The LaRouche criminal trial in the mid-1980s stems from federal and state investigations into the activities of American political activist Lyndon LaRouche and members of his movement. They are accused of conspiracy to commit fraud and ask for a loan that they have no intention of paying back. LaRouche and his supporters denied the allegations, claiming that the trials were politically motivated.
In 1986, hundreds of state and federal officials stormed LaRouche offices in Virginia and Massachusetts. The federal grand jury in Boston, Massachusetts, charges LaRouche and 12 partners in credit card fraud and impediment to justice. The next trial, described as an "extravaganza", was repeatedly postponed and ended with the cancellation of the trial. After the cancellation of the trial, a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, accused LaRouche and six of his colleagues. After a brief trial in 1988, LaRouche was convicted of mail fraud, conspiracy to fraudulent mail, and tax evasion, and was sentenced to fifteen years in prison. He went to jail in 1989 and was released five years later. At the same hearing, his colleagues received lower penalties for mail fraud and conspiracy. In separate state trials in Virginia and New York, 13 partners received terms ranging from one month to 77 years. Virginia state courts are described as high-ranking cases once prosecuted by the state prosecutor's office. Fourteen countries issued orders against organizations associated with LaRouche. The three organizations linked to LaRouche were forced to bankrupt after failing to pay a court fine.
Defense lawyers have offered a lot of failed appeals that challenge grand jury behavior, fines of humiliation, the execution of search warrants and court proceedings. At least ten appeals are heard by the US appeals court, and three appeals are filed to the US Supreme Court. Former US Attorney Ramsey Clark joins defense team for two appeals. Following the belief, LaRouche's movement stuck to the failed attempts to break free.
Video LaRouche criminal trials
​​â € <â €
Beginning in the late 1960s and early 1970s, Lyndon LaRouche established various political organizations, including the US Labor Party and the National Democratic Policy Committee. These organizations served as platforms for LaRouche's presidential campaign starting in 1976, and by his followers in a number of local races. According to one of the candidates, supporters view LaRouche as "the 20th century's greatest political and economic leader, and they are proud to be associated with it, feeling that they are leading the battle to save Western civilization." The Survey of Jewish Affairs, 1987 calls LaRouche's movement one of the two most prominent "extremist political groups" of 1986.
The greatest election success of this movement occurred in 1986 when two supporters, Janice Hart and Mark J. Fairchild, won the Democratic Party's nomination for the Secretary of State and the Illinois Lieutenant Governor. Both lost the election. Also in 1986, the "Prevent AIDS Now Initiative Committee" (PANIC) got the initiative on the California ballot, Proposition 64 (also known as "LaRouche Initiative"), which drew broad opposition and was defeated in November.
Maps LaRouche criminal trials
Investigation
Early 1980s
According to an argument made by LaRouche lawyers in subsequent appeals, a government inquiry began under the FBI COFELPRO in the 1960s. Edward Spannaus, a defendant in the trial, noted further that there was a memorandum written on 12 January 1983, by former FBI chief William Webster to Oliver "Buck" Revell, head of the Bureau's Public Investigation Division. They requested information about the funding of LaRouche and the US Labor Party, including whether the US Labor Party might be funded by a hostile intelligence service. The LaRouche Organization insists that this formulation is specifically tailored to allow the FBI to "take active action" against LaRouche under the 12333 Executive Order, which allows such action if the political movement receives foreign funds. The memo was finally obtained by LaRouche's lawyer and handed over as an exhibition at the trial of LaRouche and the defendants in Boston in 1987.
In August 1982, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger sent a memo to Webster requesting an investigation into the LaRouche movement for their "increasingly irritating" harassment, raised at a meeting that day of the Advisory Board of Foreign Intelligence President by senior member David Abshire. Revell answered Kissinger that there was enough evidence to proceed with the investigation. The FBI conducted an investigation but found no evidence of Kissinger's civil rights violations. The investigation closed in late 1983.
Mid-1980s
In the mid-1980s, the US government and eleven states began investigating alleged financial irregularities by LaRouche groups. The federal grand jury reportedly began investigating the "vast national credit card fraud pattern" by the LaRouche organization in November 1984. That same year, the New Jersey bank froze LaRouche's presidential campaign account in 1984 for allegedly cheating credit cards.
In January 1985, the grand jury in Boston, Massachusetts, subpoena documents from the National Democratic Policy Committee (NDPC), and three other LaRouche organizations: Caucus Distributors Inc., the Fusion Energy Foundation, and Campaigner Publications Inc. Seven weeks later, on March 29, 1985, US District Court Judge A. David Mazzone arrested them for insulting and fined them $ 45,000 per day. Fines for all organizations end up totaling more than $ 20 million. The same grand jury called Elliot I. Greenspan, an official from Caucus Distributors Inc., to appear but he begged the Fifth Amendment and refused to testify. He was given immunity and was forced to testify but only did so after being imprisoned for two days of contempt. A spokesman for LaRouche called the investigation a "political terror operation".
Investigations by separate federal juries in Alexandria, Virginia, along with state institutions in New York, California, Minnesota, Illinois and Washington are also ongoing. The FBI, IRS, FEC and other federal agency personnel are conducting a separate investigation. The Internal Revenue Service withdrew the tax-exempt status of the Fusion Energy Foundation in September 1985, and a year later the State of New York attempted to disperse the corporation, alleging that the company was using a "constantly cheating and illegal" way to ask for donations. US lawyer William Weld announced in January 1986 that he would hold a national conference "to coordinate prosecutive and investigative efforts" against LaRouche. The conference was held the following month in Boston. The three states, Alaska, Indiana and Maryland, prohibit fundraising by Caucus Distributors Inc. in May 1986, due to the sale of unregistered promissory notes. The Illinois Foreign Minister started a civil process against Caucus Distributors Inc. in June 1986, looking for orders to ban deceptive business practices. Minnesota officials banned "Independent Democrats for LaRouche" from fundraising, an order affirmed on appeal to the US Supreme Court.
LaRouche lawyers filed a series of civil suits related to individuals, agencies, and businesses. They demanded Weld and former Attorney General William French Smith to try to stop the FBI's investigation of a credit card case. They sued a New Jersey bank that had frozen their credit card merchant account; and they sued Chemical Bank with the same demands. Edward Spannaus, a treasurer for the LaRouche campaign, filed a complaint with state and US Department of Justice bars against one of the US Attorneys Assistants in the case.
Raid and indictment
Starting October 6, 1986, Leesburg, Virginia, the headquarters of the LaRouche organization was ransacked in a two-day, coordinated attack by hundreds of FBI officers, the IRS, other federal agencies, and Virginia state authorities, backed by armored cars and a helicopter. The agents also surrounded LaRouche's heavily fortified realm during the search but did not include it. While surrounded, LaRouche sent a telegram to President Ronald Reagan saying that attempts to arrest him "would be an attempt to kill me I would not be passively subjected to such an arrest, but... I would defend myself". He then assures that he will comply peacefully with any warrant. The LaRouche office in Quincy, Massachusetts was also ransacked. US lawyer Henry E. Hudson held a press conference to say that the search has rediscovered undisclosed items, including notebooks and index cards.
Warren J. Hamerman, Chairman of the NDPC, said the search "was done by Donald Regan's William Weld's army of Lyndon LaRouche's presidential headquarters to coincide with Don Regan's desperate attempt to maintain detention against AIDS." LaRouche later said that the Soviet Prime Minister had ordered the attack as part of an assassination attempt. "The man with the mark of the beast on his head, Mikhail Gorbachov, has demanded my abolition," LaRouche said. In his autobiography of 1987, he wrote that the attack was commanded by Raisa Gorbachev, whom he described surpassing her husband in nomenklatura because of his leadership of the Soviet Cultural Fund.
On the same day as the Leesburg search, Boston's grand jury dropped a 117-count indictment mentioning the ten associations of LaRouche, two companies, and three campaign committees. Authorities accused them of making invalid credit costs cheated $ 1 million from more than 1,000 people. The allegations also include a scheme to raise funds by asking for a loan without intending to pay back. The National Caucus Committee of the Labor Party is accused, along with others, of conspiring to hinder justice. Prosecutors alleged that the defendant had burned records, sent a potential grand jury candidate abroad, and failed to provide the evidence presented. The indictment quotes LaRouche as telling a partner that, in reaction to a legal matter, "we will gain time, bind them in court... just keep stalling, stalling and appealing, stalling and appealing." Three of the accused colleagues are still free to roam for more than a year, and investigators are suspected of being given false information. On June 30, 1987, a US grand jury in Boston charged LaRouche with one count of conspiracy to impede justice.
Meanwhile, state cases are progressing. On February 16, 1987, the Commonwealth of Virginia charged 16 LaRouche associates on securities fraud and other crimes. On March 3, 1987, the State of New York indicted 15 LaRouche associations on allegations of grand theft and securities fraud.
Bankruptcy librarian
In early April 1987, the government alleged in court that the LaRouche organization might have tried to sell the property to make cash easier to hide their assets and avoid paying $ 21.4 million as a court fine. The US Department of Justice filed for a voluntary bankruptcy application on April 20, 1987, to collect debts from Caucus Distributors Inc., the Fusion Energy Foundation, and Campaigner Publications Inc. In a rare procedure, the companies were confiscated before the bankruptcy came to court.. Assistant US Attorney S. David Schiller wrote briefly that the debtor has "a pattern of transferring or mixing many of the company's assets to its members and other insiders for little or no consideration and for non-business purposes". Supervisors then report that they can only find about $ 86,000 in assets.
Bankruptcy stopped publication of weekly newspapers, New Solidarity , and bi-monthly science magazine, Fusion . At least one publication, Fusion , was reborn with a new name but the same editor and material.
Lawyers representing LaRouche entities in the bankruptcy hearing filed a brief statement that the action was unprecedented and inappropriate, alleging that it deviated from the standard rule of forced bankruptcy, and that members of the Alexandria prosecution team from a second criminal trial were involved in the planning and execution of bankruptcy.
During a bankruptcy hearing in September 1989, an FBI agent destroyed evidence (credit card receipts, canceled checks, and FEC filings) as soon as he promised the court that he would preserve it. On October 25, 1989, Judge Martin V.B. Bostetter rejected the government's forced bankruptcy petition, discovering that two of the entities involved were non-profit fundraisers and therefore not subject to the act of forced bankruptcy. According to the LaRouche movement, Bostetter said the government's actions led to bad faith regardless of whether government agencies and prosecutors had intended this outcome. He found that government action and representation in obtaining bankruptcy had a misleading effect of the courts for the status of the organization, leading to "constructive deception in court". In 1993, the appeals court decision stated that Bostetter specifically rejected the view, saying that the defendants "deviated significantly from the character of much of the evidence". An appeal filed with the US Supreme Court found that a deliberate bankruptcy issue would not alter the outcome of LaRouche's conviction.
The LaRouche Organization affirms that it has evidence, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, which indicates that the purpose of bankruptcy is simply to cover the affected entity rather than collecting fines. US lawyers say, "Essentially the court stated that we did not abuse the bankruptcy filing, only we should have applied differently." He also noted that only a small amount of money was collected.
Boston trial
Frankhouser Trial
US District Judge Robert Keeton took the lead in Boston. The jury selection was completed in September 1987. Before the trial began, Keeton gave a motion to break the Roy Frankhouser case, whose case was first trial before a different jury. Frankhouser had been an informant for ATF and other law enforcement agencies, in addition to being a neo-Nazi and former Pennsylvania dragon Ku Ku Klux Klan. Frankhouser became a security consultant for LaRouche after assuring him that he was actively connected with US intelligence agencies.
In AS. v. Frankhauser, Frankhouser testified that he and the security officer of LaRouche, Forrest Lee Fick, had created a connection to the CIA to justify a salary of $ 700 per week. They persuaded a friend to play a former CIA official ("Mr. Ed") in a meeting with LaRouche colleagues who, according to LaRouche group lawyers, came to believe they had a direct line of communication to the White House and the Kremlin through Mr. Ed and - national power in security matters "- immune from prosecution. When LaRouche found out about a grand jury investigation, he reportedly told Frankhouser to have the CIA cancel it. Frankhouser told LaRouche that the CIA wanted him to destroy the evidence and hide the witness. Frankhouser claimed that on another occasion LaRouche sent him to Boston to check the grand jury investigation. Instead of going to Boston, he went to the Star Trek convention in Scranton, Pennsylvania and called to warn LaRouche that the FBI had tapped his phone. LaRouche was summoned as a defense witness in Frankhouser's trial but he refused to testify, carry out his Fifth Amendment to avoid self-torture.
Frankhouser was found guilty of the obstruction of a federal investigation of credit card fraud. He was sentenced to three years and a $ 50,000 fine. After his conviction, he was granted immunity against further prosecution and was forced to testify against LaRouche in a Boston trial. Frankhouser appealed his conviction on April 3, 1989, arguing that his case should not be decided from the main case, that his advisors did not have enough time to prepare, and that he was not provided with evidence deemed to rule out. Appeal rejected in July.
LaRouche Trial, et al.
LaRouche Court and six other defendants, US. v. LaRouche Campaign , commencing on December 17, 1987, with a jury selected in September, prior to the Frankhouser trial. The 12 defense lawyers made 400 pretrial movements.
Prosecutors argue that pressure to fill the fundraising quota has led to 2,000 instances of credit card fraud, and members of the organization are trying to block the investigation. The defendants filed a case that the prosecution was the culmination of a 20-year campaign of abuse by the FBI and the CIA, and that prosecutors acted on CIA orders when they destroyed evidence and hid witnesses.
During the trial, the search for Oliver North's private files was ordered by a Keeton Judge to find evidence that the North had led an attempt to harass and infiltrate LaRouche's movement, causing additional delay in the trial. The search resulted in the May 1986 telex of the Iran-Contra defendant, General Richard Secord to the North, discussing information gathering against LaRouche. After this memo appeared, Judge Keeton ordered the search of Vice President George Bush's office for documents relating to LaRouche. Another delay came when the trial was stopped to allow the FBI time to search their files for pardon documents. The trial was postponed again when a federal agent confiscated LaRouche property as part of an accidental bankruptcy procedure in 1988.
Originally expected to last from three to six months, the trial runs longer. A local journalist called the Boston trials a "long, complicated and expensive extravaganza multidefendant." After several jurors asked to be forgiven for the length of the trial, the defense refused to continue with less than 12 jurors, forcing the judge to declare a hearing on 4 May 1988. According to one judge, all defendants, including LaRouche, would be found not guilty. He told a reporter "it seems some government people are causing problems", and that people working on behalf of the government "may have been involved in some of these scams to discredit the campaign." At the time of the cancellation of the trial, a spokesman said that the Defense Fund of the Constitution, a LaRouche organization, has spent more than $ 2 million on legal and administrative costs. Defense lawyers say they will appeal if the government seeks a new trial.
A re-trial in Boston was scheduled on January 3, 1989, but the allegations were canceled after Alexandria's conviction; this is an objection from LaRouche lawyers who say they seek justification. Assistant US Attorney for the Boston and Alexandria case said after the dismissal, "This is a Boston prosecution effort that leads to evidence that allows for conviction and conviction in Alexandria, and I think that justice is served by substantial penalties accepted."
During the trial, three defendants were fugitives: Michael Gelber, Charles Park, and Richard Sanders. According to Roy Frankhouser, they have been sent to Europe. They surrendered to the courts in 1990 and were sentenced by a Keeton Judge each one year for blocking an investigation.
Related appeals
On July 3, 1986, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the contempt of court fines from Boston's grand jury. The decision was filed with the US Supreme Court, which allowed him to stand. The First Circuit Court overheard an appeal on September 11, 1987, accused the abuse of the grand jury and denied it six days later. On November 3, 1987, six organizations affiliated with LaRouche argued that their documents were improperly confiscated during the October 1986 search. The court rejected the appeal in January next. Jeffrey Steinberg said on December 11, 1987, that 100 notebooks compiled by himself and his wife should not be included in a jury or search warrant. He lost that appeal in January next. The court heard an appeal from NBC on January 5, 1988, on a lower court dialing letter from NBC after a video interview with witness, Forrest Lee Fick. The lower court ruled that the abused censorship would be placed under the seal and could only be examined by the camera, giving court discretion whether to release any part to the defendant. LaRouche has confirmed that its use can be used to indict Fick's testimony. The court confirmed a lower court ruling in March.
After the cancellation of the trial in Boston, the prosecutor moved in to schedule a new trial. LaRouche and other defendants appealed for the effort on 5 October 1988, saying that a new trial would create a double danger. Appeals rejected four months later. The humiliation of court fines was filed again on January 9, 1989, and was reaffirmed on March 29. Following a conviction in an Alexandrian court, prosecutors dismissed allegations from a Boston court, canceling a retrial. Lawyer LaRouche appealed the decision on 13 March 1989, arguing that they needed a court to release LaRouche.
Alexandria Court
Judge Albert V. Bryan Jr. leading US. v. LaRouche in US District Court for Eastern District of Virginia, where LaRouche lives. The tribunal was known as a "rocket mapet" because of its speed in disposing of cases. LaRouche and six colleagues were indicted on October 14, 1988 on allegations of letter fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud. The trial is scheduled for six weeks after the indictment. The defense attorney made an unusual appeal for a delay, which was rejected.
Judge Bryan gave the prosecutor in limine, ruled that the defense would not be allowed to discuss, or even offend, the fact that the indebted entity had been placed in an accidental bankruptcy. It also excludes claims of prosecution and political harassment by the government. Bryan writes, "the court will not allow to investigate the details of the alleged infiltration... for this reason... it will divert the jury from the matter raised in the indictment."
The prosecution, led by US Attorney-General Kent Robinson, presented evidence that LaRouche and his staff demanded a $ 34 million loan from 1983 on false guarantees to potential lenders and showed "reckless indifference to the truth". In his opening statement for the trial, Robinson said, "A jury member, this case is about money.This is about how the defendants got the money, and to a lesser extent, what they did with the money when they got it... The defendants, all three, are accused of being involved in a fraudulent scheme, meaning to get the loan by making false promises, false excuses, telling things to potential lenders that they know are not true. "
The most important evidence is the testimony of lenders, many of whom have retired, who have lent a total of $ 661,300 to help LaRouche fight the "fight against drugs" but only receive $ 10,000 in payments. One prosecutor, John Markham, said the loan represented "only a fraction of unpaid loans". Another testimony confirms that, by 1987, half of the $ 4 million borrowed by the 1984 presidential campaign had not been paid, and only $ 5 million had been paid out of $ 30 million in non-campaign loans. LaRouche's supporters claim the unpaid amount is $ 294,000 but, according to court testimony, the amount owed in 1987 was $ 25 million.
Some witnesses are LaRouche followers who testify under immunity from prosecution. A former fundraiser testified that he was told, "No matter what the person you are talking to, get the money. [...] If you talk to an unemployed worker who says he has to feed... a dozen kids , forget it.Get the money Most of these people are immoral.This is the most moral thing they ever do is give you money. "
None of the defendants testified. Outside the court, LaRouche denies all of these allegations, calling them "an all-out framework by state and federal forces," and says that the federal government is trying to kill it. "The purpose of this frame is not to send me to prison.This is to kill me," LaRouche said. "In prison it's pretty easy to kill me... If this line works, I'll die."
Income tax
One of the charges against LaRouche was that he conspired to avoid paying income taxes, not applying for a return within ten years. LaRouche claimed to have no income. LaRouche lives on a 172 acre plantation (700,000 m 2 ) near Leesburg, Virginia, with swimming and horse rings. It was purchased for use by Oklahoma oilman David Nick Anderson for $ 1.3 million, with the LaRouche organization paying the rent to cover $ 9605 mortgage. LaRouche has named the property, otherwise known as Ellwood, "Ibykus Farm" after working by Friedrich Schiller. His wife, Helga LaRouche, is reported to have overseen hundreds of thousands of dollars in property renovations. Overall, the LaRouche group spent over US $ 4 million on Virginia real estate during this period, according to court testimony. The LaRouche Defense argues that Ibykus Farm is the "safe house" needed for LaRouche and other security. The government believes that security spending is a "misplaced priority."
In 1985, a judge in a separate case has described LaRouche's testimony of almost no money as "totally lacking in credibility". In 1986, in the same case, LaRouche said he did not know who paid rent on the estate, or for his food, lodging, clothing, transportation, bodyguards or lawyers since 1973. The judge fined him for failing to answer..
Conviction and prisononment
On December 16, 1988, LaRouche was found guilty of conspiracy to commit mail fraud involving more than $ 30 million in default loans; 11 total fraudulent letters involving $ 294,000 in bad debts; and one conspiracy to deceive the U.S. Internal Revenue Service The judge said that the demand for revenge was a "nonsense arrangement", and that, "the idea that this organization is a sufficient threat to everything that would guarantee the government bring the prosecution to silence them only against human experience." Judge Horton Horton's jury told The Washington Post that it was the failure of LaRouche's maids to repay the jury-shaking loan in the Virginia case. He said that the jury "all agree [LaRouche] is not judged for his political convictions, we do not punish him for it, he was convicted on 13 charges that he was tried."
As part of the trial in Alexandria, six associates of LaRouche were also found guilty. The main funder, William Wertz, was convicted of ten fraud letters. LaRouche's lawyer and treasurer Edward Spannaus, along with fund-raising operators Dennis Small, Paul Greenberg, Michael Billington, and Joyce Rubinstein, were found guilty of conspiracy to fraudulent mail. Wertz and Spannaus were sentenced to five years in prison each, with Spannaus serving a total of two and a half years until his release from detention. Both were fined $ 1,000. The others received a period of three years and various fines.
While in LaRouche prison released a claim that he was tortured as part of an assassination attempt. LaRouche runs two political campaigns from prison: to the 10th Congress District in Virginia in 1990 and to the US President in 1992. One of his cellmates during his detention at Federal Medical Center, Rochester in Minnesota was televangelist Jim Bakker. Bakker then devotes a chapter to his book, I Was Wrong , for his experience with LaRouche. Bakker describes his amazement at LaRouche's detailed knowledge of the Bible. According to Bakker, LaRouche receives daily briefings every morning over the phone, often in German, and more than once LaRouche has days of information before it is reported on network news. Bakker also wrote that his cellmate believed that their cells were tapped. In Bakker's view, "to say LaRouche is a bit paranoid would be like saying that the Titanic has a little leak." LaRouche also befriended Richard Miller, a former FBI agent and fellow inmate imprisoned on espionage charges. LaRouche was released in 1994 after serving a five-year sentence of 15 years, a normal schedule for parole at the time. LaRouche later commented that "... basically, George H. W. Bush put me in a pitcher, and Bill Clinton took me out".
Appeal of confidence
The defendants in the Alexandria trial appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on October 6, 1989. Former US Attorney Ramsey Clark joined the defense team, who argued that there were six mistakes in the trial. In the words of the Circuit Court opinion, the alleged error is:
- District courts are mistaken in refusing their motion for continuation of the trial date.
- District courts mistakenly deny their invention requests for waiver materials.
- District courts make numerous verdicts, in limine and in court, which unconstitutionally limits their ability to defend against charges.
- The court judge failed to do voir dire enough to create an unbiased judge and improperly failed to forgive some judges for reasons.
- The number of email scams is not combined with the amount of tax conspiracy.
- Sentences dropped on LaRouche are exaggerated.
- The district court misinterpreted the jury for the amount of tax.
- District courts are mistaken in allowing the introduction of illegally seized evidence.
Seventeen amicus curiae ("friend of the court") report submitted on appeal. One, by Albert Bleckmann, director of the Institute of Public Law and Political Science at the University of MÃÆ'¼nster, objected to the lack of voir dire , the exclusion of evidence under the motion of in limina , the fact that the government did not approached LaRouche about his tax situation before indicting him for tax breaches, and concerns about double dangers due to similar accusations in the courts of Boston and Alexandria. Brief by French lawyers said that, "crime of thought seems to have been disguised as a crime of common law." Notable amicus senders include: James Robert Mann, Charles E. Rice, Jay Alan Sekulow and George P. Monaghan.
The three-judge panel reviewed and rejected each item, confirming the convictions and sentences of the accused unanimously on January 22, 1990. Five months later the US Supreme Court refused to review the case.
Country trials
Virginia Attorney General Mary Sue Terry charged eight LaRouche organizations with allegations of securities fraud related to $ 30 million in loans. The first trial was conducted at Leesburg, but later the trial moved to the larger city of Roanoke. In order for the trial to proceed, a decision by the State Corporation (SCC) is required to verify that the loan requested by the LaRouche organization is securities. Lawyers for the LaRouche organization argue that a ban to raise funds through loans will violate their First Amendment rights. The SCC rejected the argument and decided, on March 4, 1987, that the promissory note was a securities. They ordered six LaRouche organizations - Fusion Energy Foundation Inc., Caucus Distributors Inc., Publications and General Management Inc., Campaigner Publications Inc., EIR News Service Inc. and Publication Equities Inc. - to stop their sales. Five other countries have issued orders, and 14 countries have finally followed suit. At least one order, by the State of Minnesota against the Independent Democrats for LaRouche, was submitted to the US Supreme Court, which confirms a lower court ruling.
Six of LaRouche's colleagues were convicted and two others pleaded guilty. Rochelle Ascher, a fundraiser, was sentenced in Leesburg for 86 years (reduced to 10 years) for six charges by selling fake securities and one count each selling unregistered security with the intent to cheat, selling security by unregistered agents with intent for cheating, and conspiracy to commit security fraud. In two Roanoke trials, four other colleagues were found guilty of allegations of securities fraud: Donald Phau, Lawrence Hecht, Paul Gallagher and Anita Gallagher. Richard Welsh and Martha M. Quinde plead guilty and receive 12 months and one month, respectively.
Michael Billington was indicted in Roanoke court by consciously requesting 131 loans that would never be paid back from 85 people, for a total of $ 1.24 million. Represented by a court-appointed lawyer, he rejected a plea bargain that would limit his three-year prison sentence he had served in a federal case. The lawyer, Brian Gettings, doubts Billington's competence and tells the court that he believes LaRouche makes a decision in this case rather than his client. The court ordered two psychiatric tests. The first doctor considered him competent. Billington refused to cooperate with a second examination to be performed by a cult expert. Billington sought to fire Gettings, who had tried to quit over competence questions, but the judge refused to allow Billington to replace different lawyers. A spokeswoman for LaRouche said that Billington was prepared for trial. Billington was found guilty of nine allegations of "conspiracy to fail to register as a securities broker". Under the Virginia court system, the jury determines a prison sentence even if the judge can override the jury's recommendation. The jury in this case recommends 77 years (out of a possible 90); The judge refused to let him down because Billington kept insisting on innocence (which the judge deemed less regrettable) and because he had warned that he would accept a jury recommendation if Billington asked for a jury trial. Billington served ten years in prison before being released on parole. The main prosecutor said the case involved "intentional and massive scams that have caused many people to suffer".
A trial in a New York state court on fraudulent charges against fraud resulted in Robert Primack's beliefs, Marielle Kronberg and Lynne Speed.
Reactions from LaRouche and supporters
"My criminal case is the American Dreyfus," LaRouche said in an interview in January 1989 from prison. Prosecutors reject claims of conspiracy, describing the theory as "Orwellian fantasy... that we are hiding some supersecret spy plan which, if exposed, will free them". LaRouche's supporters insisted that LaRouche was imprisoned, not for violation of the law, but because of his conviction.
LaRouche is also suspected of systematic mistakes of government:
The records show, that for almost thirty years, elements of the US Department of Justice have been involved in political targeting around the world about me and my colleagues. These include the early 1970s operations co-run with US Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger. Over the past ten years or so of that period, several US officials, and others, have challenged related institutions with some evidence showing that prosecutions and harassment associated with me and my colleagues have been clearly cheated, politically motivated targeting.
LaRouche and his lawyers affirm that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is seeking to destroy its organization, and that prosecution is the result of a conspiracy between ADLs, the government and the media. This claim comes from a series of meetings that LaRouche publications refer to as John Train's "Salon".
In a testimony submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 13, 1998, LaRouche-affiliated Schiller Institute claimed that "[t] its inability to repay lenders and other creditors [sic] is a consequence of an unprecedented spontaneous bankruptcy initiated by Courts The department against those companies in 1987, started in an ex parte , in camera continued ".
Friedrich August Freiherr von der Heydte, a professor of constitutional and international law at the University of Mainz in Germany, compares the LaRouche trial to the Dreyfus affair, which he calls "the classic example of political trials". He wrote, "Just like LaRouche, French Captain Alfred Dreyfus was usurped by the procedural structure of the proceedings, from every opportunity to prove his innocence, and important facts for his defense were expelled from the trial."
On November 8, 1991, Angelo Vidal d'Almeida Ribeiro, Special Rapporteur for the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, made a request to the US Government based on complaints filed regarding the LaRouche case. The US government responded by saying that LaRouche has been given legal proceedings under US law. The UN Commission does not take any further action.
Exploit attempts
Ramsey Clark wrote a letter in 1995 to the Attorney General, Janet Reno, where he said that the case involved "deliberate and systematic mistakes and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an attempt to destroy a political movement and a leader rather than a claimant other federal in my time or for my knowledge ". He asserted that, "The government, the ex parte, seeks and receives orders that effectively close the doors of this publishing business, all of which are involved in the activities of the First Amendment, effectively preventing further payments on their debts." He referred to the belief as "a tragic injustice that can only be corrected by objective review and courageous action by the Department of Justice". The LaRouche Movement organizes two panels to review cases: the Curtis Clark Commission, and the Mann-Chestnut trial.
On September 18, 1996, a full-page ad appeared on NewRegist, LaRouche publications, and The Washington Post and Roll Call. Entitled "Call Official for LaRouche Liberation", its signatories include Arturo Frondizi, former President of Argentina; figures from the 1960s American Civil Rights Movement such as Amelia Boynton Robinson (a Larouche-affiliated Schiller Institute leader), James Bevel (a participant of the Larouche movement) and Rosa Parks; former Minnesota Senator and Democratic Presidential Candidate Eugene McCarthy; Mervyn M. Dymally, who heads the Congressional Black Caucus; and artists such as classical vocalist William Warfield and violinist Norbert Brainin, the former first Violin of Amadeus Quartet.
Next development
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments