The Rapeutation of Federal Judge George F. Bason, Jr.

Gathered together in one place, for easy access, an agglomeration of writings and images relevant to the Rapeutation phenomenon.

The Rapeutation of Federal Judge George F. Bason, Jr.

Postby admin » Tue May 10, 2016 7:21 am

The Rapeutation of Federal Judge George F. Bason, Jr.
From "Addendum 2 to Federal Corruption"
by Harry V. Martin
Copyright Napa Sentinel, 1991

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


Federal Judge George F. Bason, Jr., ruled in favor of INSLAW against the U.S. Department of Justice. He awarded INSLAW $6.8 million and lambasted the Justice Department by stating he believed it was guilty of deceit, theft and trickery. The judge's decision was upheld in another court. Recently, a higher court has thrown the ruling out, not because it was right or wrong, but because of the technical question of jurisdiction.

After ruling against the Justice Department, Judge Bason was denied reappointment to the bench for another 14 years. "I have come to believe that my nonreappointment as bankruptcy judge was the result of improper influence from within the Justice Department which the current appointment process failed to prevent," Judge Bason stated to a Congressional hearing into the INSLAW matter. Ironically, the man who prosecuted the INSLAW case in Judge Bason's court for the Justice Department, was appointed to succeed the judge when he was not reappointed.

Judge Bason was the only bankruptcy judge for the District of Columbia from February 8, 1984 through February 7, 1988. He was the trial judge who heard the INSLAW case. "The judicial opinions that I rendered reflected my sense of moral outrage that, as the evidence showed and as I held, the Justice Department stole INSLAW's valuable property and tried to drive INSLAW out of business. Those opinions were upheld on appeal by Judge Bryant in a memorandum that noted my attention to detail and mastery of evidence," Judge Bason further told Congress. "Very soon after I rendered those opinions, my application for reappointment was turned down. One of the Justice Department attorneys who argued the INSLAW case before me was appointed in my stead. Although over 90 percent of the incumbent bankruptcy judges who sought reappointment were in fact reappointed, I was not among them."

Judge Bason told the Congressional hearing that Congress required equal consideration to that given all other candidates must be given to incumbent bankruptcy judges. "Under that mandate, my qualifications were so far superior to my successor's that, on the merits, no rational person could have chosen him over me," the judge stated. "Merit must of course be judged both from the written record, my resume and opinions, and from my reputation amongst the judges and bankruptcy practitioners who knew me. My resume speaks for itself; my opinions have been cited often and reversed seldom; my successor had scant bankruptcy experience and, of course, no opinions. Despite a regulation requiring that at least one member of the Merit Selection Panel be "an attorney with a predominantly bankruptcy practice in the District of Columbia, so far as I know, no member of the panel had ever appeared even once in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia. Hence, no member of the panel had first-hand knowledge of my capabilities as a judge."

Judge Bason added, "The panel failed to interview District Court Chief Judge Aubrey Robinson, who exercises general supervisory authority over administrative aspects of the Bankruptcy Court and whose name I specifically suggested to the panel. Every year during my tenure, Chief Judge Robinson praised my performance as a bankruptcy judge. For example, in his May 1986 annual report to the D.C. Circuit Judicial Conference, he noted that despite 'increased case load...the Bankruptcy Court is basically current' because of Judge Bason's 'extraordinary efforts, perseverance and hard work'."

The panel also never notified Judge Bason of any adverse comments nor was he given any opportunity to address any adverse comments. "I have repeatedly sought and repeatedly been denied any official explanation why the decision not to reappoint me was made, " he added. "A number of the district judge members of the Judicial Council, when they received the Merit Selection Panel's report, were so dismayed at the panel's failure to recommend my reappointment that they caucused to see if there was anything they could do to reverse the process. They concluded that there was unfortunately no time left. When the chairmen of the bankruptcy committees of the two largest Bar Associations in the District of Columbia found out about the decision not to reappoint me, they too looked for ways to reverse the decision, and they too concluded there wasn't time."

In March 1987, Justice Department officials were talking with an important witness about the subject matter of his testimony. Then it developed the witness had recanted his testimony favorable to INSLAW. One of the Justice Department's lawyers apparently commented, "We've got to get rid of that judge (referring to Bason)." In May 1988, a news reporter with excellent contacts within the Justice Department states that the Justice Department could have procured Bason's removal. The reporter believes that the chairperson of the Merit Selection Panel was approached privately and informally by one of her old and trusted friends from her days in the Justice Department. The friend is believed to have told her that Bason was mentally unbalanced, as evidenced by his unusually forceful "anti-government" opinions. Her persuasive powers coupled with the fact that other members of the panel or their law firms might appear before her as litigating attorneys may have caused the vote against the judge. The reporter later stated that a high Justice Department official had boasted to him that Bason's removal was because of his INSLAW rulings.

"If Justice Department officials were willing to steal from and try to liquidate INSLAW and then to lie about it under oath, there is every reason to believe they would not hesitate to do whatever was necessary and possible to remove from office the judge who first exposed their wrongdoing. I can no longer escape the conclusion that most knowledgeable lawyers in Washington reached long ago. I would not have lost my job as bankruptcy judge but for my rulings in the INSLAW case. I have been told by legal search firms that I am now considered to be too controversial a figure to be employable by any of the large law firms. I am paying the full price for doing my duty to render equal justice without regard to rank or position. As a judge, I could not and would not do otherwise," Bason told Congress. "The independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers are among the glories of our form of government. It strikes at the heart of those principles for the Justice Department to retaliate against a judge by causing his removal. Such retaliation is the mark of a police state, not a democratic America."
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17418
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Rapeutation of Federal Judge George F. Bason, Jr.

Postby admin » Mon May 16, 2016 5:55 am

Federal Corruption: Inslaw
by Harry V. Martin

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


EDITOR'S NOTE: When discussing the widespread corruption in the federal Bankruptcy Courts, it is difficult to focus on just the Northern California jurisdiction. This new series will focus on the extent of the corruption throughout the nation and its linkage to various courts.

When the U.S. Government sent Anthony Souza to Northern California to investigate what government officials called "the dirtiest system" in the United States, it was aware that the entire bankruptcy system is unraveling. Former LendVest Trustee Charles Duck was the main focal point of Souza's investigation -- even though a local bankruptcy judge called him the most "honest man" he had ever known. Duck's ties to bankruptcy judges throughout the Bay Area is providing a picture of intense corruption going deep inside the law enforcement agencies. Even Souza admits privately that his hands are tied.

There has been one known murder in Northern California that has strong possible links to the bankruptcy system. There have been several more in Texas. This series will focus on different incidents from various parts of the country.

One of the most bizarre cases of corruption in the bankruptcy system involves a small Washington-based computer software firm called INSLAW. In 1982 the firm signed a three year contract for $10 million with the U.S. Department of Justice. The software program INSLAW developed was a case-management computer program called PROMIS. The software, which was developed by Bill Hamilton, enabled the U.S. attorneys to keep track of information on cases, witnesses and defendants, and to manage their caseloads more effectively.

Though the U.S. Attorney's Office placed the PROMIS program into operation in several of its offices, it refused to pay Hamilton. Subsequently Hamilton was forced into the bankruptcy court. Former U.S. Attorney General Elliot Richardson, representing Hamilton, advised him to sue the Justice Department for stealing his software.

Anthony Pasciuto, who was the deputy director of the Executive Office for U.S. Trustees, which oversees bankruptcy estates on behalf of the court, had stated that the Justice Department was improperly applying pressure on his office to convert INSLAW's Chapter 11 reorganization into a Chapter 7 liquidation, which would mean that all company assets, including the rights to PROMIS would be sold at auction.

U.S. Trustee Cornelius Blackshear corroborated Pasciuto's story. Two days after he was visited by Justice Department officials, Blackshear issued a sworn affidavit recanting his earlier testimony.

The Justice Department recommended that Pasciuto be fired. The memo seeking his dismissal reads "But for Mr. Pasciuto's highly irresponsible actions, the Department would be in a much better litigation posture than it presently finds itself."

Federal Bankruptcy Judge George F. Bason, Jr., ruled in 1987 that the Justice Department had acted illegally in trying to put INSLAW out of business. Bason sent Edwin Meese a letter recommending that he designate an appropriate outside official to review the dispute because of the prima facie evidence of perjury by Justice Department officials, Meese did not respond.

Later that year after nearly three weeks of trial, Bason ruled in favor of INSLAW in its suit against the Justice Department. "The department (of Justice) took, converted, stole INSLAW's software by trickery, fraud and deceit," the judge stated, adding, "the Justice Department engaged in an outrageous, deceitful, fraudulent game of cat and mouse, demonstrating contempt for both the law and any principle of fair dealing." Judge Bason ordered the Justice Department to pay INSLAW $6.8 million. Bason's verdict was upheld on appeal by U.S. District Court Judge William B. Bryant. Three months after Bason's ruling, he was denied re-appointment to the bankruptcy court.


Hamilton's trouble began when a friend of Meese attempted to buy out INSLAW, but Hamilton turned him down. In a court document, the potential buyer is quoted as saying, "We have ways of making you sell." It was after that the trouble for INSLAW began.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on investigations, chaired by Senator Sam Nunn, began an investigation into the INSLAW case. Once the inquiry got under way, the Senate Judiciary Committee's chief investigator, Ronald LeGrand, received a phone call from an unnamed senior officer at the Justice Department, a person LeGrand has known for years. The caller told LeGrand that the "INSLAW case was a lot dirtier for the Department of Justice than Watergate had been, both in its breadth and its depth."

The Nunn Committee completed its investigation and published its report. It recognized that INSLAW has been a victim of the system and stated that "the Justice Department had been uncooperative, refusing to allow witnesses to testify without representatives of the litigation division being present to advise them. The effect of their presence was to intimidate those who might otherwise have cooperated with the investigation." The report states, "The staff learned through various channels of a number of Department employees who desired to speak to the Subcommittee, but who chose not to out of fear for their jobs."

Congressman Jack Brooks of Texas has opened a new investigation into the INSLAW case. Brooks is investigating allegations that Justice Department officials, including Meese, conspired to force INSLAW into bankruptcy in order to deliver the firm's software to a rival company. The rival firm, according to court records and law enforcement officials, was headed by Earl W. Brian, a former Cabinet officer under then California Governor Ronald Reagan and a longtime friend of several high-ranking Republican officials. Meese had accepted a $15,000 interest-free loan from Brian. Meese's wife was an investor in the rival company. This is the same company that allegedly sought to buy INSLAW from Hamilton and made the alleged threat.

What happened to PROMIS?

* The program is in use throughout the nation and has been used also for military intelligence information. It has the ability to track troop movements.

* An official of the Israeli government claims Brian sold the PROMIS program to Iraqi military intelligence at a meeting in Santiago, Chile. The software could have been used in the recent Persian Gulf War to track U.S. and allied troop movements. Ari Ben-Menashe, a 12 year veteran of Israeli intelligence, made the statement in a sworn affidavit to the court.

* The software is now operative with the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the U.S. Department of Justice. Only the Justice Department is authorized by the court to use the software.

* Brian now claims he acquired the property rights to the software and consummated a sale to Israel, although he had allowed its use by the Israeli intelligence forces for as many as five years before the actual sale.

In essence, a small company in Washington developed a very sensitive computer program which the Justice Department obtained. The courts ruled in favor of the developer and the judge who made the ruling was never re-appointed. The software was acquired by a friend of Meese and the Justice Department has never paid for its use and has allowed other agencies the right of its use.

The bankruptcy court was a tool, as it appears to be with other jurisdictions, to support the economic gain of a few. Charles Duck was not alone, as the record will prove.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17418
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Return to A Growing Corpus of Analytical Materials

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests