All Episodes
Previous Next
April 4, 1995 - Bill Cooper
57:35
Scott & Karen Scarbough Story
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
*Montage of the power*
Thank you.
You're listening to the Hour of the Time.
You're listening to the Hour of the Time.
I'm William Cooper.
Early on the 31st of March, three Laos and former members of the Khmer Rouge who had renounced communism attacked the North Vietnamese 324th Division in Atapeo, Laos.
This is the first action of a general offensive by Free Lao, Vietnamese, and Khmer.
This also marks the first time that all anti-communist groups have acted in concert.
In anticipation of these attacks, the Vietnamese have reinforced their troops in Laos.
The North Vietnamese Army has ordered the Pathak Lao 4th Division to reinforce Attapeo from their base in Ximo, Laos.
The war has begun.
Ladies and gentlemen, in the vein of last night, the Patriot newspaper in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which is also the evening news, has a toll-free number in the news.
It is 1-800-692-7207.
1-800-692-7207.
That's 1-800-692-7207.
Once again, the Patriot newspaper and the Evening News in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Have a fro-tea-fumber.
All right.
A toll-free number, folks.
It is 1-800-692-7207.
And let me see here.
800-692-7207.
And let me see here.
They have an email address.
Letters to the editor.
Send to E-D-I-T-P-A-G-E.
That's edit page.
At patriot.microserve.com.
That's edit page at patriot.microserve.com.
The Patriot News Company, 812 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
1-7-1-0-1.
That's the Patriot News Company, 812 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 1-7-1-0-1.
Write them a letter, folks.
Give them a call.
Send them a fax.
Tell them what you think about their lies.
Tell them the truth about what we did in Pennsylvania.
And tell them that we'll be back on April the 18th to do it all over again.
That ought to get their goat, don't you think?
Tennessee, the Conference of States is coming up for a vote in Tennessee.
So, folks, get busy.
Get busy.
You need to phone 217-854-7000.
4-0-0-8 during the day.
That's 2-1-7-8-5-4-4-0-0-8 to find out who to call and how to deal with this Conference of the States vote in the state of Tennessee.
Make sure you do that.
Also, Nevada, Nevada is also Coming up for a vote, ladies and gentlemen, and you need to begin to take the steps right now to stop it.
To stop it in the state of Nevada.
Let me see here, or you can call.
Nevada Conference of the States is AB-99.
AB-99.
Also SB-127.
SB-127.
If you don't know who to call in Nevada, you can fax the Assembly Ways and Means members At 702-687-8207.
That's 702-687-8207.
That's a fax.
Also, you can call, let me see here.
Somewhere on here there should be a place for you to call.
826-827-8207.
That's a fax.
Also, you can call...
Let me see here.
Somewhere on here there should be a place for you to call.
Oregon was defeated, folks.
I'll tell you what.
Call this number in the California network. 916-757-827-8277.
That's 916-757-2770, and ask them who you should call in the state of Nevada to stop this Conference of States initiative.
Also in the state of Louisiana, call Fred Bickham.
Fred Bickham.
He'll give you all the information on SCR 28, SCR 83, and SCR 100, all three, regarding the Conference of States in the state of Louisiana.
Now let's call Fred Bickham, B-I-C-K-H-A-M, at area code 5047488354.
He'll give you all the information and all the people and fax numbers and phone numbers that you need to call to stop this.
If you live in the state of Louisiana, then figure out what day they're going to be bringing this up for a vote and get down there and protest.
504-748-8354.
And last but not least, Wisconsin, the Conference of the States, is also coming up for a vote.
You can fax the Senate and all representatives.
The number is the same, 608-266-7038.
That's 608.
That's the state of Wisconsin, ladies and gentlemen.
I'm going to give you some numbers here that you need to call.
The house speaker is David Prosser, P-R-O-S-S-E-R.
David Prosser, Jr.
P-R-O-S-S-E-R.
His phone number is 608-266-3070.
That's 608-266-3070.
He just sent a letter to all legislatures telling them to support the Conference of the States, which is SJR-6.
That's SJR-6.
Also, fax and call Representative Stephen Nass.
That's N-A-S-S.
He's the Chairman of the State Federal Relations and is releasing the bill without hearings.
These people are in a panic mode now.
They're going to release the bill without hearings.
His number is 608-266-5715.
That's 608-266-5715.
Also State Senator Brian Rude.
266-5715. That's 608-266-5715.
R-U-D-E.
Also State Senator Brian Rude, R-U-D-E, 608-266-5490.
That's 6-0-8-2-6-6-5-4-9-0.
He's the one that said that the Conference of the States is being opposed by far right-wing groups.
This means anyone strongly against assaults on the existing Constitution.
If you love the Constitution and liberty, you're a far right-wing radical.
And, of course, you're a follower of William Cooper.
State Senator Mike Ellis, Chairman of the State Federal Relation on the Senate side, is pushing hard for the Conference of the States.
His number is 608-266-0718.
That's 608-266-0718.
Also, Governor Tommy Thompson.
608-266-0718.
That's 608-266-0718.
Also, Governor Tommy Thompson.
His phone number is 608-266-1212.
That's 608-266-1212.
His fax number is 608-267-8983.
That's 608-267-8983.
826-612-12.
His fax number is 608-267-8983.
That's 608-267-8983.
Thompson sits on the steering board of the Conference of States, and his political aspirations are riding on this.
There's a complete blackout in the news media on the Conference of States in the state of Wisconsin.
So you've got to be active up there, and you've got to defeat this.
SGR6, ladies and gentlemen.
I'm looking for someone in the states that you can get in touch with, and I don't have any here.
Folks, when you fax me information, I wish you... Oh, here's a phone number, 310.
Nope, that ain't it.
Okay.
Never mind, folks.
Find out who the representatives are that are going to be voting on this in the committee, and contact all of them.
Phone and fax all of you people in the state of Wisconsin and all of you people all over the country.
Do it.
Now.
For the rest of the hour, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to be exposing a travesty of justice and an indication of the depth of corruption of the legal system in the federal courts.
So don't go away.
On April 16, 1990, a gray and overcast day in rural Davisburg, Michigan, Scott Scarborough came home from work, picked up his wife, Karen, and drove the 33 miles down Interstate 75 to the post office at Royal Oak, a suburb of Detroit. and drove the 33 miles down Interstate 75 to the Thank you.
This was the second year they planned to join the tax protesters there.
The 15th had fallen on a Sunday that year.
They picked up a friend, Peter Hendrickson, on the way.
All of these people were members of the Libertarian Party of Michigan.
Karen would later tell the grand jury she was feeling ill, the beginnings of what turned out to be the rejection of a transplanted kidney, and that she stayed in the car, lying on the back seat.
She testified that Hendrickson remained in the car with her while Scott got out to visit with the eight or ten picketers.
Scott says he heard sirens almost the moment he emerged from the car and figured there had been an accident.
At about the same time, an eyewitness saw a man drop a manila envelope into one of the tax receptacle bins now believed to have been the envelope containing a phosphorous smoke device.
Government experts have testified the device had no timer but bore a fuse which had to be lit with an open flame at which point ignition occurred within 90 seconds.
The eyewitness in a nearby car described a man who did not match Peter Hendrickson.
The eyewitness later viewed Peter Hendrickson in a photo lineup but picked out a postal employee instead.
She was unable to identify Hendrickson in a live lineup either.
No one, not anyone, bothered to put Scott Scarborough in a lineup.
She described someone clean-shaven, and Scots always had a mustache.
They were talking about someone with different colored hair, about five inches shorter, said Ralph Musili, Scots Scarborough's attorney.
The smoke device ignited.
Postal worker Thomas Berlucci received slight burns on his hands and legs in the course of removing the smoking device from the bin—burns which later healed without causing any scarring or permanent disability.
That was the extent of the damage caused in the Great Michigan Post Office Bombing of 1990.
But it was only the beginning of the nightmare of Scott and Sharon Scarborough.
"'These people are clean as pins,' said Musili of the Scarboroughs, never before accused of a crime.
Married seven years with a twenty-year-old daughter, Scott's Now in cosmetology school.
They go to work every day and pay their taxes and make their mortgage payments and visit with their family.
The most radical thing they ever did in their life was write an article for the Libertarian newspaper.
There were all kinds of people protesting at the post office that day, says New City, but they grabbed right at the Libertarians.
Those are the only ones they were interested in.
They took them all, every one of them, before the grand jury.
Why?
Why, indeed.
After all, the libertarians who call for the end of the income tax and the war on drugs routinely quote radicals like James Madison and Thomas Jefferson and are the only national party that requires every new national member to pledge, quote, I do not believe in the use of force to achieve political and social goals, end quote.
Now, don't get me wrong.
I'm not promoting The libertarian party.
You know that my loyalty lies with the Constitution Party.
But this is the truth.
A federal prosecutor would later warn the Scarborough's jury, quote, you're going to hear some libertarian views, some of which you may find strange or even offensive, end quote.
And Mussilli, the lawyer for the Scarboroughs, had a theory.
He said, And I quote, We have gone from a constitutional republic in this country to a democracy, which you all know is the code word for socialism, probably in the 1930s.
Uccelli is 50.
He's been practicing law in Michigan since 1969.
He further says, and I quote, Then we have gone, in my lifetime, from a democracy to what I would call a bureaucratic aristocracy, and the next step will be a dictatorship.
The Libertarians are smart people, and they have the right idea, but politics is the art of the do-able," says Mussolini, who takes pains to point out he himself is not a Libertarian.
They see this train barreling along at 60 miles an hour, and they jump in front of it, and they get flattened.
You can't get enough bodies in front of it to slow it down." Now, folks, no one, no one suspected Scott and Karen Scarborough of setting the smoke device.
But in the course of checking out the Libertarians who had been at the scene, federal prosecutors stumbled on the Scarborough's young friends, Peter Hendrickson and Doreen Wright.
Although Doreen had been out of the country at the time of the tax protest, she worked as a high school science teacher where she had access to red phosphorus, the substance used in the device, and Hendrickson and Wright had failed to file federal income tax returns for the two previous years.
The Scarboroughs were granted immunity to testify before the grand jury, where prosecutors hoped they would tell of attending meetings where Hendrickson had proposed committing the crime.
Instead, Karen told of the government's prime suspect sitting in the car with her the whole time the smoke bomb incident was in progress.
Quote, When they asked me if he was a violent person, I tried to put him in a good light, but I did not lie.
The grand jury seemed to find it strange that Scott would leave me in the car with another man.
He never got out of the car when he could have dropped the thing in the receptacle.
The attorney for Hendrickson and Wright told the feds, if you want them to come in for an arraignment, just let me know and I'll bring them down.
But two days later, they showed up at their home at 7 a.m.
Fifteen armed gorillas They staged a big raid and they seized them, Moseri says.
Doreen Wright was breastfeeding her seven-month-old baby, Katie, at the time of the raid, according to Karen Scarborough.
The officers pulled the infant from her breast and turned it over to a state social worker as they hauled the couple away in handcuffs.
Wright telephoned her ex-husband, who often babysat for the couple and who agreed to come take charge of the child that day But the postal inspectors in charge of the scene refused to allow that, according to Musili.
Wright's mother was given custody of the child that evening, but it took a day or two, and accounts, as they always do, vary, for Hendrickson and Wright to regain custody.
A lawyer had to be retained since abandonment charges had been filed.
Abandonment charges had been filed!
Because their baby had been taken away from them by postal authorities.
So Peter got the message that he could be separated from his family at any time, Karen Scarborough recalls.
You've got all kinds of these paramilitary organizations in the United States government now, says lawyer Musili.
The FBI, the ATF, the DEA, the postal inspectors.
The list goes on and on, and it's getting worse, and the list is getting longer.
They've all got their own stormtroopers, and they love to do this stuff.
We've got one in Michigan called DRANO, the Down River Area Narcotics Organization.
And there's one called COMET.
I forget what that stands for.
All Armed Multi-Jurisdictional Task Forces Anxious to go use the fancy equipment, and they're all running around like keystone cops, playing with the phallus strapped firmly to their hip.
Peter Hendrickson eventually pleaded guilty to the two unrelated charges of failure to file federal income tax returns, plus one count of the lesser charge of possession of an incendiary device.
The Scarboroughs theorized he did this in return for a promise.
You see, first they wanted the Scarboroughs to testify against their friends, and then, somehow, they got their friends to testify against the Scarboroughs.
Doreen Wright would not be charged, and this was probably the deal, and that they could keep custody of their child.
But any expectation Hendrickson may have had of a soft sentence was shattered when the judge handed down an order for 27 months incarceration.
It was too late for him to change his story.
He'd already implicated his friends, who had been asked to implicate him and had refused.
Federal prosecutors said they couldn't do anything for Hendrickson unless he could give them some higher ups in the Michigan Libertarian Party on the smoke bomb charge.
The whole thing, you see, was political.
They were out to break the back of the Libertarian Party in the state of Michigan.
Hendrickson offered them the Scarboroughs.
We see, he says, the prosecutors were dubious, since the Scarboroughs had never been suspected, and asked Hendrickson to take a polygraph test.
He did and he failed it.
It came out inconclusive the first time.
And deceptive the second time, explains the prosecutor, Assistant United States Attorney Terence Byrd.
The deceptiveness was on a not very material question, but all it takes is one deceptive answer.
It was partly because of that that we decided not to cooperate further with Hendrickson without some kind of further corroboration.
Now, folks, despite Hendrickson coming up with a scheme in which prosecutors were not initially involved, Wiring Doreen Wright for sound with an amateur tape recorder and microphone beneath her sweater.
Now this is a far cry from the kind of high-tech equipment a government agency might use.
More than two years after the great 1990 smoke bombing, Hendrickson took Doreen Wright to pay a series of social calls in the Scarboroughs.
Two at their home and one in a nearby Red Lobster restaurant.
They were hoping to take statements which might be construed as admissions of their complicity in the post office bombing.
Six and a half hours of tapes resulted, but there was a problem, and I quote, I listened to all six and a half hours, and you can't understand a thing, end quote.
Concili says, the cheap microphone and the heavy sweater had proved a disastrous combination.
It's really grim.
Despite that, despite the fact that you couldn't understand one single word on the entire six and a half hours of takes, the Scarboroughs were arrested and brought to trial anyway.
Again, their attorneys offered to bring them in peaceably for arraignment.
Again, a couple with long-standing ties to the community were subjected to dramatic and unannounced raids featuring large numbers of armed postal inspectors, goon squads, And Scott was led away in irons from his job site at Ford Motors.
Karen was hauled out in front of the neighbors at home.
There was a problem with Karen Scarborough, however.
Although she appears active and vivacious, Karen Scarborough has had diabetes since the age of nine years old.
I know Karen Scarborough personally.
She is legally blind, ladies and gentlemen.
She is a friend of mine.
She has undergone three kidney transplants and depends upon insulin and anti-rejection drugs, both of which were confiscated at the time of her arrest.
She was due for her first post-operative examination following cataract surgery the day of her arrest.
I have arthritis in my arms as well, and they kept trying to handcuff me behind my back even though I was in tears and pleading with them not to.
Finally, they just couldn't get my arms to bend that far, so they cuffed me in front.
I was in the hospital the next day.
They weren't even going to let me have my leg braces because they said they didn't know what they were.
If I go to prison, I'll die." Karen's attorney, Thomas Wilhelm, is less dramatic.
I assume if there was a jail sentence, she would be sent to a medical facility.
If they sent her to the Federal Correctional Institute at Rochester, Minnesota, which is associated with a male clinic, I think her chances would be fairly good.
But they're not overly concerned about your health needs.
You see, the marshals aren't going to let you wander around with hypodermics and all that kind of stuff, no matter what's wrong with you.
Health is one factor that might lead to a sentence reduction, says Assistant U.S.
Attorney Berg, but the way Berg looks at it, Scarborough brought such problems on herself.
Quote, those in that position always have the opportunity to plead guilty and get a better deal for themselves.
These two chose not to for whatever reasons.
End quote.
The reason is they were innocent!
Not guilty, you jerk!
Again, As with Hendrickson, the Scarboroughs were not actually charged with bombing the post office.
They couldn't be charged with that.
They had been granted immunity in return for going before the grand jury.
Back when Hendrickson was the main suspect, and they were asked to implicate him, and they told the truth, the feds got Hendrickson to turn against their friends.
So they were charged with the old bugaboo conspiracy to obstruct justice by lying to that grand jury.
I guess that makes the federal prosecutor a conspiracy theorist, not Frico!
Whacked-out, right-wing, fanatic, terrorist, gun-toting Frico!
Doesn't it?
What lies?
What lies, ladies and gentlemen?
They told the grand jury they had no knowledge about the placement of an incendiary device.
There was no evidence that they did have any knowledge of it.
They said that Hendrickson never got out of the car.
They also said Hendrickson could not have been involved because he was with them at the time the device went off.
Berg summarizes, and Hendrickson, of course, had subsequently pleaded guilty.
So why are they doing this to the Scarboroughs?
Well, the answer will become obvious very soon.
Hendrickson tried to cooperate with the prosecution.
He said he had prepared the smoke device and given it to Scott Scarborough, who had actually dropped it in the mailbox.
Asked why the handwriting on the envelope didn't match his own, he said he had written left-handed to disguise his script.
Told the ingredients of the bomb.
He reconstructed for the jury how he had put it together.
told a teabag had been found at the site.
He said he had placed it in the envelope to commemorate the Boston Tea Party.
But he never said any of this until they told him the ingredients and told him about the teabag.
Unfortunately, the government's own forensic experts said the teabag couldn't have been in the envelope or it would have been loaded with phosphorus.
Their own expert said it must have been on the ground nearby for a long time and been swept up with all the other debris.
Their own experts said Pete's story about how he built the bomb was impossible.
Their own experts said it was impossible.
They listed ingredients and he tried to make up a story to match and they said it was nonsense.
Then on the witness stand, Hendrickson blurted out that he had been subjected to a lie detector test when he first implicated the Scarboroughs, and that yet he had failed it.
Flunked it.
Failed.
Did not pass.
Surely that was a welcome opening for Musili to pursue.
Guess what?
Thank you.
He was admonished by the judge not to go into the polygraph matter.
The judge said if Musili did, she would declare a mistrial, which would have cost Musili his license.
The prosecution figured that Musili had put Hendrickson up to it.
How could he?
as a prosecution witness.
You see, we never got to speak to him without a member of the prosecuting team present.
The state's main witness!
For his help, Hendrickson finally served one year of his 27-month sentence, 51 days of that in an actual jail.
The last ten months of his time were served in a halfway house in an arrangement which allowed him to return home to work during the day.
He got a reduction on the basis of his cooperation, confirms Prosecutor Berg.
The defense called the eyewitness who repeated a description that matched neither Hendrickson nor Scarborough.
Incredibly, though, With both the eyewitness and Scarborough present in the same courtroom in front of the jury, neither attorney asked her whether Scarborough was the man she had seen.
Incompetence, no less, on cross-examination, I did not ask her if Scott Scarborough was the man.
End quote.
Says Deputy U.S.
Attorney Berg.
That was because I didn't know what she'd say.
I didn't want to, you know, you don't want to be suggestive by showing her a picture or anything, so I just figured if she recognized him, she might say it.
But as a strategy matter, you don't generally ask a witness something if you don't know what the answer will be.
End quote.
This was an eyewitness.
Supposedly the answer was going to be that the eyewitness would point out who The eyewitness saw plant the incendiary device.
What else was the eyewitness doing in the courtroom?
And from Scott Scarborough, he says, quote, I don't know why my attorney didn't ask the eyewitness if it was me, end quote.
The tactics among attorneys are strange.
Her description was nowhere close to me.
She said, reddish hair, and I have brown hair.
She said, clean-shaven, and I've had a mustache for ten years." Finally, that left only the tapes.
You see what he says?
They have no warrant to tape in these people's homes, to take conversations between social friends.
Nobody knew that there was taping going on.
There was no permission given.
It's against the law.
Besides which, you can't understand anything on any of the tapes.
So I filed an objection to the tapes, but the judge overruled me and admitted them." End quote.
And he goes on.
Then they took six hours of tapes and edited them down to about five minutes.
They pieced together parts of various conversations.
Some of the sections end in the middle of a sentence to make them come out saying what they wanted them to say.
But since you still couldn't understand them, the prosecution prepared transcripts of what they thought the tape said.
I objected.
And the judge compromised, said she'd let the jury have the transcripts in the jury box to read along with what the state contended the tapes were saying, but she'd informed the jury that the transcripts aren't in evidence, only the tapes.
But the jury was not allowed to listen to the tapes, which nobody could understand.
Doreen Wright does most of the talking in the portions of the tapes which have been transcribed, amounting to sixteen pages in all.
Weirdly, in one of Hendrickson's few transcribed remarks, he urges Scott Scarborough to shave off his mustache.
I wonder why?
The culprit was said to be clean-shaven.
Wright spends most of her time suggesting that since Scott Scarborough has been granted immunity and cannot be charged with the post office bombing, he should admit to some related misdemeanor in order to take the heat off Hendrickson.
The transcripts contain no admissions of complicity by the Scarboroughs.
None whatsoever.
Presumably, their very willingness to tolerate such discussions counted against them with the jury, as Karen Scarborough's repeated statements that Scott was reluctant to cooperate with the government may have consequences.
However, even in the excerpts selected by the government, Karen Scarborough at one point states, quote, We have to keep in mind that Scott didn't do it, end quote.
And I continue.
He told us he pleaded guilty to something he didn't do, and I thought that's what they wanted me to do, Scott Scarborough said of the conversations, all initiated by Hendrickson and Wright.
There was a point later in the conversations where I said I couldn't do that because I was innocent, but that part of the tape got thrown away.
On that tape you never hear them leave the house.
They could have cut it off before they gave it to the prosecutors.
I don't know.
Quote, they're accurate for what's been transcribed," says Wilhelm, Karen's attorney.
The problem is that parts of certain sentences are left out of the transcribed copy.
There'll be an exculpatory explanation of a previous statement that she said, and that's not transcribed.
But in closing argument, that transcript was not something that had been admitted or was going to be seen by the jury.
So we didn't reference the transcripts because you can't reference something that's not in evidence in the closing arguments.
Justice?
Huh.
It's accurate to say our excerpts did not contain all the statements on the tapes, responds Prosecutor Berg.
The excerpts the government played were evidence the government felt showed the Scarboroughs had not told the truth.
It's not the government's responsibility to put in portions that we don't think were relevant.
Justice?
We had a factual finding from the judge that the transcripts were accurate, word for word, for the parts we played.
For the parts we played.
The defense had several opportunities to play portions or submit transcripts of portions that they thought were exculpatory.
Tom Wilhelm tried to play a portion of a tape, but either he couldn't find it or he couldn't get it to play the way he wanted to.
The truth is, is nobody could understand what was on the tapes.
Wilhelm tried to play a part of the tape and he screwed it up.
He didn't play very well.
Scott Scarborough confirmed.
Maybe it didn't match well with the court's tape recorder, but to tell you the truth, there isn't a lot there one way or the other.
A lot of it's unintelligible.
Sure, we could have put words in and said, here's what was apparently said, but our attorney told us no.
We're not going to play that game of haggling over what was said when it's obviously unintelligible.
Now, maybe that strategy was wrong.
There's no doubt, in fact, that it was wrong.
The jury should have been able to listen to the tapes to find out what the prosecution had done, but the judge said no.
The judge allowed the jury to read the transcripts of what the prosecution said was on the tapes, but they were not allowed to listen to the tapes to find out that the tapes were unintelligible and that the prosecution had actually pasted portions of different sentences together and had made up the meaning of the words on the tape when they couldn't understand it.
Now maybe that strategy was wrong.
What do you think, listeners?
So when the jury went to deliberate, they didn't have the transcripts, only the tapes, Musili recalls.
And after two hours, they sent a message to the judge that they wanted the transcripts.
So she asked, does anyone have any objection to my giving them the transcripts?
I said, of course I object, Your Honor.
The transcripts aren't in evidence, and they're not allowed to have anything in the jury room that's not in evidence.
This obviously proves my original contention, that they can't understand the tapes.
Otherwise, they wouldn't be asking for the transcripts.
So during the testimony, the jury was given the transcripts and not allowed to hear the tapes, and then they went for deliberations.
They were given the tapes and no transcripts.
And of course, they couldn't understand them.
So when they asked for the transcripts, guess what?
The judge says, well, I let them have them in the jury box, so I'm going to let them have the transcripts in the jury room.
I don't see that it makes any difference.
It made every difference in the world, folks.
The jury couldn't understand the tapes, so they were given the fantasy that the prosecution made up in the transcripts.
Federal District Court Judge Nancy Edmonds, a Bush appointee, had been on the bench eighteen months at the time.
This was her first judicial appointment.
As a private attorney, her specialty was commercial litigation.
Berg argues the jury's request for the transcripts didn't necessarily mean they couldn't understand them.
One thing that the transcripts do is allow you to find your place in a particular tape, The tapes themselves were quite lengthy.
Well, to bring a long story to a short conclusion, the jury convicted the next morning.
Although Karen Scarborough says at least one juror was in tears as the verdict was read, and that juror has refused to talk to the Scarboroughs since the trial, apparently under the impression that such communications are improper.
Sentencing was set for November 18th.
And the prosecution recommended prison sentences of 18 to 24 months.
The defense is seeking, of course, a new trial, and that's all passed.
The big question is whether Karen Scarborough, along with Scott, on whose health insurance she now depends, will be allowed to remain free on bond pending her appeal, or whether her frail health will again be put at risk in prison for testifying that a friend sat in the car with her one day in April of 1990.
Why?
We think they want us to incriminate a fellow Libertarian, Karen says.
He didn't have anything to do with the bombing either, but we know who they want.
They want us to roll over on him.
But why would the government fear such ineffective gadflies as the Libertarians, whose vote totals seldom register as much as a blip on the radar screens come election night in Michigan?
Enough to spend the time and money to railroad them?
Our government today, folks, is so paranoid that they'll protect themselves with cannons against gnats.
What was so threatening about the Branch Davidians?
They got whacked.
The government sees itself as being beleaguered.
Was the jury carefully selected by prosecutors to contain only the ignorant and the brain-dead?
Nope.
They were regular citizens.
A real cross-section.
But people today don't want to believe their government is doing this.
They don't want to believe their government would trump something like this up.
The real danger in this kind of case is that the court was supposed to be the last bastion of protection to our constitutional rights.
And they're letting the government get away with everything it wants to.
Every single motion was dismissed.
And anything the government wanted to do was okay.
Massili argued to the jury how this case was put together.
It was put together like something out of a World War II propaganda film.
You've got the stormtroopers breaking in at ungodly hour when no one would imagine it.
You just take this scenario and instead of Troy, Michigan, put it in the Warsaw Ghetto and all you've got to do is put the uniforms on it.
But Masili came out raided in 1969, trying selective service cases, and the biggest change I've seen is in the juries.
Back then, he was representing companies, conscientious objectors, who were not very popular, to say the least.
And he remembers winning cases when he'd have juries that included men who had served in World War II.
That would include women with two sons in Vietnam.
And there was a presumption of innocence then, but now, today, there's a presumption of guilt.
You are guilty until you can prove yourself innocent, and God help you if you can't.
Doesn't matter if anyone can prove you guilty or not.
If you can't prove that you are innocent, you are automatically presumed guilty.
College students today aren't any dumber than they ever were.
But they aren't given anything to read that was published before 1965.
It used to be that you read a biography of Jefferson, and you read about what he thought.
Now all they read about is whether he fathered children with his black slave.
It's that ability to think and analyze that's missing!
Most people have not had an original thought in their entire life.
Constitutional grounds?
Citing the Constitution and challenging juries to stand up for its principles?
You just get blank stares.
They have no idea what you're talking about.
They never heard about it.
They don't know what it says, and some of them don't even know what it is.
Karen Scarborough lost her job over all of this.
She had to take out a second mortgage to pay the legal fees, which are over $30,000.
$30,000.
And the local libertarians...
Well, Karen was the vice chairman of the party last year.
All the major events, including the reception for the presidential candidate, were held at her house.
So they knew if they took care of us, it'd shut down the party and the state.
And it has effectively removed their protest.
Nobody goes down to the post office anymore on tax day to protest the Internal Revenue Service.
So what has that got to do with today, besides the fact that, obviously, some good people were railroaded for their political affiliations to neutralize the threat to the status quo in the state of Michigan from the Libertarian Party?
Well, I'll tell you what, folks.
Since then, Scott Scarborough has been serving his term of 18 months in federal prison.
He served his sentence in Morgantown, F.C.I.
in West Virginia.
Federal Judge Nancy Edmonds stated that he would have fared much better in her court, and I quote, if he had been a drug dealer or some other disadvantaged person, end quote.
That makes me want to puke all over Nancy Edmonds.
I mean just puke my guts up right in her face.
If he had been a drug dealer or some other disadvantaged person, he would have fared much better in her court.
Karen Scarborough was sentenced to eight months home confinement.
Although neither individual had any prior record, bond pending appeal was denied.
Now here, folks, is the gist of all of this.
In April of 1994, Karen Scarborough, exercising her First Amendment right to free speech, got permission from her probation officer to be absent from her home from 7 a.m.
to 8.30 p.m.
During this period of time, she attended a tax protest on tax day within the appointed hours.
that her promotion officer gave her permission to be absent from her home.
The only restrictions put upon her by the judge was that she could not have a weapon and she could not drink any alcoholic beverages or engage in the partaking of any dope or drugs except those prescribed by a physician.
She attended a tax protest on tax day.
She was subpoenaed to court for a violation of probation, and although she proved she was at home at the designated time, federal judge Nancy Edmonds sentenced her to another eight months of home confinement, citing a violation of probation.
The judge said, quote, I can't believe that you thought you could do anything that you wanted to do during that time period, end quote.
Visits to West Virginia to visit Scott were prohibited.
Now, both cases, folks, were appealed to the Federal Appeals Court.
Both convictions were affirmed in purcurium decisions.
Now, listen to this carefully.
That means that no single justice would take responsibility for the decision.
Chicken pluckers.
Cowards.
And here's why.
Because these were unpublished decisions.
They were made unpublished because the decisions violated five previously set precedents.
This way, the decisions do not set new precedent and are not published in any law book for reference.
In fact, the records are sealed.
Scott is now serving the remainder of his sentence in a halfway house in downtown Detroit.
He was eligible for home confinement last week, given the fact that he is a model prisoner with no prior record of any kind.
His home confinement was denied, was denied, ladies and gentlemen, after he filed a motion to unseal the records regarding his case.
You see, we all believe that these records contain exculpatory evidence which would overturn this case, and Scarborough maintains that this evidence was withheld at trial by the prosecution, which is a violation of the law.
The probation officer assigned to the Scarboroughs recommended that home confinement be denied to Scott Scarborough because she claims that Karen Scarborough threatened her last week at her home visit.
And I mean this very last week.
Karen Scarborough, ladies and gentlemen, is a friend of mine.
She is a wonderful woman.
She is legally blind.
She walks with braces on her legs.
She has had three kidney transplants.
She suffers from diabetes.
She is hardly able to threaten anyone in any manner, in any way, shape, or form.
Period.
Scott Scarborough will remain in the halfway house until May the 11th.
In the time he has been at the halfway house, one inmate was shot to death shortly before Scarborough's arrival.
Another inmate was shot in the back and paralyzed.
One was hit over the head with a pistol and mug.
Scarborough's caseworker, Ms.
Perryman, had her car window shot out just last week.
All of these incidents give the government ample opportunity to eliminate Scott Scarborough.
If he is successful in his motion, Both prosecutors will be disbarred and Federal Judge Nancy Edmonds will face impeachment proceedings.
And we are going to help bring this about because of this great injustice.
Withholding evidence, ladies and gentlemen, whether inculpatory or exculpatory, is a serious charge.
The Scarboroughs also suspect jury tampering and conspiracy on the part of the U.S.
government.
For these reasons, The Scarboroughs believe that Scott's life is in danger, and I believe this also.
He will also have grounds to sue for damages.
The only way the government can stop him from obtaining justice is to kill him.
The Scarboroughs believe they are part of Operation Phoenix, which is the government's recommendation on how tax protesters should be treated, in effect, with the most harsh and cruel punishment, never mind the fact That she was one of the highest leaders of the Libertarian Party in the state.
And folks, one of the major reasons for all of this is that she is now the National Membership Director of the Constitution Party.
Karen Scarborough is a good woman.
Scott Scarborough is innocent.
And I'm going to ask That tomorrow night, when we give you the telephone numbers and the addresses of the state legislatures in the state of Michigan, and the federal representatives to the Congress, and the Senators of the state of Michigan, and the Governor of the state of Michigan, that you begin calling and faxing and writing these people.
Never mind getting Scott out of jail.
Let's save his life.
And then let's get him out of jail.
And then let's get these crooks out of government.
Now, if that's okay with all of you, Karen Scarborough will be my special guest tomorrow night.
She is the National Membership Director of the Constitution Party.
She has been working from 14 to 16 hours a day to help all of you who belong to the Constitution Party.
And she has certainly been a godsend to me and Aaron Rousseau.
I I know her personally.
I met with her in Michigan at Ferndale.
I can tell you right now, if Karen Scarborough could hurt anybody in this The moon's gonna fall on Los Angeles tonight.
Good night.
Don't miss tomorrow.
And God bless you all.
God bless you all.
God bless you all.
God bless you all.
God bless you all.
▲
Export Selection