The Dugué Defense: Part 4.
by Firpo Carr
Online Sentinel International
The USA v. Gerard Dugué:
A Sham & A Shame
. February 28, 2011, Los Angeles,
the case of the United States of America versus Gerard Dugué, et al (not the formal or actual case name), the government
filed a 23-page brief in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana (Case 2:10-cr-00204-KDE-SS Document
117; Criminal No: 10-204) on October 26, 2010.
On page 7 of the brief, the government states that "The NOPD [New Orleans Police Department] reports
submitted by defendants Kaufman and Dugue form the backbone of the obstruction conspiracy charged in this case."
The government further contends: "The factual bases accompanying the guilty
pleas of five officers who have pled guilty and have admitted involvement in the cover-up of this incident demonstrate, by
far more than a preponderance of the evidence, that a conspiracy existed, that all six charged defendants were part of that
conspiracy, and that the NOPD report was submitted in an effort to promote and facilitate the objective of the conspiracy."
Then, starting on page 18, the Justice Department
proceeds to list 27 points specifically against Dugué in an effort to prove his "guilt." In its introduction
of this "27-Point Plan" (as I reference it), the government lays the groundwork in a paragraph containing four pertinent
sentences. I have dissected these sentences as follows:
GOVERNMENT (Sentence #1): "All of the statements in this category were made by defendant Dugué during
a voluntary interview with the FBI in September 2009 approximately nine months after his initial FBI interview."
"All of the statements" Dugué made
in his September 2009 interview were "voluntary." There is no indication that he was forced, compelled, pressured,
or prompted under duress to disclose any of these "statements." Since the stories of the perpetrators and actual
conspirators were now beginning to unravel he realizes that all the suspicions, hunches, and misgivings he entertained but
could not prove during his own investigation were now being validated.
This being the case, Dugué responsibly and unhesitatingly seizes the opportunity
to express his suspicions, hunches, and misgivings with a disinterested third party law enforcement agency with powers that
supersede those of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD), namely, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Unequivocally,
this is his motivation in approaching the FBI. His desire is to ASSIST or HELP the feds reach the truth by sharing information
he believes the government would not otherwise be cognizant of.
When he was interviewed by the FBI "approximately nine months" prior, all the officers
who had conspired to cover up the Danzinger Bridge shootings (that led to injuries and two murders) were sticking to their
story. This is a significant point given what is to follow.
Unfortunately, the FBI misconstrues Dugué's "voluntary" interview and against all conventional
wisdom transforms it into a confession.
GOVERNMENT (Sentence #2): "The September statements provide powerful evidence against Dugué, who had
previously told the FBI that he had no concerns about the actions or statements of the officers involved in the shooting,
and who had submitted an NOPD report concluding without hesitation that the officers' shootings were justified."
This anachronistic presentation of Dugué's statements--which appears to
be delivered with unabashed, shameless contrivance--gives the distinct misimpression that he was at all times aware of the
perpetrators' actions and thereafter worked in concert with them to cover up or camouflage the entire Danzinger Bridge incident.
Of course, nothing could be further from the truth.
Given the ironclad camaraderie of these criminal officers as manifested and expressed in part by egregiously
false statements made under oath, Dugué had no choice but to declare that "he had no concerns about the actions
or statements of the officers involved in the shooting." This, of course, assumes the "actions or statements"
of the officers' were, in fact, as they said they were. The world now knows that this was not the case. But this awareness
is in retrospect. At the time there was no proof whatsoever that the "actions or statements" were anything less
than what they stated.
Aside from private
suspicions, hunches, and misgivings that he could not support with even an infinitesimally small shred of evidence (especially
after being assigned to the case weeks after the murderous shootings), he understandably "submitted an NOPD
report [orchestrated under the connivance of Sgt. Kaufman, a supervisor and fellow investigator who provided an infrastructure
that was rotten to its core] concluding without hesitation [assuming that all the officers' lies were true as stated, yet
again, in their sworn statements] that the officers' shootings were justified."
If, in fact, the officers were being fired upon as they alleged and subsequently returned
fire, "the officers' shootings were justified."
It cannot be overstressed that when every single officer involved in the shooting, as well as the
supervisor on site immediately following the incident, make sworn statements to the effect that all their actions were legal
and well within department policy, a conscientious and responsible investigator would naturally, in the proper order of things,
submit "an NOPD report concluding without hesitation that the officers' shootings were justified."
GOVERNMENT (Sentence #3): "Despite
those earlier claims, Dugué made numerous admissions during the September interview demonstrating that he had serious
concerns about the integrity of defendant Kaufman's investigation, and about the veracity of the witnesses and the officers
involved in the shooting."
noted above, what Dugué did was "voluntarily" submit statements he thought would assist the FBI in its investigation.
To now mischaracterize these statements as "numerous admissions" only serves to unfairly prejudice the reader into
believing that Dugué is guilty.
Dugué in fact did was bravely and voluntarily make numerous revelations "during the September interview demonstrating
that [based on irrelevant (at the time) unsubstantiated professional hunches that he felt free to reveal in light of potential
officer confessions and an aggressive FBI investigation] he had serious concerns about the integrity of defendant Kaufman's
investigation, and about the veracity of the witnesses and the officers involved in the shooting," NONE OF WHICH HE COULD
federal investigation coupled with confessions of collusion on the part of guilty officers were, to say the least, a game
changer. This should not be difficult to comprehend. In sum, the voluntary September interview was the facility Dugué
used to help ensure justice and cement the truth.
GOVERNMENT (Sentence #4): "These statements will establish that Dugué lied to the FBI in his initial
interview, and that he engaged in misleading conduct when he submitted his official report relying, without question, on information
he knew or believed to be false."
To characterize Dugué's voluntary, genuine statements as a collection of ‘lies' is an inexcusable
affront to justice from a department of the United States of America that is--straining the bounds irony--labeled, "Department
the government is accusing Dugué of here is something that police and prosecutors do every day. Prosecutors
are often convinced--that is, they ‘know or believe'--that a criminal is lying, but, wonder of wonders, THEY CANNOT
PROVE IT. Consequently, lacking evidence, these same prosecutors elect NOT TO PROSECUTE SOMEONE THEY KNOW TO BE GUILTY. This
now begs the question: By failing to prosecute, are they tacitly approving of the crimes committed by the guilty party?
In logic or critical thinking, what the Justice Department
is employing is called the Straw Man Fallacy. In Dugué's case, this fallacy occurs when one builds a straw man
("a false or inaccurate interpretation of Dugué's statements" in contradistinction to a real man,
i.e. "a true or accurate interpretation of Dugué's statements"), proceeds to attack the straw man
(the "false or inaccurate interpretation"), and then declares "victory" in that it has succeeded in gathering
enough credible "evidence" to actually file charges against Dugué.
The bottom line is, if Dugué is guilty as charged, then all police and prosecutors
across the land are guilty as charged.
tuned for a complete point-by-point evaluation of the government's 27-Point Plan in its sham case, for which it should be
ashamed, against Dugué as the Dugué Defense continues.