life, and when all was said and done, one suspect in custody, uninjured, and I got to go home and be my wifes best friend, and a father to my children, alls well that ends well. ( you dont have to insult mt grammer or sentence structure, i had several points to make and not getting alot of cooperation from my fat fingers )

William N. Grigg said...

"Is there the slighteset possibilty that there is more to this story than you have been told? Is it possible that any of three were selling medical grade pot?"

Under the constitutional system we were given, government has no authority to imprison people or seize their property on the basis of a "possibility"; this can only be done pursuant to "due process of law."

"Due process" is not satisfied when a group of armed cretins seize somebody's life savings amid vague insinuations of "possible" wrongdoing.

"I do not know of a single police or sheriffs department that acts as a collection agency for the courts for the purpose of generating funds."

This is by far the most common role played by police and sheriff's offices.

Here are two stories that explain this fact in remarkably candid detail:

Key quote:

"`When I first started in this job 30 years ago, police work was never about revenue enhancement,' Utica Police Chief Michael Reaves said. `But if you're a chief now, you have to look at whether your department produces revenues. That's just the reality nowadays.'"

Here's the second story:

Key quote:

Police officers in Metro Detroit are often ordered to write a certain number of moving violations -- but chiefs issuing those edicts are careful not to use the "Q" word.

"`Nobody likes to call them quotas, but that's exactly what they are, Trenton Police Sgt. Richard Lyons said. `When you're being told how many tickets you need to write, to me that's a quota.'"

William N. Grigg said...

you want to talk about violence now, you have people on this site, right now that think that it is ok to kill police officers, you know guys that have wives, kids and life away from the PD, that go to work the same as the rest of us, but since they wear a badge, their life is worth less?

The point, actually, is that their lives aren't worth any more than ours.

Police are trained and equipped to kill citizens when they consider it necessary. Why shouldn't citizens do the same?

As a Christian, I am required to live at peace with all men, to the extent this is possible. In political terms, I subscribe unconditionally to the non-aggression doctrine.

I pray, literally, that God will grant me the blessing of living a long and full life at the end of which I will never have shed the blood of another human being.

That being said, I must also say that there are situations in which killing a police officer would not only be morally appropriate, but morally required.

Every day in this country, most likely hundreds of times a day, police officers inflict unjustified violence on innocent people. Until relatively recently, it was understood that citizens in such circumstances had a common law right to resist -- including the right to resist, with suitable force, illegal arrest.

Restoring protection for that right would go a long way toward restoring some sense of balance between the law-abiding public and the armed bureaucrats who are our supposed protectors.

Anonymous said...

the possibility that i spoke of was that maybe you dont know the whole story. I like you, hope that i will never have to take the life of another, but I have come to realize that if asked ( by concious, reckless conduct of another)I may have to. I certainley dont relish the fact and I certainly dont have the Tackleberry attitude,as I would guess that most leo's would agree.

I am intriqued as to your comment as to when it would be morally appropriate to kill a cop? Could you please give me an example of what or when that would be justified?

If a police officer pulls you over for a speeding violation and you feel that you were not speeding, does that in your opinion, justify you using any kind of force against the police?

I will agree that the life of a police officer is nore or no less valuable than any other, but short of the police putting a gun to your head for the fun of it, could you in your own mind justify using deadly force to protect yourself over lets say in this case, pot?

I will concede that pot smokers are not the menace of society, and if grown adults want to sit around and somke a doobie while watching cheech and chong then go for it.

William N. Grigg said...

I am intriqued as to your comment as to when it would be morally appropriate to kill a cop? Could you please give me an example of what or when that would be justified?

The residents of Mt. Carmel at Waco were morally and legally entitled to kill the ATF agents who shot up their home and religious sanctuary in an illegal raid.

Randy Weaver and his family were morally and legally entitled to kill the federal assailants who attacked their home at Ruby Ridge; that right was actually vindicated in court.

Cory Maye was well within his rights to kill an unidentified armed intruder who turned out to be part of a police counter-narcotics team staging a no-knock raid at the wrong address.

Kathryn Johnson, the 92-year-old Atlanta woman murdered by police in a no-knock, wrong-door raid two years ago, was justified in using lethal force in an attempt to repel that illegal attack. Her neighbors would have morally and legally entitled to kill those officers in order to protect that innocent grandmother.

Just a year and a half ago, a District Judge upheld the right of John Coffin to assault two police officers who assaulted his wife in the course of serving a civil warrant (to which Coffin had already replied). Coffin didn't kill the officers; he merely seized the taser from one of them and beat them bloody, which was the very least they had coming after they attacked his wife.

A citizen has the same right to lethal self-defense against a cop that he would have in a situation involving any other individual. That right isn't widely understood, but it's deeply entrenched in the common law and is actually recognized in both statute and court precedents.

The only alternative to that position is one in which police have unlimited discretion to kill: They have right to kill, and we have a duty to die. Is that your position?

Anonymous said...

I am apolice officer and very proud of that fact. I have never stolen a dime or taken property without cause. I have never killed anybody. I can not say that I have never used force to end a situation, but I never had anybody that required a visit to the hospital...that being said, I would stand in front of you to keep harm from falling upon you, even knowing that you basically detest me for my chosen calling. I will continue to stand up for and and in front of those whose are unable, and if you choose to attempt to stop me in doing my job, then you run the risk. I am a trained professional, and when it coems to force, i use what force is needed to stop a situation, untrained people use all the force they can.

Anonymous said...

The only alternative to that position is one in which police have unlimited discretion to kill: They have right to kill, and we have a duty to die. Is that your position?

10:24 AM

absoloutley not, i would never advocate murder.

Let me give you a scenario,

your wife is being attacked by a thug and all he wants is her money, but she wont let go off her pocketbook, oh and he has a knife, and a local police officer passes by her and the thug fighting over her purse, do you want the cop to take action, or walk the other way casue the situation does not technically involve him?.

Now confronted by a police officer, the thug now uses your wife as a shield, do you want the cop to talk nice or do you want him to end the situation?

Anonymous said...

The residents of Mt. Carmel at Waco were morally and legally entitled to kill the ATF agents who shot up their home and religious sanctuary in an illegal raid.

Randy Weaver and his family were morally and legally entitled to kill the federal assailants who attacked their home at Ruby Ridge; that right was actually vindicated in court.

as for these cases, are you alluding to the fact that there was no criminal activity afoot? If so, you need to check your facts...... as fior the others, poor police work, intell and any other thing that you can throw at it

William N. Grigg said...

"Let me give you a scenario,

your wife is being attacked by a thug and all he wants is her money, but she wont let go off her pocketbook, oh and he has a knife, and a local police officer passes by her and the thug fighting over her purse, do you want the cop to take action, or walk the other way casue the situation does not technically involve him?.

Now confronted by a police officer, the thug now uses your wife as a shield, do you want the cop to talk nice or do you want him to end the situation?

The scenario is inapt, since my wife, like myself, would be armed and prepared to defend herself in that situation.

On the other hand: If my wife, contrary to her upbringing and beliefs, were the innocent victim of a violent crime, and a police officer refused/declined to come to her aid, she would have no legal or civil recourse against the police officer. Under existing judicial precedents it's clear that the police have no enforceable duty to render aid to any individual citizen.

Many police officers, to their considerable credit, do their best to aid and protect the innocent, for which they have my sincere gratitude. But citizens should never make the mistake of believing that the primary purpose of the police is to protect them, as individuals, from criminal violence. That simply isn't the case, in policy terms.

William N. Grigg said...

"as for these cases [Waco and Ruby Ridge], are you alluding to the fact that there was no criminal activity afoot? If so, you need to check your facts......"

Randy Weaver was acquitted of all charges against him except for the failure to appear at a court hearing, which was the government's fault: It sent him two conflicting notices.

So to answer your question: It's a matter of established legal fact that no "criminal activity was afoot" in the Weaver household.

As to Waco:

David Koresh, licensed firearms dealer, was suspected of technical offenses involving licensing and fees for various kinds of firearms. He pointedly invited ATF officials to come out to his home and inspect his weapons and inventory, which is hardly the behavior of a criminal.

On the morning of the ATF's criminal and unjustified assault on the Davidians, Koresh became aware that his followers included an ATF informant, Davy Aguilar.

Rather than holding him as a hostage, or inflicting some kind of injury on him, Koresh let Aguilar go, in the futile hope that the ATF wouldn't carry out its unnecessary attack. As the ATF stormtroopers dismounted and encircled the Davidan home/sanctuary, Koresh exposed himself to gunfire as he tried to dissuade the feds from attacking.

The Feds opened fire first; the Davidians returned fire. The Davidians flat-out kicked the ATF's ass, forcing them to withdraw, but permitting them to collect their injured and dead.

I admire the Davidians for their restraint, given that they had the moral right to kill every single one of the thugs who attacked their home. In those circumstances I doubt my response would have been so measured.

There were nine Davidians prosecuted and convicted of various "offenses" in this episode, all of which boil down to the supposed crime of defending themselves from a criminal armed assault. Not a single Davidian was ever charged with a crime antedating the Feb. 28, 1993 raid -- which means that the only "crimes" here are charges that bootstrapped off the initial criminal raid by the ATF.

Anonymous said...

get aout your law book and look up the term, " pre-existing relationship " a police officer has a DUTY to act on crimes, now the part that is clouded is to what capicity that he will respond.

Anonymous said...