By Judge London
Due Process is a thing of the past. Is has been buried by the news media in the Court of Public opinion. An Accusation is all that is needed today for a conviction. The allegation alone makes out a Prima Facie case. No Proof is necessary.
One is Guilty until proven innocent. That is the criminal justice Standard of Proof in most 3rd World and Socialist Countries. There is no longer the Presumption of Innocence as once in America.
Because of Social Media, the News cycle is very short. A News Story can go around the World in less than half an hour. A Lie can get dressed and go around the World before Truth gets out of bed.
Gossip and Rumors spread fast, but a Lie spreads more quickly. Good News travels fast, but Bad News moves faster. The Watch Word of the Times is “If you haven’t heard a Rumor by 10 AM, start one.”
The News Media has aided and abetted the empowerment of the Court of Public Opinion. It is Tabloid Journalism. Journalism has become Jihad. It appears that 99% of the stories about Donald Trump are presented with a negative spin. This has given rise to the Supremacy of Twitter. Trump’s Constituents can get his thoughts and intentions directly from him, unfiltered.
The Constitution cannot protect you in the Court of Public opinion. For there is no recitation of your Rights because you have none. There is no Notice of the Charges Against you, no Right to Confront the Witnesses Against you, and no Investigation, no assignment of Counsel, no Arraignment, and no opportunity to enter a Plea.
The Evidence is Hearsay, Gossip, Rumor, and Innuendo. There is no Jury. Anyone who hears the allegations constitutes a one-person Judge and Jury. The Verdict is often swift and sure. There is no Appeal of the initial Verdict and no Reconsideration.
Punishment is guaranteed. It is often brutal, cruel and inhumane, and often ends with a Summary Execution. An electronic Lynch Mob can be assembled quickly in this Age of Social Media. You lose your reputation, job, livelihood, and property. You also lose your good standing in the community and among your peers, and sometimes, even your life. It could be by suicide, or at the hands of some self-appointed vigilante.
This is the ultimate Mockery of Justice. Where is our beloved Constitution, and Bill of Rights?
Is this still a Civil Society? Has Polite Society died? Is this a collapse of the Civil Order? Of the Social Order?
When Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee, and the Democrats started looking for dirt on Donald Trump, they unleashed a whirlwind that has come back and consumed more Democrats than Republicans. None of the stench has stuck to Teflon Trump.
The Scourge has touched just about every area of society; the News Media, Hollywood, Actors, Producers, Politicians, school teachers, religious leaders, and jurists.
One of the leading Democratic Fund Raisers, Harvey Weinstein, was among the first to bite the dust. He was forced to resign from his own company and now faces felony sex assault charges in several states, including New York.
The List grows longer every day. Senator Al Franken, Congressman John Conyers, Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose, Mark Halpern, Kevin Spacey, are now among those judged in the Court of Public Opinion. Some have resigned from Congress while others find themselves fired from multi-million dollar salaried positions.
Now, a Federal Republican Judge, appointed by President Ronald Reagan, and the only one to back the President’s alleged Travel Ban, has come under fire. The allegations against him were trotted out in 2008 when Judge Kozinski was investigated for viewing porn on his private computer.
Judge Alex Kozinski, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was born in Romania to Holocaust survivors in 1950.
Kozinski was appointed to the 9th Circuit by President Ronald Reagan in 1985.
Judge Alex Kozinski resigned January 1st, 2018 after several former clerks made allegations of sexual misconduct against him. One is now a law school professor. Another is a writer of romance novels. Neither of the six has ever filed a formal complaint of sexual misconduct against the judge.
The Judge has been alleged to have kept and viewed porn on his personal computer in his private Chambers. It is alleged he showed some of the porn clips and images to friends and close associates, including several of his clerks. There is no allegation that he touched or attempted to rape anyone. The only allegations are that he looked at them suggestively and asked them suggestive questions.
Even after allowing for some embellishment, these accusations amount to little more than the first impressions of women allowed to co-exist in a previously all-male sanctum. They are like newly arrived immigrants who do not want to assimilate; they want to change the status quo normal to fit their old environment.
When people who were historically excluded are invited into the inner sanctums of power, they should try to have a sense of humor, thick skin and tolerance. There is an air of ingratitude and a sense of piling-on here. The timing of these accusations for the second time, with the advent of the #MeToo Movement, is a bit suspicious.
This Judge trusted these clerks and tried to accept them as equals. As such, they may have been expected to take a little ribbing and joshing.
The Judge does not belong in the same conversation as Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, or Matt Lauer. These Democratic Hillary Supporters raped, coerced, and inflicted all kinds of physical and psychological distress on numerous innocent women and men to gratify their sexual lusts.
Judge Kozinski looked at two women and asked them if they were emotionally aroused by the pictures. This form of insane mass hysteria will drive a wedge between men and women in the workplace. It has already had a chilling effect on normal heterosexual relations in America.
Four of the former clerks spoke on condition of anonymity, but two spoke On the Record. They apparently did not shy away from the publicity.
Ms. Heidi Bond is a former clerk of Judge Kozinski. She said that he called her into his office several times, pulled up pornography on his computer, and asked her if it aroused her sexually. She clerked for him from 2006 to 2007. She said the porn was not related to any case in the office.
Ms. Bond is one of the six women, all former clerks, and junior staffers, who alleged that Kozinski subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments. She said she recalled three instances when the judge showed her porn in his office. She went on to clerk for the Supreme Court and now works as a romance novelist writing under the name Courtney Milan. She writes hot and steamy sex-scenes in her Romance Novels, but she was embarrassed when the Judge showed her porn on his computer.
In 2008, the Los Angeles Times revealed that the judge had maintained an email list that he used to distribute crude jokes, some of them sexually themed, and that he had a publicly accessible website that contained pornographic images.
A judicial investigation ultimately found that Judge Kozinski did not intend to allow the public to see the material and that, instead, the judge and his son were careless in protecting a private server from being accessible on the Internet.
Judge Anthony J. Scirica, then the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, wrote at the time that Kozinski’s “conduct exhibiting poor judgment concerning this material created a public controversy that can reasonably be seen as having resulted in embarrassment to the institution of the federal judiciary.”
Ms. Bond said the judge also showed her a chart he claimed he and his friends from college had made to list the women with whom they had had sexual relations.
One accuser spoke of him looking her body up and down in a less-than-professional way. Another reported about his fixation on the idea she should exercise naked.
Judge Kozinski went out of his way to throw Donald Trump a lifeline. In a surprising and late dissent to the 9th Circuit’s ruling on Trump’s first travel ban, he argued that it would violate the First Amendment to take Trump’s campaign statements evincing anti-Muslim animus seriously (or literally).
A federal district court judge in Hawaii, who was a former high school classmate of Barack Obama, issued an order holding that the second travel ban could not be enforced because it violated the Establishment Clause.
In a kind of pre-buttal, that is a counter argument before a Rebuttal is called for, to any eventual appeal of the Hawaii decision, Judge Kozinski argued it was inappropriate for courts deciding Establishment Clause claims to look at the campaign statements of those who would become elected officials and enforce the laws. He claimed reliance on such statements to prove discrimination was “folly” because they are unreliable: “Candidates say many things on the campaign trail; they are often contradictory or inflammatory. No shortage of dark purpose can be found by sifting through the daily promises of a drowning candidate when in truth the poor shlub’s only intention is to get elected.”
Kozinski went still further, suggesting such reliance to prove discriminatory motive runs afoul of the First Amendment rights of candidates to engage in political speech.
Kozinski said the reliance on campaign statements would “chill campaign speech, despite the fact that our most basic free speech principles have their ‘fullest and most urgent application precisely to the conduct of campaigns for political office.’ ” He imagined “eager research assistants” mining the archives of campaign statements, engaged in a kind of “evidentiary snark hunt.”