THE RAPE OF JUSTICE BY EUSTACE MULLINS (1989) This scathing broadside against the American judicial system covers problems from almost every angle. Corrupt lawyers, activist judges, Masonic control of the legal system, Marxist legal philosophy, corporate law, constitutional law, consent decrees, 'civil rights', and much more. He exposes the syndicates behind the NAACP, ADL, CSL and ACLU, whose purpose is to wreak chaos on American laws and traditions and provides first hand anecdotes of his personal struggles with the corrupt legal system, as well as reams of fascinating and alarming insights into America's 'Justice Cartel' TABLE OF CONTENTS LEGAL ANARCHY ............................................................................................................................................. 4 THE ORIGIN OF LAW ...................................................................................................................................... 11 A PLAGUE OF LAWYERS ............................................................................................................................... 33 PLAGUE OF LAWYERS, CONTINUED ............................................................................................................. 52 JUDGE NOT .................................................................................................................................................... 74 THE SUPREME COURT ................................................................................................................................ 104 THE COURT AS ARENA ............................................................................................................................... 133 THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ................................................................................................................... 151 DURANCE VILE PRISONS AND PENAL REFORM ......................................................................................... 171 J. EDGAR HOOVER THE CASE OF THE STRANGE DIRECTOR .................................................................... 183 LAWFARE I STRANGE CASE OF THE SCHIZOPHRENIC DRIVER ................................................................. 201 LAWFARE II THE STRANGE CASE OF THE SENILE MILLIONAIRE ............................................................... 212 FREEDOM OF SPEECH, ANYONE? .............................................................................................................. 226 TAXATION WITHOUT HOPE ......................................................................................................................... 231 THE TAXING POWER.................................................................................................................................... 241 MULLINS ON EQUITY ................................................................................................................................... 258 OUR LEGAL FUTURE ................................................................................................................................... 284 FOREWORD In my travels throughout the United States, I have found that the first complaint of our citizens is the sorry state of our legal system. They do not complain that the laws themselves are onerous, but rather that their administration is almost universally unfair and unjustified. I have even heard farmers arguing with each other at their markets, each protesting with inverted pride that "Our county has the crookedest lawyers and judges in this state," only to be met with the fervent response from a farmer representing another county, "Oh, no, our lawyers and 1 judges are a lot crookeder than the ones in your county!" Page Americans recognize that we must have laws, and that we must abide by them, otherwise life would become intolerable. The problem is that law-abiding citizens are usually greeted in our courts with disbelief that anyone still obeys the laws in this nation, and two, that a legal system which is operated by and for criminals has no greater enemy than the law-abiding citizen. The first purpose of law has always been "Salus Populi," the safety of the people. I write this in a building which has five locks on every door. Twenty-five years ago, the doors were never locked. We hardly knew where the key to the front door was kept. With hundreds of other citizens in Washington during its tropical summers, I went to a nearby park to sleep in the era before air conditioning. Today, no one in his right mind would close his eyes in a Washington park, either by day or by night. It is rightfully known as the "murder capital of the world," rather than as the capital city of the United States of America. This situation has been created, not by the negligence of the police, who are working harder than ever, but by the legal system, which abruptly denied the previous basis of our legal system, "Salus Populi," in 1933, with the advent of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who adopted the Marxist concept that the legal system was being used unfairly to defend property. Because of the Communist decree that all property was now the property of the state, the legal system need no longer defend crimes against personal property. This was soon extended to crimes against persons. The doctrine of compulsory equality meant that no citizen was entitled to wear a gold watch or to live in a large home. Other citizens who wished to deprive them of their excess property, even at the cost of their lives, were looked upon with approval by the legal system. If they injured or killed too many citizens in their exuberance, they might be confined for a short time, but they were soon released to continue the Marxist campaign of "levelling," that is, of reducing all citizens to a common level of fear and despair. This goal was first achieved in the Soviet Union, when Wall Street bankers financed the "noble experiment in compulsory equality." Soviet Russia was reduced to a giant concentration camp, a Gulag in which tomorrow might be worse than today, but it would surely be no better. The United States has travelled that same road with remarkable speed, constantly accelerating the techniques which force our citizens to new levels of personal depth and degradation. Under this Marxist system, our citizens have found that the legal system is now something quite apart from "the law," that is, the fixed doctrine under which we live. A law is a fixed power. In contrast, the administration of the law today is a fluid power, in flux, and subject to outside influences, mainly the power of money and its concomitant political influence. When an American citizen comes into court today, he is not faced with the power or the majesty of the law. To his dismay, he finds that this force is no longer present. Instead, he finds that he is facing the power of money, and the power of political influence. Traditionally, the scales of justice are depicted as awaiting the weight of the 2 evidence. A preponderance on one side or the other will tip them to a just Page conclusion. Indeed, this is the ideal to which we still aspire. Unfortunately, it is rarely found today in our courts. If an attorney finds that the weight of evidence is tipping the scales against his client, he immediately employs one of the myriad techniques of "civil procedure" to have that evidence declared inadmissible, to have his opponent's witnesses impeached or found incompetent, and to mount a counterattack of his own to tip the scales back to favor his client. This technique is called "practicing law." Like any other skill, it is honed by constant practice, but this skill depends heavily on its practitioner's willingness to employ any subterfuge on his client's behalf. It is as though a football game were being played during which the players were allowed to commit any unsportsmanlike or illegal act in order to gain a point, with the umpire (that is, the judge), actually cooperating in and officially approving the illegal conduct. In legal parlance, this has a name; it is known as "professional courtesy," because the judge, like the lawyers, is also a member of the bar. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I extend heartfelt thanks to the staff of the Library of Congress, the curator of the John W. Davis Collection at the Law Library of Washington and Lee University, and most especially, to the staff of the Law Library of the University of Virginia (and indirectly, to Thomas Jefferson, who sponsored this splendid university) for their painstaking cooperation in making this research possible. My sincere appreciation to Bill M. for his valuable guidance in the preparation of this book, and to my correspondents throughout the United States who have sent crucial material for my 3 research. Page LEGAL ANARCHY In perusing articles in the nation's press concerning the present practice of law, one can only ask whether the lunatics have finally taken over the asylum. Consider the following; a mother is ordered confined to jail for many months by a judge because she refuses to obey a court order from a judge who demands that she turn over her infant daughter to a divorced father. The mother refuses, because she states that the father has sexually abused the child, a statement reinforced by medical evidence. After twenty-seven months of confinement, she is still in prison, but has never faced a jury or been convicted and sentenced for any offense. Another mother, in the state of California, is sent to jail because she refuses to turn over her fifteen year old son