HomeAcademicsAlbumArticleDorner!Dugue!FC BibleFirpo FilesFlashpointGBH!JWs AfricaKatrinaMalcolm XMatthewMJN-WordPants Up!People!PharaohsProof of JesusSentinelSentinel-MJWisdom Behind WallsContact

GerardShelia7.jpg
Gerard Dugué & wife Sheila

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, California--In 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."

.

As 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.

.

What 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 EFFECTIVELY CHALLENGE! 

.

The vigorous 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 of Justice." 

.

What 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.

.

Stay 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.

Click here for Sgt. Gerard Dugué's background