From: "Mike Ruppert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For the record - I have slept in Win Richardson's home in Lone Oak, Texas. I have stood on the lake shore where private E-Systems planes used to drop bales of cocaine. I visited a small sail boat on the lake that was set up as an ELINT Intelligence eavesdropping post on Win's house. I have met his wife and daughter - the same daughter whose boyfriend was suicided. Another brave former E-Systems employee (an accountant) named Michelle Cooper, had once shared a lot of information with Win and me. She produced documents showing how E-System funded Top Secret weapons and communications research with drug money which they called "Black Rock" money. Win Richardson is a solid, solid man. I have delivered documents for him to investigator from the U.S. Senate. It is no coincidence that E-Systems (now Raytheon) has always had a retired or current DCI on it's Board. Years ago it was Adm. William Raborn. Today it's (guess who?) John Deutch. Mike Ruppert www.copvcia.com -----Original Message----- From: Herbert Jamieson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 1:05 AM To: cia Subject: [CIA-DRUGS] E systems importing cocaine and kidnapping children for sale overseas(copy of pleading) From: "Herbert Jamieson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- Original Message ----- From: Winfred Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 10:08 PM Subject: [patriotawareness] Re: Proof gov is kidnapping andsellingchildren overs... > Attached is the brief filed in %th Circuit. Its long but will give a lot of > insight. > > Case No. 99-10682 > United States of America, ex rel, WINFRED E. RICHARDSON > Plaintiff - Appellant > v. > E-SYSTEMS INC > Defendant - Appellee > > Brief In Support Of Appeal > Plaintiff/Appellant Winfred E. Richardson files this appeal. because the > lower court erred in its decision. > INTRODUCTION and ARGUMENT > The Court should grant Plaintiffs' because: > 1) The ruling denies appellant the right to a trial by jury as guaranteed > by the Constitution. > · In Apodaca v. Oregon, Justice White observed: "Our inquiry must focus > upon the function served by the jury in contemporary society. As we said in > Duncan, the purpose of trial by jury is to prevent oppression by the > Government by providing a 'safeguard against the corrupt or overzealous > prosecutor and against the compliant, biased, or eccentric judge.' In > Williams; 'This is the fundamental of jury trial which brings it within the > mandate of Due Process' was added. > a. One thing that is obviously clear is how far individuals in the > government has gone, including breaking the law and trampling on the > Constitution, in order to cover up wrong doing committed at and by E-Systems. > b. A case in point is the DoJ's involvement in setting up 30 year IG/DCIS > SSA Chris Hallien and it's attempt to falsely imprison him in order to > cover up The DoJ, DoD and E-Systems RICO activities. > c. E-Systems legal staff attempted to do the same to me by filing knowingly > false charges against me with FBI National Security Agent Danny James.(A > tape of the conversation with Agent James and the head of the Dallas office > of the FBI has been entered in the records). > d. E-Systems delivered what looked like a 'wanted poster' (in the records) > to the Hunt County Sheriffs Department at which time the Sheriff informed > deputies that I was possibly a terrorist and they should use extreme > caution when approaching me. An obvious attempt to have me legally > murdered. When I asked the sheriff why he did it he informed me E-Systems > wanted him to as they thought we were taking pictures of them changing the > tail numbers on aircraft (Tpe entered of this conversation). In the State > of Texas v. Michael Ferris the attorney for the Northeastern Drug > Interdiction Task Force admitted knowing about the drug (cocaine) smuggling > by or through E-Systems (transcript entered in records). > > · William's v Florida > Mr. Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court.*** > In Duncan v. Louisiana we held that the fourteenth Amendment guarantees a > right to a trial by jury in all criminal cases which--were they to be tried > in a federal court would come within the Sixth Amendments guarantee. > Although this was a criminal case Justice Whites statements shows it is > applicable to civil cases as well and maybe more so. > Justice White went on to state; Indeed, pending and after he adoption of > the Constitution, fears were expressed that Article III's provision failed > to preserve the common law right to be tried by a "jury of the vicinage." > That concern, as well as the right to jury in civil as well as criminal > cases, furnished part of the impetus for introducing Amendments to the > Constitution which ultimately resulted in the jury provisions of the Sixth > and Seventh Amendments..............Finally, contemporary legislative and > Constitutional provisions indicate that where Congress wanted to leave no > doubt that it was incorporating existing common law features of the jury > system, it knew how to use express language to that effect. Thus, the > Judiciary bill, signed by the President on the same day that the House and > Senate finally agreed on the form of the Amendments to be submitted to the > States, provided in certain cases for the narrower "vicinage" requirements > which the House had wanted to include in the Amendments. And the Seventh > Amendment, providing for a trial in civil cases, explicitly added that "no > fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the > United States, than according to common law.' > > Denying me a trial by jury is depriving me of Due Process. > 2. Cruel and Unusual Punishment > Any normal person would have to agree that it is cruel and unusual > punishment to punish someone for obeying the law and rewarding the guilty > party while doing so, and this is what the courts ruling does. All records > prove the guilt of the defendant in this case. The law proscribes criminal > prosecution for anyone who has knowledge of wrong doings and does not > report them. Yet I followed the law and was punished by being ordered to > pay the defendants court cost and attorneys fees! > · In District of Columbia v. Carter, the Court held that the District of > Columbia is not a "State or Territory" within the meaning of s 1983. None > the less, although no federal statue expressly provides civil remedies for > a federal officer's violation of a person's federal constitutional rights, > the Court, in Bivins v. Six unknown named agents, held that the federal > courts could award money damages, relying on Bell v. Hood for the principle > that "where federally protected rights have been violated, it has been the > rule from the beginning that courts will be alert to adjust their remedies > so as to grant the necessary relief." > 2) The Court erred in its decision due to false, misleading or incomplete > information. > A. The first thing every Judge instructs a jury to do is hear all the > evidence before making its decision. In this case the Judge heard only one > side before doing what he instructs jurors not to do. He ruled after > hearing only one side. > B. Plaintiffs' allegations are obviously well founded, and not baseless, as > Congressional and DoD investigators was able to find and confirm > Plaintiffs' allegations and Defendants' on Illegal and Conspiratorial > actions has kept Plaintiff for being able to keep Plaintiff out of court. > Allegations plaintiff made are still being investigated and confirmed as > shortly as a few months ago (tape confirming entered). > 3) The fact that the que tam was kept sealed over six (6) years instead of > the six (6) months shows there is problems and if it had been opened in the > six months, as it should have been, if it were not for DoJ personnel as > well as possibly my E-Systems furnished attorney, there would be no questions. > 4) Investigators will confirm that, due to potential baggage, they used > other peoples names on their reports, but will confirm it is my allegations > and the others just confirmed them. > · The defendant has stated it has thousands of employees but wants to argue > that because more than one knew of the wrong doings the allegations could > not be his and this is ludicrous and an insult to any honest persons > intelligence! > 5) Due to a compromised or incompetent attorney, compromised possibly by > the defendant there is no telling what has or has not be entered. > · In the defendants opposition to plaintiffs motion to proceed IFP the > defendant entered the courts ruling where my wrongful termination lawsuit > was thrown out because of something not being filed. > a. My attorney had told me it was thrown out because of it being part of > this action. > b. The court records prove otherwise. > c. I was introduced to my attorney by a confirmed (by the AF/OSI, IG/DCIS > and GAO) E-Systems plant. Ike Ellis stated an attorney had recommended Mr. > Baxter to him. Mr. Ellis was claiming problems with E-Systems at the time > and even filed a civil action himself, which he later dropped. > d. The filed affidavit of Granville Gwin states; "You've reported us to the > OFCCP, NLRB and other government agencies and we are terminating you for it". > e. The DoD and GAO both confirmed I was terminated for blowing the whistle > and that there was fifteen (15) confirmed cases of retaliation and > termination of witnesses and this was relay to Mr. Baxter. > f. Col. Manning Crump admitted under oath he had given my name and > information to the defendant. This lead to my termination. The Supreme > Court has made a ruling that when names are to be kept in confidence and > that confidence is betrayed then the individual and agency is responsible. > g. Based on the above facts I ask the following question: How do you feel > about an attorney that would lose well over one hundred thousand dollars > ($100,000) in his own fees by not filing documents with the court in a case > and would now be in excess of a million? Incompetent or compromised? > 6) Plaintiff reported Common Practice acts as Common Practice acts in a > Conspiracy to Defraud the United States Government and his allegations has > been confirmed by Congressional and DoD investigators and depended on his > attorney to do the proper filing and it not being properly listed may > possibly be due to illegal and conspiratorial acts by the Defendant as > shown above. > 7) Plaintiff has made it well known that he desired a jury trial. If it has > not been requested then it is possibly due to illegal and conspiratorial > acts by the Defendant. > a. It has been confirmed by Congressional and DoD investigators that the > Defendant had a plant by the name of Ike Ellis to "get close to the > Defendant" obviously with the intent to gain information and to mislead the > Plaintiff. Mr. Ellis has admitted he was planted by the Defendant and that > he is a friend and neighbor of E-Systems President and General Manager > Brian Cullen. > > b. Mr. Ellis asked Plaintiff if he had an attorney. When the Plaintiff > stated 'not yet' Mr. Ellis stated an attorney had recommended Mr. Lance > Baxter and that he, Mr. Ellis, had made an appointment with Mr. Baxter for > himself and Plaintiff. Mr. Ellis and Plaintiff went to see and retained Mr. > Baxter to represent them. Mr. Ellis dropped his suit shortly after filing. > Mr. Baxter, the attorney the Defendant led the Plaintiff to, is the > attorney that was representing the Plaintiff in this suit and the attorney > that did the filing for the Defendant. If the Defendant controls the > attorneys for both sides it is understandable the Plaintiff has not got > anywhere, and why former CEO A.L. Lawson stated in a news interview, 'well, > they may spank our hands and tell us not to do it anymore'. > c. I was told by my former attorney Mr. Baxter that my wrongful termination > suit was thrown out because it was part of this suit and only found out in > Defendant/Appellee Raytheon E-Systems response to Plaintiffs' Motion to > Proceed In Forma Pauperis attachment E, which states it was because > Plaintiff made no response. It appears the Defendant did control my former > attorney and could only be more obvious if Mr. Broodo represented both. > > 8) The Defendant has used others to 'get close' to the Plaintiff and gather > information. Two of these who have admitted their use by the Defendant > against the Plaintiff is Mr. Guy Morphew and Mr. Billy Rath (affidavit > already submitted). > 9) The Defendant Has Been Dishonest During Government Investigations and > Had Others To Give False Information And Used Threats and Intimidation to > Get People To Give False Or Misleading Information > a. When the investigation began the government contacted the OFCCP to > obtain records. Shortly after the Director of the OFCCP in Dallas wanted me > to come in to see him. I went with my attorney Mr. Baxter. The Union > Officials interviewed by the OFCCP were former Union Officials and not the > officials who were involved during the termination. One statement I saw was > openly false and will be easy to prove in court. > b. The Defendants legal staff and others used threats and intimidation to > get employees to give false information to investigators as well as > instructing employees what to say and threatening to fire them if they > deviated. This has been confirmed by investigators but the AUSA's involved > refused to do anything about it. > 10) The Defendant, And Defendants Legal Staff, Has Used Corrupt Officials > In A Conspiracy To Falsely Imprison, Allegedly To Cover Up The Defendants > RICO Activities. > a. Defendants General Council sent AUSA Lynn Hastings a memo stating; it > appears Mr. Richardson has went to the Congress and Washington press. AUSA > Hastings then called the defendant in to her office and threatened to file > charges on me if I talked to any current or former E-Systems employees, > Congressional Committees or the press. SA Richard Bollinger, SA Ed Dowling > and 'Carlos' was at the meeting and will confirm this. > b. The Defendant had made up what looked just like a 'wanted poster' from > the Plaintiff and Mr. Lewis Sams badge pictures and had it delivered to the > Hunt County Sheriffs Department. The sheriff posted it and informed > deputies the Plaintiff and Mr. Sams were possibly terrorist and to use > extreme caution when approaching them, in an attempt, Plaintiff believes, > to have the Plaintiff and Mr. Sams killed legally. > c. When the Plaintiff and Mr. Sams went to the Hunt County Sheriff and > asked why he had put up the wanted poster and told deputies that, the > sheriff stated the Defendant wanted him to as the Defendant was afraid the > Plaintiff and Mr. Sams was afraid they were taking pictures of the > Defendant changing the tail numbers on some of the aircraft at E-Systems. > In The State of Texas v. Michael Ferris, Kent Williams, attorney for the > Northeast Texas Drug Interdiction Task Force, admitted knowing about the > drug smuggling by or through E-Systems. These were the planes in question. > d. After a meeting at my house at which AF/OSI SA Richard Bollinger, DoD > IG/DCIS SSA Chris Hallien, FBI SA Mark Briant and a judge met with the > Plaintiff, the three agents were followed to Greenville, around Greenville > as they met others, then to the Hunt County line by Hunt County Deputies. > e. Plaintiff had reported to the agents how employees of the Defendant, > Hunt County Sheriffs Department, the then DIS agent at E-Systems and others > were following and harassing witnesses and their families. The agents had > been skeptical of the reported incidents until the actions mentioned in 1, > 2 and 3 above. After the above mentioned incidents thirty (30) year IG/DCIS > SSA Chris Hallien began investigating the Sheriff's Department. > f. A deputy informed me the sheriff informed deputies not to worry about > SSA Hallien because the Defendant was going to have SSA Hallien indicted. I > informed SSA Hallien and other Congressional and DoD investigators of this. > g. In a conversation with Mr. Sams and his wife I was informed: the > government had threatened to file criminal charges against him if he didn't > drop his wrongful termination suit against E-Systems, as he would have > continued to mischarge if he had not been terminated. Mr. Sams was called > before a grand jury and told what to say, and that if he deviated the > government would file the criminal charges against him, and this testimony > was used to get an indictment against SSA Hallien, which forced his > retirement. > h. Mr. Billy Rath, who was being used by Defendants legal staff to keep > track of me, was called in by Ms. Nancy Hampton, one of the Defendants > attorneys, and asked if he thought the Plaintiff would ever quit pursuing > his case. Mr. Rath stated no, that Plaintiff felt he had been cheated out > of his job and until he got his job back or compensation for his job he > would keep pursuing it. Ms. Hampton then picked up the phone and called FBI > National Security Agent Danny James, in the Dallas office, and knowingly > filed the false charge of extortion against the Plaintiff. > i. Twenty-year employee, Mr. Billy Rath was also a senior estimator. Mr. > Rath had informed me how Defendants legal staff was using him and also gave > that and other information to the government investigators. The Defendant > has a fire block that stops employees from gaining access to pornography on > the Internet. The Defendant checked Mr. Rath's computer for pornography and > found none. At this point they brought in a specialist who put in a disk > and found pornography they claimed Mr. Rath had pulled up. Mr. Rath was > fired or forced to resign. The specialist's wife was living with Mr. Rath. > Mr. Rath invited her to leave around the first part of December. Three > months later she filed some kind of assault with a weapon against Mr. Rath. > 154th District Judge Beacum changed court dates, moving them up, Mr. Rath > would not be notified and would be arrested for not being in court. > j. Judge Beacum was also the visiting judge when the pedophile that > molested my daughter was captured after jumping probation and was wanted > for over six years. Judge Beacum ruled the pedophile had not broken any > laws and turned the pedophile loose. > k. I went to the courthouse to get a list of Judge Beacum's contributors > and it was not on file and his office refused to give me a copy. > 11) Possible Reasons The Government or Corrupt Officials Are Aiding E-Systems > > a. Defendant's documents shows where there was bribery or attempted bribery > of a government official. > b. The governments knowledge of defective aircraft as well as crashes with > loss of life which it refused to do anything about and this includes the > Presidents aircraft as well as King Fauds. > c. Defendant's documents shows Defendants and NSA's involvement in the > German bribery scandal. > d. The Defendants or governments involvement in the before mentioned drug > smuggling using government aircraft and operated under AFSOC contracts. > e. The treasonist sale of state of the art technology that comprises the > security of Israel as well as our on military in that region. > f. I was asked, by a Congressional Committee, to see if there was certain > individuals still working for the Defendant that was involved with the > 'Finders' a group that was/is kidnapping then selling children overseas on > a scale that requires a money laundering operation. It is supported by a > ten page Treasury Department, Customs Agents report. > g. I was asked, by a Congressional Committee, if I knew of, or had > information concerning Defendants possible involvement in 'Brownstone'. > This is where government officials were photographed with young boys > performing oral sex on them. > h. Per Senator John DeCamp children were provided for the entertainment > certain officials at the Republican Convention when it was held in Dallas. > This may have ties to Raytheon Systems, 'Brownstone' and the 'Finders'. > i. I was informed a couple of weeks after President Clinton's election in > November 1992 that word had come down from Washington for the DoJ to > decline on all issues before Clinton is sworn in. I reported this to > Congressional and DoD investigators. January 10 1993, days before President > Clinton was sworn in, the DoJ declined on all issues. > j. The preparer of the GAO Report on E-Systems, SA William Davis, stated > that he had been forced to rewrite the report, watering it down, several > times in order to make it acceptable to the Republicans. > k. When the Republicans gained the majority in the House and Senate, the > first thing they did, even before they were sworn in, closed this and other > investigations, which the Democrats say they are going to reopen when they > gain back the majority. > l. The DoD refuses to do anything about the confirmed firing of Defendants > employees for blowing the whistle and/or giving information, although the > terminations are confirmed. > m. The DoD admitted to Government Affairs, and an employee of the DoD > confirmed it to the Plaintiff, the DoD has never ruled in favor of a > defense contractor whistleblower. > n. Allegedly a report was given to Government Affairs that there is an > agreement between the DoD and DoJ not to prosecute certain government > contractors. > o. Given all of the above information, and the fact that judges are > political appointees, what sane or semi-sane person would not want a jury > trial. It also shows the Defendants and Defendants legal staffs lack of > credibility. > p. The Defendants council mentioned to the judge, in a telephone meeting, > that due to the amount of monies involved a settlement was impossible, as > if this was a reason for the judge to throw out this complicated case. The > government estimate of the rip off's is 25 to 30% of all contracts and this > company is/was doing over three billion dollars a year in business with the > government. The Defendant never tried to settle and why should they when > they own enough political influence and officials to get away with > anything, not to mention the probability of controlling my former attorney, > and the tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars, confirmed by the > government investigators, which also prove plaintiffs allegations are not > baseless, and they have ripped the tax payers off for enough to buy off > almost anyone. > CONCLUSION > Almost daily there is even politicians speaking about how corrupt the > system is and how it is corrupted by 'donations'. If this is not true then > why would the Republicans close an investigation when it has been confirmed > the tax payers has been ripped of for hundreds of millions of dollars? Why > did the DoJ close their part of the investigation after the word come down > from Washington to decline on all issues before Clinton took office? Was it > to cove up the kidnapping then sale of children overseas or the drug > smuggling or the donations? I realize I must now file a separate civil > action against the corrupt government officials involved, but I listed the > actions to show how they have effected this action. The same thing happened > in Irwin Rautenbergs case Air Sea Forwarders v. E-Systems after E-Systems > purchased Air America and took over the CIA's contracts with that company. > The government did everything it could to aid E-Systems but in that case > Mr. Rautenberg had the money to fight, which I have been illegally denied, > to prevent me from obtaining justice and proper fight this action. I, > Winfred E. Richardson, Plaintiff, therefore requests that the Court grant > Plaintiffs appeal. > > > Respectfully submitted, > > ____________________ > Winfred E. Richardson > P.O. Box 94 > Lone Oak, Tx 75453 > 903-447-4211 > _________________ > The recovered monies are a matter of record shown on the investigators > reports. > > > > > At 12:36 PM 1/30/00 -0600, you wrote: > >Pool of children for sexual purposes: > > Harris,etc. > >The two INSIGHT articles , by Timothy W. Maier, in my estimation, prove > >conclusivelyo that sex with children is on thwe agenda of Democrats ANd > >Republicans and U.N. Diplomats. There is a sighting of 121 children in a > >mechanically disabled plane at Denver Airport headed for Europe. I cannot > >prove this. It is anecdotal ,therefore. However, children were definitely > >used for sex at the 1993 APEC Pacific Rim APEC COnference, contractred by > >FBI,National Security Agency, and Ron Browb abd Bill CLinton. They were > >placed there to be videotaped by having sex with dignitaries from 15 naTIONS > >at the 1993 Pacific Rim Conference in Seattle.I personally think this alone > >is enough to impeach Clinton, but I have found no SUpreme COurt of > >Congressman who agrees with me, so they much be indulgindg in the same?? > >Herb Jamieson > >Houston > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get what you deserve with NextCard Visa! Rates as low as 2.9% > Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR, online balance transfers, Rewards Points, > no hidden fees, and much more! Get NextCard today and get the > credit you deserve! Apply now! Get your NextCard Visa at: > http://click.egroups.com/1/913/4/_/26726/_/949473380/ > > eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/patriotawareness/ > http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications > > > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 2.9 percent Intro or 9.9 percent Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW! <a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/NextcardCreative4 ">Click Here</a> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription to digest, go to the ONElist web site, at http://www.onelist.com and select the Member Center link from the menu bar on the left. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
