Castillo:
The Ultimate Betrayal
How
To Use the Justice Department's Agents Manual to Defend In Court Against
Dishonest Agents
Picture a society where the government employs thousands of its citizens
to inform on their friends, family members and business associates; where
tens of millions of dollars in government funds are spent annually paying
those who inform; where police can obtain warrants to search and seize
private property based on reports from hidden sources; where the only
way to win early release from prison is to tell stories about others.
This is done as informants exert growing control over agents and judges
fail to impose any checks or balances. Welcome to the United States, 1999.
Emphatically and without equivocation, outgoing Inspector General Michael
Bromwich was correct when he made his recommendation that an outside
office be established to serve as a permanent watchdog for the FBI and
the DEA. He further stated that outside monitoring "has a greater
deterrent effect, and has more credibility with he public than the FBI
and DEA policing themselves." He is also correct in his findings
that abuses by informants and law enforcement threaten the rights and
safety of innocent people, as well as the integrity of the courts. He
is crystal clear when citing several cases where the government mishandled
DNA evidence; the deadly mishandling of the Ruby Ridge and Mount Carmel
standoffs in 1993; and the bungled investigation of the Atlanta Olympics
bombing that resulted in the media crucifixion of the innocent Richard
Jewell.
A few years ago I became an "Expert Witness" for the defense
(including the Federal Public Defenders Office) on federal drug cases
throughout the United States. My job is to research the Discovery/Bates
material and determine if the DEA/FBI agents violated any of their agency's
policies or procedures while conducting the case. Most defense attorneys
attempt to make their case by targeting the credibility of informants.
As I see it, federal agents are the foundation of their case. If you
can prove "misconduct," the foundation will crack. In my experience,
you can prove "misconduct" on the informant and still lose
the case. However, in just about every case I came across, it was revealed
that both the agents and informants had applied some "misconduct"
in their reports and in their grand jury testimony.
That's right - informants are required to submit their own handwritten
Informant Statement when debriefed by the agent, as per Agents Manual.
When an allegation is made of misconduct, the defense then has the "probable
cause" to request the agent's file from The Office of Professional
Responsibility (Internal Affairs) to support their case. The Department
of Justice will fight hard to suppress this request. But judges have
complied with this request and even gone a step further by entering
the Agents Manual as an exhibit (Eleuterio Garcia v US). This also makes
it easier to show that there was the possibility of "entrapment"
(Sahadi v US). The hunter now becomes the hunted. When hunted down and
captured, the findings may result in termination of the agent, but more
often will result in a "politically connected" slap on the
wrist.
The Chief of the Criminal Division in the Reagan Justice Department,
now a judge on the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, offers this chilling
warning in lectures to federal prosecutors: "Criminals are likely
to say and do almost anything to get what they want, especially when
what they want is to get out of trouble with the law." Judge
Stephen S. Trott continues, "This willingness to do anything
includes not only truthfully spilling the beans on friends and relatives,
but also lying, committing perjury, manufacturing evidence, soliciting
others to corroborate their lies with more lies, and double-crossing
anyone with whom they come into contact, including - and especially
- the prosecutor."
The second atrocity occurs when a massive cover-up is initiated by
the higher up in the agencies (FBI at Ruby Ridge-Randy Weaver, and Mount
Carmel-Waco). For the first time, thanks to the latest revelation concerning
the FBI at Waco, it is probable that several federal agents will be
incarcerated or forced to take early retirement for giving "false
statements" to Justice. So, as they said in Vietnam, "tag
'em and bag 'em."
For several years I have been lecturing that we should "incarcerate
the criminals within our own government." Danny O. Coulson, the
retired FBI assistant deputy director who recently alleged that the
FBI used pyrotechnic shells at Waco, states, "We have an obligation
to tell the truth." The body count is high and the American people
get angry when they feel they are being deceived. But it is more upsetting
when the bad guys are agencies they can no longer trust, such as the
FBI, CIA and DEA.
In closing, I will cite a high profile case in California where a senior
undercover agent has just committed perjury in his grand jury testimony
(I don't think he knows that his misconduct has been discovered). The
perjury was discovered when an Expert Witness revealed that the agent
had violated a particular section of the Agents Manual. The agent probably
thought he could continue to violate this policy because no one would
know where to look. To make matters worse, in the New York side of the
case, the group supervisor had previously been suspended for
paying a US fugitive, in a foreign country, as a documented informant
when the individual was not. This is a major reason why all OPR files
should be available to the defense especially in high profile cases.
This is where a permanent watchdog needs to be, to "protect the
interest of the people, rather than of the government."
All of this information is contained in court records, accessible by
reporters, investigators and the general public. Greater investigation
of "the people's documents" needs to replace total reliance
on government spokesmen.
And finally, whenever a group of individuals who are beyond any investigation,
and can manipulate the press, judges and members of Congress, you're
always going to have those "above the law." We, the people,
need to protect our God given rights. As they say, "if you speak,
they will come."
Gestapos of "Operation Impunity"
December 3, 1999: Here we go again! What does Ruby Ridge, Waco, Atlanta’s
Richard Jewell and, fresh out of the oven, the Department of Justice's
"Operation Impunity," have in common? CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS !!! "Operation
Impunity" has been, for the past few months, in the national news. It
was showboated by none other then Atty. Gen. Jenet Reno. She enlightened
us by telling us how the US Government dismantled, "From top to bottom"
the operation of the notorious late drug trafficker Amado Carillo Fuentes.
This 18 month investigation, if the allegations are founded, has the
possibility of self destruction before the case is prosecuted. I will
explain in detail, but first let me refresh your memory.
A few months back, I submitted an article (letter to the editor) regarding
"The Rules of Engagement" of and by federal agents on the so call "war
on drugs". At that time, outgoing Inspector General Michael Brownswick
recommended that a permanent watchdog for the FBI and the DEA be initiated.
Some asked why. One of the reasons he gave was the continuing abuse
by the federal agents. And this is what brings this story to light.
First and foremost, let me remind you that these are allegations made
by the individuals who claim that their civil rights were violated by
the DEA and FBI on Aug. 12, 1999. I find myself writing this story after
obtaining signed statements from the complainants. Hopefully these allegations
will be properly investigation by an outside agency. Even then, no promises
are made because as we all know to what extent the government goes to
cover up their mistakes. However, do give credit to these allegations,
I know for a fact that at lease one of the agents involved in these
allegations has in the past been "under the scope". Because, it is highly
probable that civil rights violations may be filed in the near future,
I have chosen not to utilize the real names of the individuals that
claimed that their civil rights were violated.
Again, I do not wish to prosecute this case in the media, but I find
that it's of great importance to continue to educate the public on how
these arms of the government enforce their Gestapo's tactics on our
citizens. As we all know, there is a consistency of evidence to show
that these allegation are not new to our judicial system. It all started
in the early dawn hours of August 12, 1999. It was approximately 5:00
am, when federal agents raided a residence in Donna, Texas. The owner
of the residence, Mr. Jose Citizen Sr. confronted the agents at the
door with, "May I help you?". It is alleged that Special Agent Gestapo
asked, "Are you Mr. Jose Citizen.? which Mr. Citizen replied, "Yes,
I am". Agent Gastapo advised Mr. Citizen Sr. that he had in his possession
a federal arrest warrant for him and a warrant to search the house.
He then placed Mr. Citizen Sr. under arrest and instructed him to get
dress.
Note: I feel that, at this time, it is necessary to give you some back
ground of Mr. Jose Citizen Sr. He is 79 years of age and a WWII veteran
who proudly served his country above and beyond the call of duty. Furthermore,
he has had major heart surgery (triple by pass). But most important,
the fact of the matter is that he had never been in trouble with the
law. By this time, there were several agents inside the residence which
included a female agent. Mr. Citizen Sr. proceeded to ask agent Gestapo
what were the charges against him. No one responded to Mr. Jose Citizen
Sr.'s question. The search of the residence was then initiated without
displaying any kind of search or arrest warrant.
Note: An arrest is to deprive a person of his liberty by legal authority
and take him/her into custody for the purpose of holding or detaining
him to answer a criminal demand. Mr. Citizen was never told why he was
arrested. An arrest warrant is a written order of the court which is
made on behalf of the state, or United States, and is based on a complaint
(accompanied by an affidavit or affidavits stating that there is probable
cause to believe that an offense has been committed) issued pursuant
to statute and/or court rule and which commands law enforcement officers
to arrest a person and bring him before magistrate. There was never
an arrest warrant issued for Mr. Citizen Sr.
Form: The warrant shall be signed by the magistrate and shall contain
the name of the defendant or, if his name is unknown, any name (or)
description by which he can be identified with reasonable certainty.
It shall describe the offense charged in the complaint. It shall command
that the defendant be arrested and brought before the nearest available
magistrate. Agent Gestapo, was then asked by Mr. Citizen’s daughter,
if he was sure that he had arrested the right individual. Agent Gestapo
looked into his folder and stated, "Without any doubt, the warrant is
for your father." The daughter then asked to see the arrest and the
search warrant. Agent Gestapo refused to display the warrants. She then
asked if she could make a telephone call to a relative. She was advised
that she could call anyone she wanted. She proceeded to called her brother,
a Border Patrol Agent. She advised her brother that DEA and FBI agents
were at her residence arresting their father. The brother instructed
her to make absolutely sure that the arrest warrant was for her father.
Again she asked agent Gestapo to verify that the arrest warrant was
for her father and again he replied that it was. Then out of the blue,
Agent Gestapo asked Mr. Citizen's daughter if they (the agents) could
search the residence? She replied that they could because they had nothing
to hide, but what was most important to her was knowing where her father
was going to be taken and why he was being arrested. All this was done
after the agents had already searched the house.
Note: Please! never! never! give any law enforcement officer permission
to search you house or car without a search warrant. If they don't have
a search warrant, it's probably because they don't have probable cause.
Remember if you do give consent, anything they find (contraband) can
be used against you. You don't know who's been in your house or in your
car.
She was now getting very upset and demanded to see the arrest warrant
which again she was denied. By this time, agent Gestapo was starting
to ask several questions about her other brother, Jose Citizen Jr. She
now suspected that the warrant that agent Gestapo had was for her brother,
Mr. Jose Citizen Jr. Another agent stated that during the course of
their investigation they had surveillance on her brother, Mr. Jose Citizen
Jr., and on several occasions had followed him to their house. Ms. Citizen
stated that if they had in fact been following him, they would have
known that her brother did not reside with them.
Agent Gestapo then asked her if there were any suitcases in the house,
to which Ms. Citizen replied that there were, since her sister’s job
required traveling. Another agent then came inside the house and asked
who resided in the little house behind the main house. She stated that
no one lived there. The agent then proceeded towards the little house.
It was now obvious to the Citizens that the agents in fact did not have
an arrest warrant for her father or a search warrant for the house.
Agent Gestapo (probably trying to cover his tracks) excused himself
and stated that he would return within a few minutes. Agent Gestapo
returned with a DEA form 88 "Consent To Search" and several DEA evidence
clear plastic bags. He then instructed Ms. Citizen to sign the Consent
to Search form. Ms. Citizen emphatically refused to sign the form and
instructed the other three members of her family not to sign it.
At this time, "out of left field" as they say, Agent Gestapo stated
in front of everyone that he had just discovered that "He had just made
a very crucial mistake and arrested the wrong person." He stated that
the person that they were looking for was Mr. Jose Citizen Jr. Agent
Gestapo then finalized his performance by placing his hand over his
forehead and stated, "Oh, I’m sorry I’ve made a mistake and arrested
the wrong person." With that said, all agents hurriedly exited the residence,
leaving behind the consent form and the evidence clear plastic bags.
A massive cover-up was then initiated. The following day, a DEA supervisor
arrived at the residence. The supervisor stated that he was the individual
responsible for ordering the raid of their home. He further admitted
that the agents had arrested the wrong individual. The supervisor apologized
for the mistakes. Ms. Citizen stated that she wanted to talk to agent
Gestapo. The supervisor advised her that agent Gestapo was out of the
country and could not be interrupted. Ms. Citizen then asked if she
could audio record her conversation with the supervisor. The supervisor
stated that it was against the law, "To record the law." The supervisor
requested Ms. Citizen to contact her brother (Citizen Jr.) and advise
him that he was the agent who had seized his money and needed to talk
to him (yea! right).
The supervisor then commented in front of Mrs. Citizen Sr. that Mr.
Citizen Jr. had been in prison before. This comment upset the elder
Mrs. Citizen because she knew her son had never been arrested or been
in prison. Ms. Citizen stated that she needed to go to the DEA and FBI
office to complain because too many mistakes were committed by the agents.
Shortly after that, Ms. Citizen paged the supervisor and received the
return call from the supervisor. Ms. Citizen requested a copy of the
search warrant. The supervisor stated that the agents did not have a
search warrant to search the house. Again, the supervisor apologized
for the mistakes.
Note: The 4th Amendment states that the right of the people to be secure
in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall
issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and
particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or
things to be seized. What constitutes a false arrest? An officer or
agent of the law can not be charged with false arrest even is he or
she arrests the wrong individual. However, the officer or agent can
be charged with violating an individual's Constitutional Civil Rights,
if in fact, the officer or agent knew that the individual that was being
arrested was innocent and maliciously continued to conduct the arrest.
An arrest without proper legal authority is false arrest, and because
an arrest restrains the liberty of a person it is also false imprisonment.
If the allegations are founded, there were serious procedures that were
violated by the agents.
The two primary investigative arms of the Justice Department--DEA and
FBI--each have their own agents’ manuals. These manuals contain strict
guidelines and reporting requirements for serving an arrest and search
warrants. Note: The guidelines mandate that there be a pre-raid briefing
prior to executing a search or arrest warrant. Warrants must specifically
describe "The place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized."
During the briefing, prior to the execution of the arrest or search
warrant, all agents who participate in the raid study the arrest package
which includes photos of the individual who is to be arrested or the
place that is to be searched. Most important there is a description
of the individual, which includes a date of birth. In DEA cases, you
would have a DEA-202 form (Personal History) which has the vital information
of a person. Again, this is done to protect all individuals. When a
search warrant is executed a copy of the warrant is left at the location
that had been searched with an itemized list of the items that were
seized. The warrant is then returned to the court.
The following is my opinion as to what might really have happened.
First, the agents had an arrest warrant for Mr. Jose Citizen Jr. It
was evident that they had been looking for him and could not locate
him. So, the agents decided to raid Mr. Jose Citizen Sr.'s residence
with the pretext of looking for their son. They then decided to squeeze
the family by arresting the father knowing that he had nothing to do
with the charges. While at the residence the agents decided, as they
say,to " kill two birds with one stone" by conducting an illegal search
for money and other evidence. When the agents realized that several
members of the family were educated (one being a federal agent), they
decided to cut their loses and try to legalize their search by having
them sign the Consent to Search form. When that failed, they hurriedly
exited the residence, leaving behind their Consent to Search form and
the evidence envelopes. The following day the agents send in their "Fixer"
(the DEA supervisor) in an attempt to clean their mass up. His job was
to place a "Band Aid" on their mistakes to ease the pain on the family
by claiming that they were very sorry for their mistakes, and "to take
two aspirins and call him back is they needed anything". By the way,
the following week, Mr. Jose Citizen Jr. turned himself into the agent's
custody.
By the time this letter is published the agents should have already
turned in their reports of the incident (they have 5 working days to
do so). It will be interesting to see what was said in their report.
Let's see how fast they can backpeddle, but I certainly hope it will
be too late. The Department of Justice was correct when they stated,
"That their investigation (Operation Impunity) is continuing and more
arrests are pending." I bet that they never thought that the arrests
might include federal agents for civil rights violations. I certainly
hope that OPR (Office of Professional Conduct) [internal affairs] will
be all over this. It's a start. I just wonder how many of those agents
are willing to go to jail to cover up for the others.
I have the honor and privilege to bring this to you as a veteran of
my third and perhaps most dangerous war, the war against the criminals
in my own government.
