From: aq817@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve Crocker)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Prodigy Repost - CA Man Killed Defending Home From Bogus Raid
Date: 9 Nov 1992 07:47:52 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Don't know if this has been discussed here already, but thought I 
would pass it along. Don't get me wrong, I'm anti-drug (i.e. crack)
and favor a War on Drugs (I wish somebody would have one). But this
is unmitigated fascist crap!!!
-Steve

<begin repost>

PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service     11/02/92     0:57 AM
 
          ARTS CLUB
 TOPIC:   BOOKS/NONFICTION
 TIME:    10/28  7:21 AM
 
 TO:      JUDITH BARNETT   (HKMC94A)
 FROM:    LINDA HITCHINGS   (MFHP99A)
 SUBJECT: WORLD GOV.UN TROOPS
 
 Judy,
 I've been out running errands and didn't catch the Prodgy
 headlines today.....was the news about the Israeli troops
 and the comet on today's headlines?
 
 We have an interesting local case that I didn't mention when
 it happened, because it didn't appear that it would ------>
 become an important issue.  But, now it has assumed bigger
 proportions.
 
 On Friday, October 2nd, FBI, DEA, Los Angeles County Sheriff
 deputies, and LAPD officers in a caravan of more than a
 dozen cars, raided the 250 acre ranch of milti-millionaire,
 Donald Scott in the Malibu Mountains. They suspected he was
 cultivating marijuana. Their evidence was a one-time fly -
 over in an airplane, which revealed light green folliage,
 and an informant who said Mr. Scott's wife was seen
 purchasing items in local stores with $100 bills.  As it--->
 turned out, no marijuana was found "not even a seed" (local
 newspaper).  Here are the details as reported in a number of
 local newspapers.  When no one answered the front door, the
 agents and officers broke in and restrained Mrs. Scott in
 the kitchen where she was working.  She started screaming
 "don't kill me, please don't shoot me".  Mr. Scott, who had
 been sleeping (it was 9:00 AM) came running out with a
 pistol in response to his wife's screams.  Then the officers
 shot him twice, killing him instantly.  Later a thorough
 search of the entire ranch revealed there was no marijuana.
 There is now a complete investigation of the incident, and->
 there are several interesting things that have come out so
 far.  First of all, Mr. Scott's ranch lies completely within
 Ventura County and about one mile from the Los Angeles
 County/Ventura County line.  Ventura County Sheriffs Dept.
 was not informed about the proposed raid with their
 jurisdiction.  Secondly, it has been revealed that the
 federal government has been trying to buy Mr. Scott's ranch
 for a number of years, to add to the acreage of the Santa
 Monica Mountain Federal Reserve.  Mr. Scott has not been
 willing to sell his ranch.  On hand at the raid were federal
 seisure officials, who were prepared to seize the ranch if->
 marijuana was found.  There is speculatiion that this was
 the real purpose of the raid....to sieze the land under the
 federal seizure laws.  Ventura County is doing the
 investigation, and it has been reported that they will soon
 decide if officers and agents involved in the raid will be
 indicted.  Mr. Scott was 61 years old, partially blind from
 two recent cataract surgeries.  His wealth was inherited
 thru a family-owned company in Europe that produces perfumes
 and makeup, which his grandfather started, and thru large
 investments in IBM stock (he holds several millions dollars
 worth of IBM).  So, his source of income is not suspect. -->
 The family attorney is filing a wrongful death lawsuit
 against the federal government and the other law enforcement
 agencies. This case is now getting some national media
 attention....Associated Press is carrying it.  I noticed it
 was also mentioned in the latest Spotlight.
 
 Locally, people are refering to it as another Randy Weaver
 incident.  The ranch is about 10 miles from my home.
 
                                                Linda

 PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service     11/02/92     1:01 AM
 
          ARTS CLUB
 TOPIC:   BOOKS/NONFICTION
 TIME:    10/28  3:30 PM
 
 TO:      LINDA HITCHINGS   (MFHP99A)
 FROM:    JUDITH BARNETT   (HKMC94A)
 SUBJECT: WORLD GOV.UN TROOPS
 
   And people say we don't live in a dictatorship.
 
   It's really going to do Scott a lot of good for them to
 apologize.
   What really outrages me is that the feds who planned the
 whole thing will get off without so much as a wrist slap.
 And our taxmoney will pay for the wrongful death, while the
 officers who did the actual shooting and raid will be the
 scapegoats.
 
   There's an article in our local paper by Timothy P.
 Johnson, dated 10/24/92, which addresses this same
 dictatorial control. First paragraph reads:
   "A recent story, "I was treated like a criminal," by Julia
 Robb, Sept. 25, points out the general opinion of law
 enforcement that they are empowered to do almost anything
 that the courts have not explicitly forbidden and/or have
 set guidelines."
   The Fourth Article of the Constitution states: "The right
 of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
 papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and
 seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall
 issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath, or
 affirmation and particularly describing the place to be
 searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
 
   The operative words here are `unreasonable searches and
 SEIZURES'.  There is nothing reasonable about seizing a
 person's home/property, and it is certainly UNREASONABLE to
 issue a warrant on the basis of only someone's
 unsubstantiated word.
   Isn't it interesting that if someone spends a $100 bill
 they are automatically guilty of being a criminal.
   Gee, my grocery bill often runs around $150, and it is
 much easier to pay for it with hundred dollar bills. Guess
 I'd better ask the bank to give me all one dollar bills so
 people won't think I'm a criminal, and I can spend half an
 hour in the checkout line with both myself and the clerk
 having to count the bills just so people won't think I'm a
 criminal.  Oops, then they'll probably think I'm a horrible
 mother and guilty of robbing my childs piggybank or
 something.
   You know, Linda, I'm really ashamed and disgusted with
 what the people of this country have come to, especially
 those in government and law enforcement.  Nazi Germany
 will pretty soon seem mild compared to what our own
 government and `storm troopers' are now doing.
   For the life of me, I don't see how these men live with
 themselves and their consciences.  Seems like they've been
 conditioned to believe that all `civilians' are their
 enemies, and that they're some kind of superior gods.
 They don't want to stop crime, they just hate people in
 general and get some sort of sadistic thrill out of
 inflicting whatever punishment they can on people. Doesn't
 matter who, what, when, or why, just as long as they can
 vent their frustrations, and unreasoned and unjustified
 anger, out on both the innocent and guilty alike.
   These supposed `law enforcement' officers are getting
 worse than any criminal ever put in prison, behaving just
 like the intimidating street gangs only with the power and
 authority to get away with it.



 PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service     11/02/92     1:05 AM
 
          ARTS CLUB
 TOPIC:   BOOKS/NONFICTION
 TIME:    10/29  7:38 AM
 
 TO:      JUDITH BARNETT   (HKMC94A)
 FROM:    LINDA HITCHINGS   (MFHP99A)
 SUBJECT: WORLD GOV.UN TROOPS
 
 Judy,
 I think this particular case may have the potential to
 become a major news story.  If our local sheriffs dept.
 decides to issue indictments against the agents and officers
 involved in this raid and it goes to trial, then the Fourth
 Article of the Constitution will certainly be the focus of
 the trial.  In any case, if for some reason the sheriffs--->
 dept. doesn't issue indictments, the family attorney has
 stated that he is filing a lawsuit.
 
 Donald Scott was a little eccentric.  He preferred the
 seclusion of his ranch, which I'm told is a very beautiful
 piece of land....in a small valley within the mountains with
 surrounding mountains.  Prior to his death, he was
 considering purchasing a yacht and taking a year or so to
 cruise the world with his wife (third wife).  His second
 wife was a Europeon actress and their divorce trial many
 years ago was quite a case.  At that time he lived in the-->
 Troutsdale Estates (are you familiar with that area), which
 is one of the most expensive areas in southern California.
 She got the Troutsdale house and he took the ranch.  Anyway,
 he didn't like government intrusion, and thats one of the
 reasons he wouldn't sell his ranch to the government.  His
 wife said he just didn't trust the government.  His hobby
 was western history, particular the local indians and their
 art/culture.  Doesn't sound like he would be much of a
 threat to the government, does it?
 
 I failed to mention that the newspaper report of the raid-->
 stated that National Park police were also involved in the
 raid.  I wonder if they were there to take possession of the
 land if it was seized?
 
 Anyway, this may become a major case.
 
                                                Linda



PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service     11/02/92     1:08 AM
 
          ARTS CLUB
 TOPIC:   BOOKS/NONFICTION
 TIME:    10/29 11:13 AM
 
 TO:      LINDA HITCHINGS   (MFHP99A)
 FROM:    JUDITH BARNETT   (HKMC94A)
 SUBJECT: WORLD GOV.UN TROOPS
 
 Linda...By the sounds of it, the case SHOULD become a major
 event demonstrating how out of control government has
 gotten.
   Obviously, Donald Scott was right in not trusting
 government, as they cost him his life. To die simply because
 one was defending their home and wife from unknown
 intruders is wrong, and nothing can ever justify such.
   There has to be a return to respecting the rights of the
 individual as being innocent until PROVEN guilty, instead of
 this deliberate shift to convicting people before any
 evidence is presented or their due process rights to a trial
 have been upheld.
   Also the crime must exist as a fact before the search and
 seizure warrant issues. Where currently, government forces
 are not waiting for a crime to exist as a material fact
 before acting against the citizens of this country.
   It is NOT a crime to think or even talk about committing a
 crime. It is only a crime when one actually harms/injures
 other people.
   The pervasive attitude is `thought' control, thus, if they
 wanted to claim that we are going to use our computers for
 something illegal, they could now arrest us without any
 crime even being committed by claiming intent, whether or
 not there actually was any such intent, as how could we
 prove there wasn't.  And, after all, the government is
 always right.
   This may sound far-fetched, but it isn't, and will soon be
 the norm of our society, as each of the situations like that
 of D. Scott are test cases pushing the envelope to condition
 us to accepting that people are guilty of whatever we are
 accused of doing, even if there was no victim or actual
 crime committed.
   Even if Scott had 10 acres of marijuana growing, there
 would be no actual crime committed until such time as he
 sold or gave it to someone else.  And only at that point
 would government have the right to step in.
   The `intent' to commit a crime is NOT the crime, and we
 are not guilty of committing a crime until we actually do
 so.  But we have been convinced that government has the
 right to control our thoughts as well as our actions.
   For anything to be a crime in our society, the rule must
 be that there has to exist one or more victims of that crime
 before society has the right to take any actions against any
 of us.
   If we become aware of an `intent' to commit a crime, the
 ONLY right we have is to watch the person suspected of
 intending to commit a crime and then catch them when they
 begin to act on that intent. Otherwise we have tyrannical
 dictatorship and human life becomes worthless as it is now
 becoming, where one's worth is predicated solely on the
 power one has to overwhelm any opposition, by force.



 PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service     11/02/92      1:11 AM
 
          ARTS CLUB
 TOPIC:   BOOKS/NONFICTION
 TIME:    10/29  1:59 PM
 
 TO:      JUDITH BARNETT   (HKMC94A)
 FROM:    LINDA HITCHINGS   (MFHP99A)
 SUBJECT: WORLD GOV.UN TROOPS
 
 Judy,
 The public reaction will be interesting.  Locally, some
 people immediately said....."well Scott had to be doing
 something wrong for the agents/officers to raid the place".
 They assumed that the government had a justifiable reason
 for the raid. Then others, and here I think this is the
 majority of the people, feel that this is a case of ------->
 government intrusion at its ugliest.  Even though the case
 made headlines when the raid occured, further details are
 now buried in the back of the newspapers.  But, I think that
 if the Ventura Co. Sheriffs Dept. issues indictments, then
 this will become frontpage news.  The Los Angeles County
 Sheriffs Dept. spokesman admitted they had "made an error".
 But, the federal authorities have not said anything....not
 one word about the incident.
 
 A Santa Monica newspaper states that the laws surrounding
 seisure of property by federal agents will be tested in --->
 a Supreme Court decision that is expected to be handed down
 next Spring.  As it now stands, the laws provide that if you
 are the 10th owner of a house, and the 5th owner of the
 house was conducting drug sales or manufacture of drugs
 while living in the house, the house can be seized from the
 10th owner, even if he/she had no knowledge of what happened
 in the house when the 5th owner lived there. This also is
 applied to the sale of automobiles, boats, RV's, etc. If
 you, an average, law-abiding citizen, decide to purchase a
 newer car, and respond to a classified ad in the newspaper
 by a private party, and you purchase the vehicle, the law-->
 provides that the federal government can seize the car if it
 is later found that the original owner of the vehicle bought
 the car with money made from the sale of drugs.
 
 The case before the Supreme Court will address this issue,
 and we should be watching for the decision next Spring.
 
                                                Linda



 PRODIGY(R) interactive personal service     11/02/92     1:17 AM
 
          ARTS CLUB
 TOPIC:   BOOKS/NONFICTION
 TIME:    10/29  3:50 PM
 
 TO:      LINDA HITCHINGS   (MFHP99A)
 FROM:    JUDITH BARNETT   (HKMC94A)
 SUBJECT: WORLD GOV.UN TROOPS
 
 Linda...That Supreme Court decision should have received
 immediate attention, as look at how many people can be hurt
 before it is handed down, providing they side with the
 Constitution and human rights, and not government, that is.
   You wouldn't want to bet what they're decision is going to
 be, would you? <g>  I know I'd be very shocked if the S.C.
 sided with what is right and against government.
   It is understandable that the feds won't say a word, all
 their big time lawyers would have told them to keep their
 big mouths shut and admit to nothing.  Typical CYA behavior
 and lack of honesty so pervasive in government, and out.
   What is upsetting is that there is no hue and cry from the
 citizens out there.  People should be demanding an
 indictment against ALL those responsible so that a jury can
 decide the facts, not let it just be swept under a rug.
   And the newspapers should be spearheading the public's
 outrage and demand for justice.  Looks like the 4th estate,
 that so-called voice of the people, is dead and buried.
   This case bothers me a great deal, as you can tell,
 because it cost a man's life over something that was
 relatively trivial and meaningless in the scope of things,
 and gave more worth to everything but that of the man
 himself.
   The man's ranch was evidently more valuable to the feds
 than the man. The drugs were more valuable than the man and
 his wife, not to mention our Constitution.
   Our priorities are all screwed up, and it upsets me
 greatly to see human life relegated to last place on our
 list of priorities.

<end repost>

-Steve
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs