Why Do You Think I Call Them The Department Of Lawlessness?

"So this is the sort of law book they study here," said K., "this is the sort of
person sitting in judgement over me.” 
Franz Kafka, The Trial


An egocentric couillon in Fairbanks blew up 300 pounds of explosives damaging property all around from windows to foundations and a grand jury found there was no criminal intent. Odd isn't it? I actually believe he is much more than an egocentric idiot, but don’t have the information to say much else. A person who texts while driving or is intoxicated while driving is committing a negligent act which can result in unintended consequences from damage of property to death. Why is blowing up a large amount of explosives in a reckless way not considered negligent behavior when it certainly has much intent behind it? It was 300 pounds of explosives, what did he think would happen. Are we supposed to shrug our shoulders and say, oh well boys will be boys when this juvenile behavior was done by a grown man, Guy "Chris" Mannino who we know has been educated as he is a chiropractor. In Alaska, who you are, who you know and what you know have everything to do with being indicted or not. For information about the militia and law enforcement connections to Mannino read Jesse Griffin’s post at Immoral Minority.

This is not the first time the DOL has dropped charges the troopers filed against Mannino. From the News Miner:
Mannino previously had been charged in association with his activities at O’Donoghue’s range, though prosecutors dismissed charges in the last case. According to a criminal complaint filed in August, troopers investigated in May when a neighbor reported “shrapnel was falling on his property.”
The investigation of that incident led troopers to O’Donoghue’s range last year, where they and Mannino got into an argument. Troopers ended up handcuffing Mannino and forwarding charges of misdemeanor disorderly conduct and weapons misconduct to the district attorney. The district attorney withdrew those charges in September.

It sounds like this guy needs a psych evaluation, but as we know being drunk or mentally ill is considered normal in many areas of Alaska. Does a person who has empathy for others or a grip on reality blow up explosives like this. I don't think so.

Take a look at the people the DOL protects and be afraid, be very afraid. Mannino is a gun dealer and an explosives dealer who makes bad choices, so what else is he up to and who does he do it with? This is how I know the orders for this kind of corruption come from high up whether it is to demonize and frame someone or protect them. In my case they protected a corporation, workplace bullies and then a man who was a pimp, constant thief and con man. What does he have on law enforcement?

I have mentioned in the past my amazement at the idiocy, lack of education, bullying and unethical behavior of many medical professionals in Alaska. How would you like to go to this man for health care? I have had some experiences that are very alarming with some health care "professionals"in this state. I have described in great detail that the Department of Lawlessness manipulates evidence to get the result they and/or their overlords desire, innocence, guilt, mitigating circumstances and justice be damned. Do you believe me yet?

I do a routine of a prosecutor taken from comedic performances done by several of the DOL's precious pumpkins who came to court unprepared as usual, “Your honor I had to read a document, your honor I have several other cases, your honor I was just on leave”. Was this prosecutor just on leave or did he have to read a document rendering him incapacitated?
 

Here is how a Grand Jury in Alaska works, the prosecutor presents evidence which may be total lies to the grand jurors, the defense can’t even attend and they do not allow the defendant to even be there. This is why it is often said a ham sandwich could be indicted in Alaska. In other words they can get an indictment with little effort on anyone. They just chose not to in this case. In my case ADA John Earthman tried to get the grand jury to come to a heinous conclusion at one point without any evidence at all (I know there was no evidence because it never happened), a break was taken and then it was never mentioned again. I suspect one of the jurors had been tampered with by either the DOL or interests in the community as he made statements as if he was Earthman's puppet. I was never allowed to counter the lies and misstatements of fact even in my hearings. If I had done what Mannino did I would be at Hiland Mountain being tortured by corrections officers right now. 

 The state troopers told me when my property was stolen in Homer by Robin Hume it was a just a civil case, but it was not, they should have charged him and his brother with the crimes they committed against me. This appears to be what is going on with this case, no charges, just civil cases. They protect certain people and harm others with evil intent. The DOL should have more concern for the safety of the public. This is exactly what it looks like and is as corrupt as it seems.
  

CHANGING WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS MEANS CHANGING PROSECUTORS

From the Justice Project: Changing the “Convict at All Costs” Culture of Prosecutor’s Offices

November 23, 2009
By John F. Terzano


All too often, prosecutors’ offices fall prey to a culture of conviction-seeking at all costs. Prosecutors who become singularly focused on conviction rates often neglect their ethical duty to protect the innocent and guard the rights of the accused. The Kern County District Attorney’s Office in California provides a clear example of this pitfall, boasting that under District Attorney Ed Jagels’ supervision, the office “has had the highest per capita prison commitment rate of any major California County.” What the office fails to highlight is the startling twenty five wrongful convictions that the office has accrued during Jagels tenure as District Attorney. Jagels recently announced his retirement, and despite his appalling record, he hopes to personally select his successor.

There has to be misconduct and knowledge that is held back for this to happen.

The troubling culture apparent in the Kern County office is not the exception. Due in large part to the public pressure to convict and the widespread failure of state bars and disciplinary agencies to hold prosecutors accountable for ethical violations, this culture of “convict at all costs” is a nationwide problem.


With the unique role as both advocates and ministers of justice, prosecutors are the most powerful actors in our justice system. Prosecutors have sole responsibility for decisions regarding what charges to bring against an individual, what sentence to seek, what plea bargain to offer, and what evidence to present to a jury during trial. Yet despite their power, they are rarely held accountable for violating their ethical obligations. This lack of accountability promotes the problematic culture that plagues prosecutors’ offices and contributes to wrongful convictions.

This is the same situation we have in Alaska with probably more malicious prosecution here. It is made worse by a legislature that fails to give the Public Defender Agency the funds to assure all defendants get a good defense. It also is made worse when the public defender agency is incompetent and treats people as if they are working for the other side, the Department of Law.

The pervasive culture of conviction-seeking in prosecutors’ offices must be tempered by an overriding goal of justice. The Justice Project’s policy review, Improving Prosecutorial Accountability outlines suggested reforms that can help create a culture that values fairness and accuracy over high conviction rates. For example, prosecutor’s offices should establish training programs and official office policies on the prosecutor’s duty to disclose evidence to the defense and the proper use of prosecutorial discretion. Furthermore, prosecutors who intentionally abuse their power to secure a wrongful conviction must be investigated and disciplined for their actions. The Justice Project also recommends that jurisdictions recognize the unique role of prosecutors through the establishment of prosecutorial review boards with the power to investigate and sanction prosecutors who perpetrate acts of misconduct. Enacting these reforms will foster a more ethical culture in prosecutors’ offices and increase transparency in prosecutorial decision-making.

Alaskans used to be able to sue prosecutors for malicious prosecutions, but they took that law off the books to protect them. In other words, they condone the behavior.


Creating a culture of accountability in prosecutors’ offices is critical to ensuring the fairness and accuracy of our justice system. Establishing training manuals and office procedures as well as implementing disciplinary measures provide the means of achieving such a culture. These measures will encourage prosecutors to better fulfill their simultaneous and critical roles of convicting the guilty and protecting the innocent.

I had an assistant DA from Texas and a public defender who had just moved here from Texas and had been a prosecutor there for one of my hearings. The result was predictable. When I complained to the DOJ employee in Alaska who was suppose to deal with  the misconduct of prosecutors, Rick Svobodney about ADA Earthman's unethical and downright criminal conduct in my case he told me no one would ever do anything about it, called me a liar and hung up on me. This guy was the acting AG in Alaska for a while. The only way that could have happened under Sarah Palin is if he shared her ideology. I did not know what motivated their thinking then, but I sure do now. I was bewildered then how they could twist the legal system, but I'm not bewildered now, I know just what they are. Justice is coming back to our country.

AS 11.56.850. Official Misconduct.

(a) A public servant commits the crime of official misconduct if, with intent to obtain a benefit or to injure or deprive another person of a benefit, the public servant
(1) performs an act relating to the public servant's office but constituting an unauthorized exercise of the public servant's official functions, knowing that that act is unauthorized; or
(2) knowingly refrains from performing a duty which is imposed upon the public servant by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of the public servant's office.
(b) Official misconduct is a class A misdemeanor.