|
Trial by Media
by Edgar Steele
13 March 2005
March 12, 2004
"The modern press itself is a new phenomenon. Its typical unit is the great
agency of mass communication. These agencies can facilitate thought and
discussion. They can stifle it... They can play up or down the news and its
significance, foster and feed emotions, create complacent fictions and blind
spots, misuse the great words and uphold empty slogans."
-- Commission on Freedom of the Press, A Free and Responsible Press,
1947.
"Your failure to be informed does not make me a wacko."
-- John Loeffler
The recent media orgy over the murder of members of the family of a Federal
judge who ruled against Matt Hale in a relatively trifling civil matter is
instructive on several levels.
First, the Lefkow murder affair demonstrates just how difficult it is for
the politically incorrect to catch a break in America because of media bias
against all who support White interests (whether or not to the detriment of
other races, which is the true distinction between White Supremacist and
White Separatist, never mind those of us who merely decry the unfairness of
racial preferences for anybody) and which indoctrinates the public,
intentionally inculcating a mob psychology - the very public from which are
drawn the members of all juries.
Second, reporting on the Lefkow murders laid bare the methodology of the
media bosses in creating the current climate of hostility toward the
politically incorrect in America.
Finally, the affair shows just how irrelevant is the truth to the attainment
of justice in modern America...including justice in the courts.
Geraldo and the other trained seals on Fox News ("Fair & Balanced"),
indeed, all the networks, including their pet panelists, were at a fever
pitch from the moment the story broke about Judge Lefkow finding her husband
and elderly mother murdered, execution style, in the basement of her Chicago
home. The police, other judges and all media poodles agreed that it had to
have been done by "White Supremacists," likely at the direction of Hale
himself. Anybody who disagreed (and there were only two who I noticed dare
to do so: Hale's mother and a personal friend named Kathy) was shouted down
and loudly denounced. "The acorn doesn't fall far from the tree - she's
just a bigot and a racist herself," shouted one Fox News ("Fair &
Balanced") panelist after Hale's mother speculated as to just who might
really be responsible. The Fox motto really should be: "We decide - You
follow," not "We report - you decide."
Of all the TV talking heads I saw, only Fox News' ("Fair & Balanced")
redoubtable Greta van Susteren seemed to maintain any sense of personal
equanimity, yet even she scheduled panelists who did the shouting for her.
Just as things got darkest and I heard one of the Fox News ("Fair & Balanced
") hosts mutter, "Somebody git a rope" (or at least it seemed I heard one
of them say something quite like it), I decided it was time to step forward
and defend Hale. Nobody else from the legal profession did so, nor has
anybody done so since Hale was exonerated of involvement with the murders.
That is when I issued "The Railroading of Matt Hale," going so far as to send
it to a large media list that I use perhaps once every couple of years for
high-profile cases.
I also used a couple of direct media contacts to try to get a spot on the
panels being televised on NBC's Dateline and all over Fox News ("Fair &
Balanced "). I had Hale's mother and friend, Kathy, relentlessly redirect
media people to me. I hoped to get an opportunity to provide the
counterpoint to the building lynch mob.
Guess how many calls I got from media people? Two. That's right, exactly
two. And, though I returned those calls immediately, neither of those
people has ever called back. Bottom line: absolutely nobody in the media
was interested in talking to the guy who will sit at counsel table with Hale
during the anticipated retrial.
Oh, I did get a response of sorts: a couple of the media people tried to
get my ISP to shut down my domain and my email accounts because of my
"racist and anti-Semitic beliefs."
Nobody was interested in hearing the truth about what was going on, in other
words. Nobody wanted anybody who could hold his own with the talking heads
and their lynch-mob panelists. That wasn't important or relevant to the
lynching then taking place.
Why should the media listen to me regarding Matt Hale's case? Good
question. Let me explain.
I was involved with Hale's case long before the criminal charge was lodged,
but only peripherally, via occasional email exchanges. After Hale was
arrested, I was approached to handle the trial, but declined because I did
not want to do what I thought absolutely necessary: live part time in
Chicago from then on and full time for the three months directly prior to
trial. I was, after all, not asking to be paid and cannot personally afford
such an adventure. Of course, I could have phoned in the defense that Hale
actually received from Thomas Durkin, the man who I personally checked out
and pronounced to be a good criminal defense lawyer with a great track
record in the Chicago courts.
Honestly, Durkin checked out as being top notch. Of course, there are those
persistent rumors these days about Durkin being Jewish and, therefore,
susceptible of a strong bias against an alleged "White Supremacist" like
Hale, who used an Israeli flag for a doormat at his home. Perhaps there is
more than simple incompetence to Durkin's denigration of his own client
throughout the trial and refusal to mount even a weak defense.
I consider the strongest basis of Hale's soon-to-be-filed appeal for a new
trial to be the recognized legal theory called "Ineffective Assistance of
Counsel." I don't think I ever have seen a stronger case to be made for
such an appeal. That doesn't mean Hale will be granted a new trial on
appeal, however, and almost certainly not in the first round. Remember that
the same Seventh-Circuit Appellate Court that (in my opinion, wrongfully)
overturned Judge Lefkow's original ruling in favor of Hale's
trademark-infringement argument will hear his criminal-conviction appeal.
The moment I heard that Hale's attorney had rested without calling a single
witness, let alone Hale himself, I called his mother to inquire about the
family's trial strategy. She said that Durkin insisted upon that strategy,
against the wishes of both Hale and his parents. Furthermore, she told me
that Durkin lied to Hale, telling him that his own father didn't want to
take the stand on Hale's behalf. Finally, she told me that Durkin claimed
that I wanted nothing further to do with the case. That, too, was a lie, as
I had told Durkin I would assist him in any way I could, including coming to
Chicago a time or two to assist with pretrial preparation and to assist him
full time during the impending trial. Durkin, of course, was not interested
in my assistance, even though I was willing to sit second chair through the
trial pro bono (for free), unlike Durkin, who was paid quite handsomely from
public donations and family funds. Unlike Durkin, I saw Hale's case as
being important to the interest of White civil rights. Why was Durkin lying
to his clients? The red lights on my panel begin to flash nonstop.
Then Hale's position was weakened further when he retained his cousin
attorney for the post-trial work. (Picture My Cousin Vinny, but without the
legal-secretary girlfriend.) Hale finally fired his cousin and hand wrote
his own post-trial motions, the deadlines for which had been allowed by his
cousin to lapse. The Judge, to his credit, reached the merits on some of
those motions, though he denied them all, including that for a new trial
based upon a theory of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.
Unwilling to see Hale railroaded any further, though likely helpless to
prevent it, I have agreed to handle his retrial, despite the geographic
distance. Possibly, I will try to appear for Hale at the upcoming
sentencing hearing, though that truly is something that could be phoned in.
Problem is, the court requires that I take on the case in full before I am
allowed any direct contact with Hale or any official role whatsoever. That,
in turn, blocks Hale from being appointed any public defenders in any role,
and I prefer that we have the help of a local public defender appellate
counsel in preparing the formal appeal.
And that is why the media should have allowed me to counter the scurrilous
assault it mounted on Matt Hale recently.
"Congratulations," said Greta van Susteren to Chicago's Chief of Police
after the real killer, Bart Ross (nee Bartlomiej Ciszewski) turned up in a
routine traffic stop in Wisconsin and promptly committed suicide.
Congratulations? For what? For stumbling around and feeding the media
frenzy focused on "White Supremacists," then finally lucking out and having
his case solved by a traffic cop in the next state?
Just yesterday, and in Minnesota, one state over from where Ross killed
himself, a man killed a judge and two others...in court and in broad
daylight. Bet you won't hear much, if anything, about this killing spree,
though. Why? The perp is Black. Doesn't fit the media profile, so move
along...nothing here for you to see...these are not the droids you're after.
Threats? Think the FBI really cares about death threats, for which it had
to entrap Hale (and then it botched the job in such a way that it could be
rescued only by Hale's defense lawyer abdicating his responsibility
altogether)? Think again. Else, they would have arrested and prosecuted
Mark Wiles, JDL henchman who, while working for the late and unlamentable
Irv Rubin, threatened me (go here for a part of the threatening message he
left on my machine at about the same time a female fellow traveler of his
was leaving death threats for my wife and each of my children - the comments
re my family being Jewish is a typical Jewish diversionary tactic). Though
I made a formal complaint with the FBI, they did nothing. This same Mark
Wiles showed up at the Aryan Nations trial in Idaho a few weeks later and,
catching me alone crossing the street next to the courthouse, physically
assaulted me (no battery - he pulled up short at the last possible moment).
Though I complained to both the FBI and the county sheriff, nothing was
done. Wiles still periodically pops up to harass me, usually via the
Internet. In fact, Wiles provided the inspiration for my new tag line in
one of those drills when, thinking to insult me, he said "AntiSemitism is a
disease." My immediate response? "Yes - you catch it from Jews."
Here's the way the FBI thinks (and it is a distinctly Jewish mindset,
courtesy of the ADL, which is inextricably intertwined with the FBI): Hale
is a bad guy, so he deserves to be taken down by any means. Let's entrap
him by sending in Tony Evola with a wire to suggest "getting" that "Jew rat"
judge for him.
By the way, few know how Hale came to know Evola. My ever-present paranoia
suggests FBI involvement right from the start. You see, Hale and his
followers regularly were assaulted and brutalized through the years by
Jewish thugs, just the sort of thugs that threatened my children, my wife
and myself. One night, Matt Hale was out by himself in Chicago and got set
upon by a few of these thugs, who proceeded to beat up Hale. Out of nowhere
comes Tony Evola, who cleans the clocks of these thugs, thereby rescuing
Hale from a likely hospital stay. The rest is history, as Hale came to
trust Evola implicitly, evidenced by naming Evola to be his Security Chief.
So, here's my paranoia in action: I think those Jewish thugs, from whom
Evola rescued Hale, were sent in by the FBI/ADL, too, just so that Evola
could ride in on a white horse and gain Hale's confidence...just so he could
later attempt to entrap Hale into the FBI scheme to "get" the "Jew rat"
judge.
Am I the only one who sees a distinct similarity between the Evola
entrapment scheme and the original trademark business, by the way, wherein
the ADL engineered, financed and ran the trademark application and
subsequent prosecution of Hale's World Church of the Creator, which was
using the name long before the trademark was applied for by that sham Oregon
corporation?
Up popped Hale's civil lawyer, Glenn Greenwald, just as the media lynch mob
was speculating that Hale probably engineered the killings through coded
messages he passed to followers. Greenwald conveniently reported, according
to Fox News ("Fair & Balanced"), that Hale did attempt to pass just such a
coded message through him, delivered by his mother. What he conveniently
left out, however, was that it was instructions for Greenwald to line up a
witness from the trademark case for the conspiracy case.
Now, where I come from, it is an ethical violation for a lawyer to disclose
an attorney-client-privileged communication. That Greenwald's marching
orders came via Hale's mother did not strip the communication of that
privilege. Nor did the fact that he was too much of a dolt to make sense of
it render it violable. An attorney may divulge such a privileged
communication in one circumstance only: when he reasonably believes that it
concerns a future (not past) crime. Greenwald plainly stated on TV that he
had no idea what the message concerned. So, you have to ask yourself why he
not only was violating the attorney-client privilege, but doing so by
calling a press conference and holding forth on Fox News Channel ("Fair &
Balanced"). And...why didn't he tell the feds when it happened rather
than waiting until the media lynching reached a fever pitch about the
possibility of coded messages from Hale directing the hit on Lefkow's
husband and mother? Can you say "fifteen minutes of fame?" Greenwald took
advantage of his client for his own self aggrandizement. Shut up and sit
down, Greenwald. Oh, and get your story ready for the state Bar
disciplinary proceeding. Incidentally, did you know that Greenwald is a
Jewish name, by the way? Do you believe in coincidence?
Why did Hale use his Captain Midnight decoder ring in attempting to
communicate with Greenwald? Because he was denied direct access to him and,
in fact, is denied unsupervised access to any lawyer - how else was he to
keep confidential his legal strategy for the criminal trial? Now that Hale
has been shown to be innocent of soliciting the murder of Lefkow's family
members, is there any other possible interpretation of what he did? Are you
beginning to see how he got convicted of conspiring to murder Judge Lefkow
in the first place? Nope, there is nothing wrong with your reception.
Finally, you are beginning to get the picture, loud and clear. Finally.
Thanks to Bart Ross' pulling the curtain down as he fell, disclosing the
wizened little man (think media boss) manipulating the levers.
I can't let this subject go without addressing the incessant media
allegations that "some white supremacists (were) celebrating the deaths of
the judge's husband and mother." I know white supremacists. I looked all
over, in all the nooks and crannies of the Internet. Yes, there was a wacko
or two mentioning that Judge Lefkow got her just desserts, but there
certainly was nothing to support the wild media allegations of rampant White
Nationalist gloating. More media spin and a part of the lynching being
orchestrated from on high (wizened little hook-nosed man behind the
curtain).
As with the Columbine School killing coverage, once again we see a Jew
(Ross, nee Ciszewski) killing others, while the media frenetically blames
its favorite whipping boys: Nazis and White Supremacists. Ironically, this
particular Jew called the target of his malice a Nazi, then proceeded to
kill another Jew! Revenge by murder is a particularly Jewish trait - just
ask the 20-80 million (depending upon whom you believe) White Christians
slaughtered in Russia early last century. Oh, wait, you can't...because
they're all dead.
The Chicago Sun-Times had an on-line poll available until it became clear
that Hale had nothing to do with the Lefkow murders - it was running 2/3 to
1/3, favoring those who believed Hale engineered the murders. On no
evidence. None. Nada. Do you see how juries manage to convict the
politically incorrect almost every time they get one for a defendant? More
than once I personally have seen that dark horse ridden through a courtroom.
I theorize that none of the jury members want to go home and explain to
family and friends how they voted to let such a bad person go free. So what
if the evidence didn't support this conviction? He's a White Supremacist.
He's a bad guy, Dan Rather said so, so he deserved it. That's the mentality
behind an entrapment, of course, of which Hale now has suffered at least
two: trademark infringement and conspiracy to commit murder. I see the
fine hand of the ADL at work in both instances.
A lynching, just like the one you saw Matt Hale undergoing last week, is the
logical and designed result of trial by media, of course. What? You
thought it was accidental? That it was just the result of the media going
for the sensational story? Wrong. Multiple rape/murders are pretty
sensational, yet they happen all the time, all across America and the media
doesn't tell you a thing about them...because they almost always are Black
or Mexican or homosexual on White, that's why. Heaven knows, you hear about
every single White murderer the media can get its hands on. And guys the
media pins the tail on, regardless of guilt or innocence...guys like Matt
Hale. Move along...nothing here for you to see...these are not the droids
you're after.
New America. An idea whose time has come.
EDGAR STEELE
_________________________________
Edgar J. Steele, noted White-civil-rights attorney, is the author of
Defensive Racism - An Unapologetic Examination of Racial Differences, now
available through www.Amazon.com, though you can get a $5 discount by
ordering directly from the publisher. Visit www.DefensiveRacism.com for
more information.
|