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 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 J. Steele, noted White-civil-rights attorney, is the author of Defensive Racism - An Unapologetic Examination of Racial Differences, now available through, though you can get a $5 discount by ordering directly from the publisher. Visit for more information.

Back to VNN Main Page