abuse, Alex Kozinski, Censorship, Central District of California, Debra Wong Yang, Fraud on the court, fundamental rights, Judge A. Howard Matz, U.S. Marshal Darcy Smith, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In criminal prosecutions, where guilt must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, the Supreme Court requires a conviction to rest on more than the uncorroborated confession of the defendant or his appointed counsel. Opper v. United States, 348 U.S. 84 (1954).
The majority unduly disregards the underlying reason for the very existence of the appeal, that the accused DENIES the charges he transmitted, not falsely admits it on the appeal, or else why even an appeal????
The dissent from the government attempts to minimize the importance of the false confession by taking the position that the facts should be CENSORED.
The problem can be traced back to the failure of today’s judiciary to stand up to clear abuse of governmental authority as well as its unwillingness to protect the fundamental rights of all Americans.
“FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE GOING TO BE PROTECTED, BUT NOT ALL.” Judge A. Howard Matz
No other case, however, reflects a greater surrender on the part of the courts of the citizens’ fundamental rights simply because it is told “Trust Your Government.” As far as I am concerned, the Constitution demands far more.
Never before have we condoned so great an infringement on the fundamental rights of so many Americans. The government’s rationales are flimsy, at best, and don’t come close to outweighing the recognized interests of free individuals in keeping the entirety of their fundamental rights.