Murray Trial (Synopsis) | Day 3

Chernoff, the defense attorney looked at the easel that contained all the small events that happened before Alvarez dialed 911, which they determined to have been 12:20PM. There were 14 items on his board. He just had to ask, “Did you do all this in one and a half minutes?” Like a sharp whip, Alvarez replied, “I’m very efficient, Sir.”

June 30, 2011, Day Three of the Conrad Murray trial, the jury saw the prosecution call two witnesses to the stand - Alberto Alvarez and Kai Chase.

ALBERTO ALVAREZ
Mr. Alvarez is the Director of Logistics and a member of MJ’s security detail. He has been employed by the Jackson Family sporadically since 2004 until he was hired on full-time at the end of December 2008. In the days preceding MJ’s death he was responsible for shuttling the artist to rehearsal venues and assisting the security detail. This morning’s witness examination was conducted by Deputy District Attorney David Walgren.

Some of the most damaging testimony to date was offered in court by Mr. Alvarez, this morning. He was the first member of the security detail to arrive at MJ’s side after the artist was discovered unconscious the day he died. During questioning, he was able to recall a step by step account of the critical moments prior to MJ being transported to the hospital. Under questioning, he appeared to have excellent recall of the chaotic moments.

Mr. Alvarez testified that on the afternoon June 25, 2009, the day of MJ’s death, he was sitting inside the security trailer when he got a call from Michael Amir Williams. Corroborating phone records showed that the call was received by his phone at 12:18PM  but went straight to voicemail. There were two calls placed from his phone to Mr. William’s phone both timed at 12:18. Then, there was another call recorded also on 12:18PM lasting 88 seconds, now determined to have been the conversation between him and Mr. Williams.

Something had gone wrong and Alvarez was commanded by Williams to enter the house and go upstairs. "Alberto, where are you?", Williams asked. "In the security trailer", he replied. "Get up quietly and go to the front of the house". “Run”, Williams asked him.

He said that it was very unusual for the security detail to stay long inside much less go upstairs. In the last 6 months, he said he only went upstairs twice to escort MJ’s hair-dresser. So, before he went upstairs, Alvarez asked him, “Are you giving me permission to go upstairs?” Williams answered in the affirmative.

When he entered MJ’s room, he observed Dr. Murray giving the artist chest compressions. At some point, the the doctor looked up and said, “Alberto, we have to get an ambulance”. As he walked closer Paris and Prince followed behind him. Upon seeing the artist in that condition, Paris screamed - “Daddy” and started crying. The doctor implored, “Don’t let them see their father like this.” He also told Alvarez that the artist “... had a reaction.”

Laying right before him was a terrible sight. He said that MJ had his mouth and eyes open. Attached to his penis was a plastic bag, later described by the defense attorney as a “condom catheter”, a devise used so a person does not have to get up to urinate. There were tubes in his nose, for the oxygen. On his leg was a tube and a catheter for the I.V.

The 911 was made at 12:20PM by Alvarez himself. LISTEN TO THE 911 CALL

The following medical equipment and devices were determined to have been in the room:

Ambu Bag
Condom Catheter
Pulse Altimeter
Oxygen Tanks
IV Stand with 2 bags on it
Several vials of pharmaceutical products

Before the paramedics arrived, Dr. Murray gave Alvarez a number of vials and said, “here do something with these.” He directed Alvarez to put them in a bag. Alvarez held a brown bag open where the doctor placed all the vials. Alvarez was then asked to place the bag in another blue bag.

Alvarez was also instructed to remove an IV bag from the stand. What he saw next was something he thought unusual. Inside the IV bag was a 100 ml vial of Propofol. It was set a quarter sideways inside the bag. At the bottom of the IV bag contained what he described as “white substance”. We now deduce that vial to be Propofol, which is also known as “milk of amnesia”.

They were at the hospital for several hours after MJ was transported. He testified to having a conversation with Dr. Murray who thanked him for his help. To which he replied, “We tried our best.” He was also later approached by the doctor who asked to take him home. He didn’t answer, requiring the doctor to direct the question to Williams who was standing within earshot. The doctor was told that the police had taken their keys.

The next line of questioning sought to give the jury a perspective of how things have changed for Mr. Alvarez since MJ’s death. “Has anything good come out of this?”, Walgren asked. he testified to having been offered money including $200,000 by National Geographic for an interview. There were several he said. The highest being $500,000. All of which he turned down. He told the court that he has experienced financial difficulties since and hasn’t been able to get constant work. He used the phrase “financially wiped-out.”

The defense had their hands full this afternoon. Alvarez appeared to have been a credible witness. He was articulate, precise and appeared to be truthful. He was also a security guard for the stars which meant that he was screened beginning with a background check. He even elicited laughter from the court when the prosecution showed as exhibit a drawing he produced depicting an IV Bag. “Is this your drawing” the defense asked pointing at a piece art reminiscent of grade school. “I’m embarrassed to say, but yes”, lightening the mood in the court room.

The defense had to find inconsistencies in his statements to cast doubt on Alvarez’ testimony. The cross-examination was conducted by defense attorney Edward Chernoff.

The defense asked many questions, seemingly probing for a weakness in the armor. Most of the answers did not vary from the earlier testimonies. But Chernoff had keyed in on the moments between the moment Alvarez got a call from Williams until he called 911. During the questioning he wrote 14 specific actions that Alvarez testified to have done.

The easel filled up with a written representation of the various things Alvarez did before calling emergency.

1.   I WALKED IN THE ROOM
2.   IN SHOCK
3.   REACHED FOR PHONE
4.   ESCORTED CHILDREN
5.   COMFORTED CHILDREN
6.   WALKED TO DOOR
7.   CLOSED DOOR
8.   DR. MURPHY SAID “BAD REACTION”
9.   FROZEN
10. PICKED UP PLASTIC BAG
11. PUT PLASTIC BAG INTO “BROWN BAG”
12. WALKED TO IN STAND - COUPLE STEPS
13. TOOK DOWN IN BAG
14. PUT IN BAG IN BLUE BAG

At some point during the re-direct Chernoff asked, “You did all this in one and a half minutes?” To which he retorted, “I’m efficient, Sir.” The defense was trying to show the jury that either it was physically impossible or that he had the times confused. He even placed the easel in a location that was hindering the view of the jury, requiring the judge to ask if he was done with it so it can be moved.

The next line of questioning brought up the fact that the “white substance” was not mentioned to the police until after Alvarez saw a show on CNN discussing it. Defense was also able to draw out that the he didn’t say anything about putting vials in the bag the day he was first interviewed by the police on June 25, 2009.

“Can you think of any reason why you wouldn’t conspire with Dr. Murray?”

Objection.

Sustained.

KAI CHASE

Ms. Chase is the Personal Chef of MJ and his family. She was trained in France at a Culinary School of Cordon Bleu. She was at the artist’s residence when MJ was discovered unconscious. She was examined by Deputy District Attorney Deborah Brazil.

The prosecution set out to show the jury a picture of a man who lived a healthy lifestyle and an artist who was particular about the food he ate. He had a routine that called for a serving of granola, almonds and milk breakfast. He had a favorite smoothie drink called an “Organic Beet Juice Blast” that he had regularly.

Ms. Chase testified that she usually arrives at the Jackson Residence between 8:00AM - 8:30AM six days a week. She would enter through the front gate by calling on the security through a call box. She would then be escorted inside the compound by the security team. On the day MJ was found unconscioius, she could not recall who escorted her but remembered that she was let into the home by MJ’s children.

Upon her arrival, Ms. Chase would proceed to prepare for the day’s meals. Several times a week she would do her marketing and acquire the foodstuff that she will use in the coming days to prepare the meals.

Through the testimony of other witnesses, it was established that Dr. Murray stays overnight at the Jackson residence several days a week. Ms. Chase said that it was not uncommon for the doctor to come downstairs to the kitchen in the morning to get the juice for the artist.

On the 24th of June 2009, the day before MJ’s death, she arrived at the residence at the same time and engaged her work the same way she did every day. She prepared all the dishes including an “Ahi Tuna Salad” that the artist brought with him to the rehearsal that day. She also prepared a “Tuscan White Bean Soup” that evening and left it in the refrigerator in case the artist returned that evening hungry. She noted that she returned the next morning and the soup was still there.

On the 25th of June, the day of MJ’s death, she arrived at the residence between 8:00AM to 8:30AM. She prepared breakfast and then went to do her marketing and returned at 10:30AM. Asked by the prosecutor whether or not there was anything unusual happening when she returned. She said that she didn’t feel anything unusual and that it was a happy home. She proceeded to prepare that day’s lunch menu knowing that the artist prefers having lunch at around 12:30PM.

At around 12:05 -12:10, she heard the frantic calls of Dr. Murray who was rushing down the stairs from the upstairs bedroom. She characterized his state as “nervous, frantic and shouting.” He yelled at her, “Get help. Get security. Get Prince.” She proceeded to grab Prince. The prosecution asked how she was able to determine the time. She said that she had her phone in her Chef’s Bistro Apron pocket.

On the prosecutor’s prompting, she said that “ … her heart was still broken. It was a devastating day for me.” She made the disclosure that several foreign television programs had paid for her appearance on their show. She appeared on cooking shows around the world including France, Germany and others. In total she said she was paid $7,000.

She also appeared on shows here in the US including the Today Show, Good Morning America, Larry King and others but did not receive compensation for her appearances.

On cross-examination, Mr. Chernoff confirmed her earlier testimony by essentially asking the same questions, perhaps looking to find variances in her story. Then, he shifted to a series of well placed questions. He first established that there were no land lines inside the home. Then, he asked, “If something happened to you (at the residence), who would you call? She said that she would call Michael Amir Williams, MJ’s Personal Assistant. She said that she didn’t have any other phone numbers and that everything went through M. Williams.

Chernoff then asked why she didn’t call 911. She said that the doctor screamed. “Get help. Get security. Get Prince.” She said that she got Prince, MJ’s son. What did you do after? I went back to the kitchen and went back to work.

R|J’s Note: The defense did not ask whether or not there was fire on the stove. But since this was happening right around the time the artist usually has lunch, it infers that she was preparing a meal.

Murray Trial (Synopsis) | Day 2

“I am an employee but I am a fan first. I would sneak in to see things.” (Michael Amir Williams, MJ’s Personal Assistant)

Called to the stand by the prosecution this morning, the 28th of September 2011, were four individuals - Paul Gongaware, Kathy Jorrie, Michael Amir Williams and Faheem Muhammad. Following is a synopsis of the questioning that were conducted inside the courtroom.

PAUL GONGAWARE
Mr. Gongaware is an executive from AEG Live, the company that was promoting Michael Jackson’s “This Is It Tour.” He served the dual capacity of promoter and manager.

The prosecution painted a picture of a company that exercised adequate care for the well-being of Michael Jackson. Assistant Deputy Prosecutor Deborah Brazil showed that they scheduled an average calendar of approximately 9 shows per month.

Mr. Gongoware was asked about his role in negotiating the employment of Conrad Murray, MD. There were two conversations regarding employment. The first was a call initiated by Mr. Gongaware inquiring about how much it would cost MJ to hire him. Dr. Murray said his services will cost MJ $5 Million because he had to close his practice that included offices in California, Nevada, Texas and Hawaii. Mr. Gongaware answered that it was not at all possible, using the phrase “no way” he terminated the negotiations.

In learning this, MJ said that he needed a physician to take care of the “machine”, referring to his body. He later instructed Mr. Gongaware to call Dr. Murray and re-open employment negotiations. In the conversation, he told Dr. Murray that “he was authorized to make him an offer and it comes directly from the artist.” The offer was $150,000 per month to which Dr. Murray said, “I’ll take it.”

On cross-examination, the defense attorney, Edward Chernoff tried to cast doubt on the character of Mr.Gongaware by pointing to another case against him and his company, AEG Live. He asked Mr. Gongaware if he was here with his attorney. Objection, called out the prosecution. It was sustained by the judge. Are you being sued? Objection. You work for AEG Live? Yes. Is Katherine Jackson, suing AEG Live? Do you know why they were being sued for? Objection, called out the prosecution. It was a great moment of lawyering, making the jury think a little harder about Mr. Gongaware.

KATHY JORRIE
Ms. Jorrie is an attorney and a partner at the firm Luce Forward who drafted the “Contract for Services”, specifically an “Independent Contract” between the parties that included Conrad Murray MD, his company GCA, AEG Live and Michael Jackson. She was examined on the stand by Deputy District Attorney Deborah Brazil.

Ms. Jorrie testified that she had two telephonic conversations with Dr. Murray - on June 18 and on June 23, 2009. The questions raised tried to establish MJ’s level of health. She explained that the contract specified a number of medical equipment including a CPR machine and others. She was curious enough to ask, why all that medical equipment was needed? Dr. Murray said that MJ was going to have a series of concerts in London and wanted to make sure that he brought his own equipment. Given MJ’s age, “he wanted to make sure that he had a CPR machine” and that “he wouldn’t take a chance.”

The conversation also touched on the list of documentation required to execute a “cancellation insurance” that was being put in place to protect the parties in case there is a cancellation of any concert events . The documents being requested included a 5-year medical history of MJ. This is when she told the court that Dr. Murray has been MJ’s doctor for only 3 years. Overall, Dr. Murray spoke of MJ’s health in glowing terms.

The defense cross-examination, under J. Michael Flanagan tried to raise the question of a pre-existing condition that may have gone undetected and only exacerbated by the demands of touring. For instance, he asked two questions which where both objected to. He asked, Did Mr. Jackson tell you that he loses 10% of his weight when he performs? And that clothing changes during the concert required that his clothes got smaller and smaller. The objections were sustained and Mr. Jorrie didn’t have to answer.

Along the same line of questioning Flanagan asked if there was anything unusual about performers bringing their own physicians on tour. There was also a question about why Dr. Murray wanted to modify the contract that initially specified a nurse to an assistant. She said that the doctor wanted the flexibility of hiring another physician to attend to MJ in the event he is not able to.

MICHAEL AMIR WILLIAMS
Mr. Williams is MJ’s Personal Assistant. He was a graduate of USC and was originally hired on as the video librarian until he was promoted to his current position. He oversaw the staff, the housekeepers and the security detail. He was examined by Deputy District Attorney David Walgren

Mr. Williams accompanied MJ to the last rehearsal at the Staples Center on the 24th of June. He provided the court with one of the most poignant lines of the trial. When asked if he ever saw MJ perform, he said “I am an employee but I am a fan first. I would sneak in to see things.” He testified that they returned home at around midnight the night before MJ died.

Defense’s Chernoff started slow but worked at carefully impeaching Mr. Williams’ character. Mr. Williams’ testimony was not particularly destructive to the defense. It did not provide any testimony that pointed to Dr. Murray as the ultimate cause of the death. There was no smoking gun. This will be sorted out during the expert witness phase when medical professionals and chemists who can speak to the effects of all the drugs that MJ was thought to have been taking for months, particularly those that were allegedly prescribed by Dr. Arnold Klein and others.

Mr. Williams told the court about a conversation that he characterized as odd. They were already at the hospital and may have known that MJ had died. He was approached by Dr. Murray who said that MJ had a jar of cream in his room that he probably wouldn’t want the world to see. He said that the doctor needed to return to the house.

All the things that were happening caused him to have a conversation with Faheem Muhammad, the Chief of Security, as he searched for a way to evade a potentially charged moment with Dr, Murray who he expected will demand that he take him home. Mr, Chernoff asked him, “The cream. It was so important to you that you concocted a lied with Mr. Muhammad to tell the Dr. that the police had taken your keys.” To which he responded, “Yes”. The follow-up question asked why it took him two months to tell the police about the cream.

By making up a lie, the whole testimony and everything else he said may now be questionable. Expect the defense to return to this moment during closing arguments if more damaging information attributed to Williams is introduced at the trial.

More names where introduced in this portion of the trial. We begin to learn of other individuals who may or may not have supplied MJ medication including a Dr. David Adams, a Tome Tome (to be confirmed), a Nurse Sherry Lynne Lee, A Jason Fifer in addition to a Dr. Arnold Klein and Dr. Conrad Murray. This lays out the theory of a cocktail of medication, outside of the ones given by Dr. Murray, that may have caused the bad reaction.

FAHEEM MUHAMMAD
Mr. Muhammad is the Chief of Security for the Jackson Family. He is personally responsible for transporting MJ and his entourage to and from different locations. He sends out an advance party and plans a travel route, including creating decoys and diversions to confuse the paparazzi and fans that may attempt to follow MJ.

The prosecution painted a picture of a competent security man who was doing a competent job. He was asked how the last rehearsal went and he said that MJ “looked good” and used the words “high energy” to describe the performance.

He was not at the property when Dr. Murray discovered that MJ was unconscious. He testified to have been on the way to the bank with his wife when he received the phone call from Mr. Williams who instructed him to return home and to go upstairs to see what just occurred. Upon arriving at the property, he testified that it was unusual for them to go upstairs so he asked Mr. Williams his permission by phone.

When he arrived MJ was on the floor, his eyes and mouth were open and he appeared dead. He assisted Dr. Murray in administering CPR until the paramedics arrived.

The cross-examination focused on making sure the jurors did not think that Dr. Murray was trying to hide anything. Up until this point the testimony about the cream were based solely on statements of both Mr. Williams and Mr. Muhammad. Chernoff asked how he may have known that Dr. Murray left the hospital to cast doubt on the possibility that he returned to the property. Through questions, he was able to bring up the fact that Dr. Murray rode with the ambulance and did not have his car with him. He also showed several images and clips showing Dr. Murray inside the confines of the hospital.

The prosecution started showing the court images of medical equipment that were inside MJ’s room - oxygen bottles and an I.V. Stand. Questioning also included the trips that MJ made to Dr. Kleins office, even repeating a conversation between Mr. Muhammad and MJ. The frequency of the visits were such that MJ even asked Mr. Muhammad, “You must think I’m crazy?” for going to Dr. Klein’s office so frequently. To which he replied, “No, Sir. I don’t think you are crazy.” He told the court that MJ told him he had some sort of skin disease.

There were questions about the integrity of the surveillance videos around the property. Defense asked him about the set up and where the cameras were located. “All your comings and goings are recorded?” “Yes”, Muhammad replied. “On the 27th, the police asked you to take out he surveillance tape … you helped an LAPD Technician. Did you see the amount of tape that was downloaded?” No, he said.

Kidnapped Dugard sues federal gov't

... he sequestered Jaycee in ragged sheds and tent-like structure in his backyard - removed from any semblance of normalcy and functioning society - where he raped Jaycee hundreds of times and over the course of many years. (Complaint - Dugard v. US, filed in US District Court Northern California District)

Jaycee Dugard was 11-years old when she was abducted in 1991 and held as a sex-slave for 18 years by parolee Philip Garrido and his wife. In the number of years it took to become an adult, she was kept in an elaborate tent and shed complex in Garrido’s backyard, away from prying eyes in the City of Antioch California. There she was raped and held against her will and where she later bore two children fathered by Garrido. The first of which she gave birth to at the tender age of 14.

On Thursday, she filed an action in the US District Court in Northern California against the federal government and its agencies - the United States Parole Commission (USPC), United States Probation Office (USPO), the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for an unspecified amount of damages.

The action invoked the “Federal Tort Act” and specified 28 USC Section 2671 and Section 1346(b). The complaint alleges that the federal government and its agents committed “gross negligence” including “flagrant errors in Garrido’s supervision (while on parole) resulting in Jaycee’s continued captivity and torture” It further stated the following:

1. Defendant ignored facts establishing that Garrido would harm again.
2. Defendant failed to report Garrido’s multiple parole violations.
3. Defendant ignored existence of Garrido’s backyard sheds.
4. Defendant ignored requirements to see Garrido once a month.
5. Defendant ignored requirements to furnish state authorities with information about Garrido.

The action specified the following Causes of Action:

1. Negligent Supervision (of Garrido while on parole).
2. Negligent failure to consider all relevant information in reaching parole decision (resulting in the early release of Garrido from a previous sex-crime sentence)
3. Failure to conduct mental health examination (of Garrido).
4. Negligence in treating Garrido’s mental health problems.
5. Negligent failure to provide information regarding Garrido to the state authorities.

The complaint pointed to Garrido’s early release from prison as a major factor in Dugard’s abduction. Garrido had been serving a 50-year sentence for another sex-crime when she was kidnapped. He was committed to prison until 2027, but because of actions by the federal government “bordering on complicity” he was released on parole in 1988.

The complaint alleges that while Garrido was out, he habitually violated the conditions of his parole. At the time, he was a subject to the US Parole Commission's “Zero Tolerance Policy”, but nevertheless tested positive for methamphetamine, amphetamines and marijuana. He also tested positive for alcohol, registering a reading of 0.45%, enough to induce a person into comma or even cause death. But perhaps more telling of future events were the reports of him making threatening statements to women, which should have caused the parole officers assigned to take action including rescind his parole. At one point the counselor assigned to his case was concerned enough to make the recommendation that he be placed on electronic monitoring.

Jaycee Dugard and her minor children will be represented by the Los Angeles law firm of Kinsella, Weitzman, Iser, Kump and Aldisert.

FILED COMPLAINT (DUGARD v. US)
WEBSITE OF KINSELLA, WEITZMAN (KWIKA)
CNN ARTICLE
LA TIMES ARTICLE
AMERICAN BAR ASSOC ARTICLE

Extravagance at the DOJ Conventions

The audit found that DOJ had few internal controls to limit the expense of conference planning and food and beverage costs at DOJ conferences. We identified several conference expenditures that were allowable but appeared to be extravagant. (DOJ Inspector General - Audit Report 11-43 | September 2011)

The Inspector General released an accounting report on Tuesday after reviewing 10 conferences held by the Department of Justice between 2008 and 2009. The study showed the DOJ exceeded cost thresholds set for food items served at conferences. Some of the items listed in the report included the following:

$ 5.00 - Swedish Meatballs (per piece)
$ 5.57 - Soda
$ 7.32 - Beef Wellington Appetizer
$ 8.24 - Coffee
$10.00 - Cookies
$16.00 - Muffins
$32.00 - Snack Pack - Cracker Jack, Popcorn and Candy
$41.00 - Breakfast
$58.00 - Dinner at Mt. Vernon Inn (per attendee)
$65.00 - Dinner with General Mukasey (per attendee)
$76.00 - Mission Dolores lunch (per attendee)

A search for the possible reasons for the abuse of taxpayer's money led to the following statement, which could be interpreted as meaning the procurement guidelines are not clear to the event handlers. In fact, it states that the system of procurement is discretionary.

We also found that even though JMD established food and beverage cost thresholds in April 2008 – no more than 150 percent of the GSA per diem meal allocation – DOJ guidelines still provide conference hosts with a large amount of discretion over the food and beverages served at their events. (DOJ Inspector General - Audit Report 11-43 | September 2011 - Page vi)

CLICK TO VIEW ALLOWED MEAL ALLOCATION TABLE

The Phd’s and JD's at the Inspector General's Office produced a set of recommendations that will now have to be executed by the appropriate officials at the DOJ and future event handlers. Based on the reading we can only hope that the recipients of the recommendations are also Phd’s and JD's. If they are not, the system will remain exactly that - discretionary. But, isn’t that another word for the “old boys network?”

Recommendations:

We recommend that JMD:1. Work in cooperation with OJP, the OVW, and other awarding components to ensure that conference cost reports include all salaries, benefits, and other costs charged to the government by all associated funding recipients.  
We recommend that OJP and the OVW:
2. Require that award recipients using DOJ funds to plan conferences track time and activities performed to plan conferences.
3. Update guidance provided to award recipients to ensure that recipients report all costs associated with time spent planning conferences, including salaries and benefits.
4. Demonstrate that a training and technical assistance provider offers the most cost-effective logistical services before awarding a cooperative agreement that supports conference planning to such a firm.

We recommend that OJP:
5. Remedy $3,454 in questioned costs, and ensure that event planners in the future attempt to minimize consultant travel costs, as applicable, by soliciting bids for sub-awards from entities that are closer to anticipated conference venues.
6. Remedy $29,365 by justifying the need for costs associated with travel, lodging, and food and beverages for attendees at this planning meeting.
7. Ensure that external event planners justify the need for travel, lodging, and food and beverage costs associated with future conference planning meetings.
8. Remedy $102,622 in questioned costs and work with the event planner to approve a future indirect cost rate or allocation plan.

Recommendations
We recommend that JMD:
9. Require that components and their event planners conduct a cost-benefit analysis whenever they justify ordering food and beverages to obtain free meeting space for their conferences.

We recommend that OJP and the OVW:
10.  Establish and implement guidelines on conference food and beverage limits for conferences supported with cooperative agreement funds congruent with DOJ-wide rules.We recommend that OJP and the OVW:2. Require that award recipients using DOJ funds to plan conferences track time and activities performed to plan conferences.3. Update guidance provided to award recipients to ensure that recipients report all costs associated with time spent planning conferences, including salaries and benefits.4. Demonstrate that a training and technical assistance provider offers the most cost-effective logistical services before awarding a cooperative agreement that supports conference planning to such a firm.
We recommend that OJP:
5. Remedy $3,454 in questioned costs, and ensure that event planners in the future attempt to minimize consultant travel costs, as applicable, by soliciting bids for sub-awards from entities that are closer to anticipated conference venues.
6. Remedy $29,365 by justifying the need for costs associated with travel, lodging, and food and beverages for attendees at this planning meeting.
7. Ensure that external event planners justify the need for travel, lodging, and food and beverage costs associated with future conference planning meetings.
8. Remedy $102,622 in questioned costs and work with the event planner to approve a future indirect cost rate or allocation plan.

Recommendations
We recommend that JMD:
9. Require that components and their event planners conduct a cost-benefit analysis whenever they justify ordering food and beverages to obtain free meeting space for their conferences.

We recommend that OJP and the OVW:
10.  Establish and implement guidelines on conference food and beverage limits for conferences supported with cooperative agreement funds congruent with DOJ-wide rules.We recommend that OJP:5. Remedy $3,454 in questioned costs, and ensure that event planners in the future attempt to minimize consultant travel costs, as applicable, by soliciting bids for sub-awards from entities that are closer to anticipated conference venues.6. Remedy $29,365 by justifying the need for costs associated with travel, lodging, and food and beverages for attendees at this planning meeting.7. Ensure that external event planners justify the need for travel, lodging, and food and beverage costs associated with future conference planning meetings.8. Remedy $102,622 in questioned costs and work with the event planner to approve a future indirect cost rate or allocation plan.
Recommendations
We recommend that JMD:
9. Require that components and their event planners conduct a cost-benefit analysis whenever they justify ordering food and beverages to obtain free meeting space for their conferences.

We recommend that OJP and the OVW:
10.  Establish and implement guidelines on conference food and beverage limits for conferences supported with cooperative agreement funds congruent with DOJ-wide rules.RecommendationsWe recommend that JMD:9. Require that components and their event planners conduct a cost-benefit analysis whenever they justify ordering food and beverages to obtain free meeting space for their conferences.
We recommend that OJP and the OVW:
10.  Establish and implement guidelines on conference food and beverage limits for conferences supported with cooperative agreement funds congruent with DOJ-wide rules.We recommend that OJP and the OVW:10.  Establish and implement guidelines on conference food and beverage limits for conferences supported with cooperative agreement funds congruent with DOJ-wide rules.

INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REPORT

ABC NEWS ARTICLE

WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE

UN Women - Southern Comfort

The FBI was her refuge. It allowed her to escape her old life, to assume a different identity so nobody can call on her and ask her to explain. She is a woman whom by an act of nature cannot have sexual relations with a man. She is a special kind of wonderful.

She sat in front of me at a cafe, looking disheveled and carrying a cat in a cage. She said that she was in between homes and was effectively living in her car - if only temporarily. Several more chance meetings around town finally cemented a friendship. First, we went on a number of excursions to Laguna Beach. Then, eventually, we went on lunches and then dinners.

She is the prototypical female agent of the FBI. But I can say that she is definitely not a “UN Woman”. She was not trained to carry out such missions but capable if required, nonetheless.  Like most of their recruits, she has quiet a physical presence, potentially able to subdue a criminal if engaged in a scuffle. But even more valuable to the Bureau is her commitment and allegiance to their mission. I was under the distinct impression that she would carry out a superior’s directive without question including an order to seduce a man.

She has brown hair, blue eyes and an amazing smile. I used to tease her, “Can you smile for me, please. I just want to see your smile.” Sometimes she would and sometimes she’d simply ask me why and keep a parsed lip.

The second team of FBI operatives were deployed, in effect, to clean up the mess created by the previous team. Part of their mission is to fashion a particular profile of me that wasn’t conducive to public sympathy and support. How does one explain a person who claims he is an indigent having a nice dinner at a restaurant? Every now and again I would come upon some money for writing projects and website designs. One particular project netted me $200 which the FBI was aware of through listening devises and electronic communications. The call from her came within a day of the largesse (That’s a considerable amount for an indigent). She came to the Neighborhood Cup all dressed up and nowhere to go. After a lengthy conversation, she said “I want to go out, tonight”, in a demanding manner. Put in those terms, what was a man to say? I yearn to get back to a normal life. At that point I’ve already gone out with her several times and have genuinely enjoyed her company to the extent one can with a foe. I make it a point to be close to their people. Many are so undisciplined that if you let them talk enough, there will be a Freudian slip and some sort of spilling of beans.

The manipulations were quite subtle. From several choices, we ended up at the Stadium Brewery in Aliso Viejo. Her mission for that evening were two-fold. First, to deplete as much of my funds as possible. Second, to parade me as a fraud - a homeless guy only by act. At the restaurant waiting were members of their “identity theft experts” who were there to witness me having dinner with a woman. These are people who already live in the city and have a considerable circle of influence. Their job is to say, as many times to as many people as possible, about the day they saw the homeless Asian man eating at an expensive establishment. The inference is that any form of financial support for ROBERTS|JUSTICE will end up misappropriated and used to pay for a decadent lifestyle. Just to play into their plans, I was more than happy to indulge and had a glass of wine with the dinner.

There is much fun to be had in my situation. There is a certain exhilaration defying danger. At this point, if they had something on me, I would be already in jail. The only thing that they have to explain to a jury in the future is why I ended up a victim of “cruel and unusual punishment”. Prison is nothing to fear. It could be a good place to educate myself. I know of prisoners who learned the law while incarcerated. It is a known fact that some of the best constitutional lawyers are prisoners representing themselves on very tough criminal cases. The FBI is here to clean up a mess and to try to induce me into a criminal act. It isn’t any wonder that I am always in a desperate situation, the result of sabotaged business deals and all their intricate counter-intelligence nonsense. So, every opportunity for me to observe their entrapment activities is an interesting event. It makes me sharper.

We were having a conversation one evening and out of nowhere she said, “I want to have sex dammit!” That wasn’t surprising to me at all. One of the things that they have been trying to do is make me look like a low class male prostitute (To be discussed in a different blog post). She didn’t direct it at me but I was the only one there to hear her. I recalled a line from a movie and I told her that “I was gonna make her meow at the moon like a cat, that I was going to make her bark at the moon.” She looked tempted.

I was somehow able to diffuse that situation knowing that I was going to sleep with the enemy. There have been people framed with very minute quantities of body fluid found at a crime scene. I wasn’t going to be one of those poor miserable people sitting in a jail cell unjustly convicted because of a DNA match. Being on the receiving end of their dirty work, I wasn’t going to let that past me.

I slept at her apartment one time, in her living room and nothing happened. I was waiting for an advance from her, for an assault and it never happened. I wasn’t going to do anything that will allow the FBI to put me away for good. All she had to do was to scream in distress and a swarm of cops would be all over me and it will be game over. It wasn’t going to happen.

My experiences with her gave me my first sense of how the FBI uses voice actors and faked electronic transmissions. Once they have a subject labeled as an enemy of the state, anything is permissible. That is why they go to incredible lengths to get that status on their cases. In some situations, all it took was that the person originated from another country.

Some strange things have happened over the last couple years that confirms a lack of ethical and morale guidepost among those who’ve been working my case. Early on during my homelessness, there was a friend from out of state who promised to advance me a small amount of money to help me get on my feet. For some reason we could not connect for days after he made that promise. We played the worse case of phone tag possible. Finally, I got a call from him explaining that he was not able to send the money, that something came up. This was despite assurances from him that I was not imposing. The last conversation was very strange, however. It was as if I was talking to the same voice but not the same person. There was a lack of depth in the conversation and a certain detachment from experiences that people with a history together can expect. We played for our high school soccer team together and go back a long way. To intensify my suspicions he just recently passed away in his mid-40’s.

There were other anomalies. There were friends who were warm and then strangely distant all of a sudden. There were overseas calls from friends who as we were saying good-bye would make references to highly deviant behaviour that we supposedly participated in. All of which could be played to an audience to shape or manipulate an opinion.

I was at a fast-food restaurant when she showed up. She appeared perturbed and dispensed with the pleasantries in short order. Then, she said “I can’t believe you said that” and then she stormed off and have remained sporadically aloof since. I am aware of the technologies available to the FBI whenever they conduct investigations. That’s principally why I don’t carry a cellphone anymore. Apart from being able to pinpoint my location via GPS, it can also capture conversations even if it is turned-off. Because of all the irregularities that I have been experiencing, I felt that getting rid of the cell phone was necessary. That way it can be said that if I was attributed to saying something on a phone, it is deniable because of the phone’s absence. All messages are now sent to a Google Voice number which keeps a record of all incoming texts and voice messages. But even that does not give me peace of mind. Anything digital can be altered.

In the last couple of years, I have made a point to learn as much as I can about the Bureau’s tactics and technology. I am aware of super bugs and parabolic mics that they deploy to intercept conversations. But much of their technologies are classified. So, I have been very careful with things that I say. I have never really said anything caustic about her, knowing that she would be on the opposite side of the table when it comes to the trial. That was why when she acted in that manner, I knew that my voice was imitated by a voice actor.

What makes her different from the other “UN Women” is the incredible cunning she possesses. She speaks with a distinct mid-western accent, but in fact, she is from the deep South. It’s common for their agents to develop a cover accent. From my perspective, her greatest cover job was to try to get in the Bureau. She had to get away from home, her peers and from a culture that became burdensome to her. She came from a small town where everyone talks and she has a secret that nobody knows about. It took me a while to figure this out, and I say this with all the respect and affection for her because there was nothing that she could have done about her situation. The FBI was her refuge. It allowed her to escape her old life, to assume a different identity so nobody can call on her and ask her to explain. She is a woman whom by an act of nature cannot have sexual relations with a man. She is a special kind of wonderful.

LAST UPDATED: September 20, 2011 - 0514PM

Boeing goes "Separate But Equal".

The NLRA Lawsuit is a “Bastardization” of the law. (Sen. Graham) 

VIEW THE YOUTUBE CLIP OF SEN. GRAHAM’S STATEMENTS

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) filed suit against Boeing Corporation to stop the construction of a second plant being built in Charleston, SC on the grounds that it was violating the employees’ rights.

NLRB COMPLAINT:
“Specifically, the union charged that the decision to transfer the line was made to retaliate against union employees for participating in past strikes and to chill future strike activity, which is protected under the National Labor Relations Act.”

“Boeing violated two sections of the National Labor Relations Act by making coercive statements and threats to employees for engaging in statutorily protected activities, and by deciding to place the second line at a non-union facility, and establish a parts supply program nearby, in retaliation for past strike activity and to chill future strike activity by its union employees.”

LAW:
The action invokes provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), specifically:
Section 7: The employees have the right to self-organize ...
Section 8(a): It is unlawful to prevent employees from exercising Section 7
Section 13: It is unlawful to discriminate and discourage membership in a labor organization.

EVIDENCE:
A Boeing executive was quoted as saying, "The overriding factor (in transferring the line) was not the business climate.  And it was not the wages we’re paying today.  It was that we cannot afford to have a work stoppage, you know, every three years."

Another Boeing official was caught saying that “we are going to punish you for striking and to prevent you from striking again.”

BOEING’S ANSWER:
The Washington Plant will remain open and will continue to get a majority of the 787 Dreamliner assembly business. In addition, they have added more than 2000 jobs in the Seattle Washington plant since 2009.

ROBERTS|JUSTICE’s analysis:
It appears that Boeing’s management is attempting to create the best of both worlds - a striking and a non-striking plant for the same class of workers. It’s a loose interpretation of the concept “Separate but Equal”. It is not clear whether the rights of those who do not wish to strike is actually protected. Because as so often happens, those who do not wish to strike are out-voted by a majority of workers who want to strike. So, their solution appears to be this: Move the non-strikers to Charleston but keep the strikers in Seattle.

VIEW NLRA COMPLAINT FACT SHEET