October 13, 2016 Posted by: Bill Duvall


Cases Repeatedly Decided In Favor of U.S. Government

Adapted from an article by Pat Shannan, Editor

Those of us who attempt to keep ourselves aware of on-going litigation in the nation’s highest courts are frequently amazed at the obvious bias exhibited by the presiding judges in favor of the prosecution.

Federal statutes show how and why U.S. law encourages judicial conflicts of interest, non-neutrality, non-impartiality and corruption of justice in the federal courts. One need simply read United States Title 5, Chapter 45, Subchapter 1, page 2 to understand how our U.S. Government encourages

judges to find in its favor.

How can the federal judiciary be independent and impartial when the law permits the federal government to secretly award judges up to $25,000 in undisclosed secret “cash awards,” and to privately, secretly and erroneously overpay them up to $10,000, then waive these erroneous overpayments?

How can any defendant be found innocent or guilty beyond a reasonable doubt when such statutory cash award provisions create an incentive for these judges to find for the prosecution? These questions and others will be answered by the U.S. District Court in Portland, Oregon following a lawsuit naming multiple defendants in the Department of Justice including Judge Anna J. Brown, who presided over a trial of “conspiracy to impede the IRS” last November.

In that case, defendant Roy Bendshadler’s attorney Nancy Bergeson had complained of suspected jury tampering and was found strangled to death in her Portland home the next day. Her cause of death was at first passed off as natural causes until a second medical examiner changed it to homicide. The murder is unsolved.

The jury tampering action was filed by Michael Sean Mungovan, one of five convicted in the above 2009 case. Mungovan was sentenced to four years in prison on July 28. This was an hour after he had served Judge Brown with a copy of the suit, which should have legally restricted her from any sentencing action over him until it was resolved.

None of this is new to the IRS. Its manual on Delegation of Orders provides for monetary awards “of up to and including $5,000, for any one individual employee or group of employees in his/her immediate office, including field employees, engaged in National Office projects; and contributions of employees of other government agencies and armed forces members.”

This would include U.S. District Court judges and U.S. attorneys.

The Mungovan suit, composed by Utah lawyer Dr. Dale Livingston, explains, “These awards include secret cash awards. They are not limited as to the number of awards that may be awarded to any one person or group. There is no limitation placed upon any award. Any person or group of persons can be awarded this money, including: U.S. attorneys, federal judges, the president of the United States or anyone else for that matter. “The awards may be given to the same person or group, each minute, each hour, every day, every week, every month, every year or not at all. In other words, the U.S. government and the alleged Internal Revenue Service . . . have a perfectly legal (not lawful) system of bribery. The bribery works against the American people…when they expect impartial justice, and there is no

proof on the record to the contrary.”

The murder of attorney Bergeson, who only threatened to initiate an investigation into what she believed to have been a stacked jury, sends the warning that Mungovan, by forcing the issue, may have placed a much larger target on his back.

While there are myriad instances of miscarriages of justice by these bought-and-paid-for judges, it would seem these judges may receive higher payoffs for higher profile cases. Consider a few of the more recent dubious convictions:

Judge Paul Benson virtually railroaded Yori Kahl and Scott Faul in 1983. There was no evidence these young men ever fired a shot in the melee in Medina, North Dakota, where Yori’s father, Gordon, admitted shooting U.S. Marshal Ken Muir in self-defense. Later it was learned this was the same judge that had sent away Leonard Peltier of Wounded Knee fame for life, with no evidence he had killed the two FBI agents found dead after the 1973 shootout. How much “bonus” money did Judge Benson receive for these egregious actions? Because of the layers of secrecy, we’ll never know.

Then there is Judge Walter Smith of Waco, Texas. We’ll never know how much he may have received after sending away 11 Branch Davidian Church members, who had been acquitted by a jury of capital crimes in 1994, not long after the Waco massacre of men, women and children by federal agents and troops. These 11 churchgoers received a total of 240 years. These outrageous maximum sentences for merely carrying a firearm were applied against people who had not even fired a shot in self-defense at the onrushing U.S. marshals, U.S. military Special Forces soldiers and other federal gunmen.

Finally, there were the Montana Freemen, who were labeled as “separatist outlaws” in federal court in 1996 as they were working to expose the banking fraud of the Federal Reserve System. Many of these men are still in federal prison, yet they never harmed anyone. Again, we’ll never know how much of a cash payoff the judge in this case was awarded.

Cash incentives paid for convictions help us understand not only what has happened in the past, but also what biased, unfair, and un-American decisions we may see in the future.

The IAP posts this article as it is line with our 15 Principles, Principles that are designed to fix problems such as this

Principle 2We believe that God has endowed men with certain unalienable rights as set forth in the Declaration of Independence and that no legislature and no majority, however great, may morally limit or destroy these; that the sole function of government is to protect life, liberty, and property and anything more than this is usurpation and oppression.

Principle 3We believe that the Constitution of the United States was prepared and adopted by men acting under inspiration from Almighty God; that it is a solemn compact between the peoples of the States of this nation which all officers of government are under duty to obey; that the eternal moral laws expressed therein must be adhered to or individual liberty will perish.

Join the Discussion


Comments are closed.