LaRouche criminal trials
The LaRouche criminal trials in the mid-1980s stemmed from federal and state investigations into the activities of American
In 1986, hundreds of state and federal officers raided LaRouche offices in Virginia and Massachusetts. A federal grand jury in Boston indicted LaRouche and 12 associates on credit card fraud and
Defense lawyers filed numerous unsuccessful appeals that challenged the conduct of the grand jury, the contempt fines, the execution of the search warrants and various trial procedures. At least ten appeals were heard by the
Background
Beginning in the late 1960s and early 1970s, Lyndon LaRouche formed a variety of political organizations, including the
The movement's greatest electoral success came in 1986 when two supporters,
Investigations
Early 1980s
According to arguments made by LaRouche's attorneys in later appeals, the government investigations were started under the FBI's
In August 1982, former
Mid-1980s
In the mid-1980s, the U.S. government and eleven states began investigations into alleged financial improprieties by LaRouche groups. A federal grand jury reportedly began investigating "an extensive nationwide pattern of credit card fraud" by LaRouche organizations in November 1984.[15] That same year a New Jersey bank froze the accounts of LaRouche's 1984 presidential campaign due to allegedly fraudulent credit card charges.[16]
In January 1985, a grand jury in
Investigations by a separate federal grand jury in
LaRouche lawyers filed a series of related civil suits against individuals, agencies and businesses. They sued Weld and former Attorney General William French Smith to try to stop the FBI investigation of the credit card case.[15] They sued the New Jersey bank that had frozen their credit card merchant accounts; and they sued Chemical Bank in a similar suit. Edward Spannaus, a treasurer for LaRouche campaigns, filed complaints with the state bar and the U.S. Justice Department against one of the Assistant U.S. Attorneys in the case.[15]
Raid and indictments
Beginning October 6, 1986, the Leesburg, Virginia, headquarters of the LaRouche organization was searched in a coordinated, two-day raid by hundreds of officers of the FBI, IRS, other federal agencies, and Virginia state authorities, supported by armored cars and a helicopter. The agents also surrounded LaRouche's heavily guarded estate[26] for the duration of the search but did not enter it.[27][28] While surrounded, LaRouche sent a telegram to President Ronald Reagan saying that an attempt to arrest him "would be an attempt to kill me. I will not submit passively to such an arrest, but ... I will defend myself".[29] He later assured that he would comply peaceably with any warrant.[29] LaRouche offices in Quincy, Massachusetts, were searched as well. US Attorney Henry E. Hudson held a press conference to say that the searches had recovered subpoenaed materials, including notebooks and index cards.[30]
Warren J. Hamerman, Chair of the NDPC, said the searches "conducted by
On the same day as the Leesburg search, the Boston grand jury handed down a 117-count indictment that named ten LaRouche associates, two corporations, and three campaign committees. Authorities charged them with making unauthorized credit charges that defrauded $1 million from over 1,000 people. The charges also included a scheme to raise funds by soliciting loans with no intention of repaying them. The National Caucus of Labor Committees was charged, along with others, of conspiring to obstruct justice. Prosecutors charged that defendants had burned records, sent potential grand jury witnesses out of the country, and failed to provide subpoenaed evidence. The indictment quoted LaRouche telling an associate that, in reaction to legal problems, "we are going to stall, tie them up in the courts ... just keep stalling, stall and appeal, stall and appeal".[34] Three of the indicted associates remained at large for over a year,[35] and investigators were allegedly given false information. On June 30, 1987, the U.S. grand jury in Boston indicted LaRouche on one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice.[36]
Meanwhile, the state cases were progressing. On February 16, 1987, the Commonwealth of Virginia indicted 16 LaRouche associates on securities fraud and other felonies.[20] On March 3, 1987, the State of New York indicted 15 LaRouche associates on charges of grand larceny and securities fraud.[37]
Involuntary bankruptcy
In early April 1987, the government charged in court that LaRouche organizations may have been trying to sell properties for cash to more easily conceal their assets and avoid paying $21.4 million in contempt of court fines.
The bankruptcy halted the publication of a weekly newspaper, New Solidarity, and a bi-monthly science magazine,
The attorneys who represented the LaRouche entities in the bankruptcy trial filed a brief stating that the action was unprecedented and improper, alleging that it deviated from the standard rules of involuntary bankruptcy, and that members of the Alexandria prosecution team from the second criminal trial were involved in the planning and execution of the bankruptcy.[42]
During the bankruptcy trial in September 1989, an FBI agent destroyed evidence (credit card receipts, cancelled checks, and FEC filings) immediately after he had promised the court he would preserve them.
The LaRouche organization asserts that it has proof, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, which shows that the purpose of the bankruptcy was simply to shut down the affected entities rather than to collect fines.[47] The U.S. Attorney said, "Essentially the court holds that we did not abuse the bankruptcy filing, just that we should have filed differently." He also noted that only a minimal amount of money had been collected.[44]
Boston trials
Trial of Frankhouser
United States District Judge Robert Keeton presided in Boston. Jury selection was completed in September 1987. Before the trial could begin, Keeton granted a motion to sever the case of Roy Frankhouser, whose case was tried first in front of a different jury.[48] Frankhouser had been an informant for the ATF and other law enforcement agencies, in addition to being a neo-Nazi and a former Pennsylvania Ku Klux Klan grand dragon.[49] Frankhouser became a security consultant for LaRouche after convincing him that he was actively connected to U.S. intelligence agencies.[50]
In U.S. v. Frankhauser,
Frankhouser was found guilty of obstruction of the federal investigation into credit-card fraud.[55] He was sentenced to three years and a $50,000 fine.[56] After his conviction, he was granted immunity against further prosecution and compelled to testify against LaRouche in the Boston trial.[50] Frankhouser appealed his conviction on April 3, 1989, arguing that his case should not have been severed from the main case, that his counsel had inadequate time to prepare, and that he was not provided with allegedly exculpatory evidence. The appeal was rejected in July.[57]
Trial of LaRouche, et al.
The trial of LaRouche and his six co-defendants, U.S. v. LaRouche Campaign, began on December 17, 1987, with the jury that had been picked in September, before the Frankhouser trial. The 12 defense lawyers made 400 pretrial motions.[58]
The prosecution argued that pressure to fill fund raising quotas had led to 2,000 instances of credit card fraud, and that organization members had sought to obstruct the investigation. The defense presented the case that the prosecution was the culmination of a 20-year campaign of harassment by the FBI and CIA, and that the prosecution was acting on the orders of the CIA when they destroyed evidence and hid witnesses.[59][60][61]
During the trial, a search of the personal files of
Originally expected to last from three to six months, the trial stretched out much longer. One local reporter called the Boston trial a "long, complex and costly multidefendant extravaganza".[67] After several jurors asked to be excused due to the length of the trial, the defense refused to proceed with fewer than 12 jurors, forcing the judge to declare a mistrial on May 4, 1988.[68] According to one of the jurors, all defendants, including LaRouche, would have been found not guilty. He told a reporter "it seemed some of the government's people caused the problem", and that people working on behalf of the government "may have been involved in some of this fraud to discredit the campaign."[69] At the time of the mistrial, a spokesperson said that the Constitutional Defense Fund, a LaRouche organization, had spent over $2 million on legal and administrative expenses.[68] Defense attorneys said they would appeal if the government sought a new trial.[68]
A retrial in Boston was scheduled for January 3, 1989,[70] but the charges were dismissed after the Alexandria convictions; this was over the objections of the LaRouche lawyers who said they were seeking vindication.[71] The Assistant U.S. Attorney who handled both the Boston and Alexandria cases said after the dismissal, "It was the Boston prosecuting effort which led to the evidence which allowed the indictment and convictions in Alexandria, and I think justice was served by the substantial sentences received."[72]
Throughout the trial, three of the indicted individuals were fugitives: Michael Gelber, Charles Park, and Richard Sanders. According to Roy Frankhouser, they had been sent to Europe.[73] They surrendered to the court in 1990 and were sentenced by Judge Keeton to one year each for obstructing the investigation.[74][75]
Related appeals
On July 3, 1986, the
Following the mistrial in Boston, the prosecution moved to schedule a new trial. LaRouche and the other defendants appealed that effort on October 5, 1988, saying that a new trial would create double jeopardy. The appeal was denied four months later.[83] The contempt of court fines were appealed again on January 9, 1989, and affirmed again on March 29.[84] Following the convictions in the Alexandria court, prosecutors moved to dismiss the charges from the Boston court, canceling the retrial.[71] The LaRouche lawyers appealed that decision on March 13, 1989, arguing that they needed the trial to exonerate LaRouche.[85]
Alexandria trial
Judge
Judge Bryan granted a prosecution motion
The prosecution, led by Assistant U.S. Attorney Kent Robinson, presented evidence that LaRouche and his staff solicited US$34 million in loans since 1983 with false assurances to potential lenders and showed "reckless disregard for the truth".[90] In his opening statement to the trial, Robinson said, "Members of the jury, this case is about money. It's about how the defendants got money, and to a lesser extent, what they did with that money when they got it ... The defendants, all seven of them, are charged in engaging in a scheme to defraud. That is, to obtain those loans by making false promises, false pretences, saying things to potential lenders which they knew weren't true."[91]
The most important evidence was the testimony of lenders,[5] many of them elderly retirees, who had loaned a total of $661,300 to help LaRouche fight the "war on drugs" but only received $10,000 in repayment.[5] One of the prosecutors, John Markham, said those loans represented "just a very small portion of unrepaid borrowing". Other testimony asserted that, as of 1987, half of the $4 million borrowed by the 1984 presidential campaign was unpaid, and that only $5 million had been repaid out of $30 million in non-campaign loans.[5] LaRouche supporters claim the unrepaid amount was $294,000 but, according to testimony at trial, the amount owed by 1987 topped $25 million.[5]
Several witnesses were LaRouche followers who testified under immunity from prosecution.[5] A former fundraiser testified that he was told, "No matter what the person you are talking to says, get the money. [...] If you are talking to an unemployed worker who says he has got to feed ... a dozen children, forget it. Get the money. Most of these people are immoral anyway. This is the most moral thing they have ever done is to give you money."[70]
None of the defendants testified.[70] Outside of court, LaRouche denied all the charges, calling them "an all-out frame-up by a state and federal task force," and said that the federal government was trying to kill him. "The purpose of this frame-up is not to send me to prison. It's to kill me," LaRouche said. "In prison it's fairly easy to kill me ... If this sentence goes through, I'm dead."[5]
Income tax
One of the charges against LaRouche was that he had conspired to avoid paying income tax, not having filed a return in ten years.
In 1985, a judge in a separate case had described LaRouche's testimony about being almost penniless as "completely lacking in credibility".[97] In 1986, in the same case, LaRouche said that he did not know who had paid the rent on the estate, or for his food, lodging, clothing, transportation, bodyguards, or lawyers since 1973. The judge fined him for failing to answer.[98]
Conviction and imprisonment
On December 16, 1988,[99] LaRouche was convicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud involving more than $30 million in defaulted loans; 11 counts of actual mail fraud involving $294,000 in defaulted loans; and one count of conspiring to defraud the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. The judge said that the claim of a vendetta was "arrant nonsense", and that, "the idea that this organization is a sufficient threat to anything that would warrant the government bringing a prosecution to silence them just defies human experience."[100] Jury foreman Buster Horton told The Washington Post that it was the failure of LaRouche aides to repay loans which swayed the jury in the Virginia case. He said that the jury "all agreed [LaRouche] was not on trial for his political beliefs. We did not convict him for that. He was convicted for those 13 counts he was on trial for."[5]
As part of the trial in Alexandria, six of LaRouche's associates were also found guilty. His chief fund-raiser, William Wertz, was convicted on ten mail fraud counts. LaRouche's legal adviser and treasurer, Edward Spannaus, along with fund raising operatives Dennis Small, Paul Greenberg, Michael Billington, and Joyce Rubinstein, were convicted of conspiracy to commit mail fraud. Wertz and Spannaus were sentenced to five years imprisonment each, with Spannaus serving a total of two and a half years until his release from custody.[99] Both were fined $1,000.[101] The others received three-year terms and various fines.[1]
While in prison LaRouche released claims that he was tortured as part of an assassination attempt.[102] LaRouche ran two political campaigns from prison: for Virginia's 10th Congressional District in 1990 and for U.S. President in 1992.[103] One of his cellmates during his incarceration at the Federal Medical Center, Rochester in Minnesota was televangelist Jim Bakker. Bakker later devoted a chapter of his book, I Was Wrong, to his experience with LaRouche.[104][105] Bakker described his astonishment at LaRouche's detailed knowledge of the Bible. According to Bakker, LaRouche received a daily briefing each morning by phone, often in German, and on more than one occasion LaRouche had information days before it was reported on the network news. Bakker also wrote that his cellmate was convinced that their cell was bugged. In Bakker's view, "to say LaRouche was a little paranoid would be like saying that the Titanic had a little leak."[106] LaRouche also befriended Richard Miller, a former FBI agent and fellow inmate who was imprisoned on espionage charges.[107] LaRouche was paroled in 1994 after serving five years of the 15-year sentence, the normal schedule for parole at that time. LaRouche commented later that "... in effect, George H. W. Bush put me in the jug, and Bill Clinton got me out".[108]
Appeal of convictions
The defendants in the Alexandria trial appealed their convictions to
- The district court erred in denying their motion for a continuance of the trial date.
- The district court erroneously denied their discovery request for exculpatory material.
- The district court made numerous evidentiary rulings, in limineand at trial, that unconstitutionally restricted their ability to defend against the charges.
- The trial judge failed to conduct a voir dire sufficient to impanel an unbiased jury and improperly failed to excuse several jurors for cause.
- The mail fraud counts were improperly joined with the tax conspiracy count.
- The sentence imposed on LaRouche was excessive.
- The district court erroneously instructed the jury on the tax count.
- The district court erred in allowing the introduction of illegally seized evidence.
Seventeen
The three-judge panel reviewed and rejected each item, affirming the defendants' convictions and sentences unanimously on January 22, 1990.[101][111] Five months later the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the case.[112]
State trials
The Attorney General of Virginia,
Six of LaRouche's associates were convicted and two pleaded guilty.[116] Rochelle Ascher, a fundraiser, was sentenced in Leesburg to 86 years (reduced to 10 years) for six charges of fraudulently selling securities and one count each of selling an unregistered security with intent to defraud, selling a security by an unregistered agent with intent to defraud, and conspiracy to commit security fraud.[117][118] In two Roanoke trials, four other associates were found guilty of securities fraud charges: Donald Phau,[119] Lawrence Hecht, Paul Gallagher and Anita Gallagher.[120] Richard Welsh and Martha M. Quinde pleaded guilty and received 12 month and one month terms, respectively.[121]
Michael Billington was charged in a Roanoke court with having knowingly solicited 131 loans that would never be repaid from 85 people, totaling $1.24 million.[122] Represented by a court-appointed lawyer, he rejected a plea bargain that would have limited his prison sentence to the three years he had already served in the federal case.[117] The lawyer, Brian Gettings, doubted Billington's competence and told the court that he believed LaRouche was making the decisions in the case rather than his client.[123] The court ordered two psychiatric tests. The first physician deemed him competent. Billington refused to cooperate with a second examination that was to be conducted by an expert on cults.[124] Billington sought to fire Gettings, who had already tried to quit over competency question, but the judge refused to permit Billington to substitute a different attorney.[125] A LaRouche spokesman said that Billington was prepared for trial.[123] Billington was convicted on nine counts of "conspiracy to fail to register as a securities broker". Under Virginia's court system, the jury determines prison terms although a judge may override the jury's recommendation. The jury in this case recommended 77 years (out of a possible 90); the judge refused to lower it because Billington continued to insist upon his innocence (which the judge deemed lack of remorse) and because he had warned that he would accept the jury recommendation if Billington requested a jury trial. Billington served a total of ten years in prison before being released on parole. The lead prosecutor said the case involved "willful and massive fraud that has caused a lot of people to suffer".[126]
A trial in New York state courts on charges of scheming to defraud resulted in the conviction of Robert Primack, Marielle Kronberg and Lynne Speed.[127]
Reactions from LaRouche and supporters
"My imprisonment is the American Dreyfus case", LaRouche said in a January 1989 interview from prison. The prosecutor denied claims of a conspiracy, describing the theory as an "Orwellian fantasy ... that we are hiding some supersecret spy plot which, if exposed, would exonerate them".[85] LaRouche supporters insisted that LaRouche was jailed, not for any violation of the law, but for his beliefs.
LaRouche also alleged systematic government misconduct:
The record shows, that for nearly thirty years, elements of the U.S. Department of Justice have been engaged in world-wide political targeting of me and my associates. This includes early 1970s operations run in conjunction with Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger's U.S. State Department. During the last ten years or so of that period, some U.S. officials, and others, have challenged the relevant agencies with some of the evidence which shows, that those prosecutions and correlated harassment of me and my associates, had been clearly fraudulent, politically motivated targeting.[128]
LaRouche and his lawyers asserted that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) sought to destroy his organization, and that the prosecution was the result of a conspiracy between the ADL, the government and the media.[129] This claim stemmed from a series of meetings that LaRouche publications refer to as the John Train "Salon".[10] The New York Times reported, in its obituary for Train, that "he convened meetings at his home for journalists, law enforcement agents and others in government to raise awareness about research he had done into Mr. LaRouche."[130]
In testimony submitted to the
Friedrich August Freiherr von der Heydte, a professor of constitutional and international law at the University of Mainz in Germany, compared the LaRouche trial to the Dreyfus affair, which he called "a classical example of a political trial". He wrote, "Just as LaRouche was, the French Capt. Alfred Dreyfus was deprived by the structure of the trial procedures, of any opportunity to prove his innocence, and facts critical for his defense were excluded from the trial."[132]
On November 8, 1991, Angelo Vidal d'Almeida Ribeiro, the Special Rapporteur for the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, filed a request to the U.S. Government based on a complaint that had been filed concerning the LaRouche case. The U.S. government responded by saying that LaRouche had been given due process under the laws of the United States. The U.N. Commission took no further action.[133]
Exoneration attempts
Ramsey Clark wrote a letter in 1995 to then-Attorney General Janet Reno in which he said that the case involved "a broader range of deliberate and systematic misconduct and abuse of power over a longer period of time in an effort to destroy a political movement and leader, than any other federal prosecution in my time or to my knowledge". He asserted that, "The government, ex parte, sought and received an order effectively closing the doors of these publishing businesses, all of which were involved in First Amendment activities, effectively preventing the further repayment of their debts." He called the convictions "a tragic miscarriage of justice which at this time can only be corrected by an objective review and courageous action by the Department of Justice".[134] The LaRouche movement organized two panels to review the cases: the Curtis Clark Commission,[135] and the Mann-Chestnut hearings.[136]
On September 18, 1996, a full-page advertisement appeared in the New Federalist, a LaRouche publication, as well as
Later developments
In 2009, Molly Kronberg, widow of
United States court of appeals
- In Re Grand Jury Proceedings.appeal of Campaigner Publications, Inc., et al., 795 F.2d 226 (1st Cir. July 3, 1986).
- U.S. v. Larouche Campaign, 829 F.2d 250 (1st Cir. September 17, 1987).
- Fusion Energy Foundation v. Terry, 836 F.2d 1342 (4th Cir. January 7, 1988).
- In Re Jeffrey Steinberg, 837 F.2d 527 (1st Cir. January 22, 1988).
- U.S. v. LaRouche Campaign, appeal of National Broadcasting Company, Inc, 841 F.2d 1176 (1st Cir. March 9, 1988).
- U.S. v. LaRouche Campaign, 866 F.2d 512 (1st Cir. January 31, 1989).
- In Re Grand Jury Proceedings.appeal of Caucus Distributors, Inc., et al., 871 F.2d 156 (1st Cir. May 30, 1989).
- U.S. v. Frankhauser, 878 F.2d 1571 (4th Cir. July 4, 1989). [Note: Court records spell the name "Frankhauser" while most other sources spell it "Frankhouser".]
- U.S. v. LaRouche, 896 F.2d 815 (4th Cir. January 22, 1990).
- U.S. v. LaRouche, 4 F.3d 987 (4th Cir. September 13, 1993).
- Welsh v. Holt, 78 F.3d 580 (4th Cir. February 28, 1996).
Notes
- ^ a b c d "LaRouche Gets 15 Years for Cheating His Backers, IRS 6 Aides Also Get Prison Terms, Fines". Los Angeles Times. Associated Press. January 27, 1989. p. 1.
- ^ Edds, Margaret (April 2, 1995). "James S. Gilmore III: Intense, All-Business Attorney General Already Has Stepped From Allen's Shadow". The Virginian-Pilot. p. A1.
- ^ Ford, Brian (August 20, 1995). "LaRouche Pushes For Exoneration". Tulsa World. p. N13.
- ^ "Dems distance selves from Milton". Associated Press. August 25, 1999. p. 9. Retrieved May 10, 2010.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i Murphy, Caryle (December 17, 1988). "LaRouche Convicted Of Mail Fraud". The Washington Post. p. A01.
- ^ Mintz, John (January 13, 1985). "Group Makes Political Inroads". The Washington Post.
- ^ Toner, Robin (March 30, 1986). "Democrats Scrutinize Larouche Bloc". New York Times. pp. A.22.
- ^ Frankel (1988), p. 202.
- ^ "LaRouche Backers Lose Illinois Court Round". The New York Times. Associated Press. July 29, 1986. p. A8.
- ^ a b "Has your neighbor been brainwashed about Lyndon LaRouche?". Schiller Institute. Archived from the original on September 20, 2006. Retrieved October 11, 2008.
- ^ a b "LaRouche Lawyers Introduce Three Kissinger-F.B.I. Letters". The New York Times. Associated Press. March 18, 1988. p. B5.
- ^ Spannaus (1989), p. 306.
- ^ Spannaus, Edward (March 21, 1997). "Richard Mellon Scaife: Who Is He Really?". Executive Intelligence Review.
- The Frederick Post.
- ^ a b c Brinkley, Joel (May 19, 1986). "LaRouche Groups' Debt To U.S. Mounts Daily". The New York Times. p. B7.
- ^ a b "Abrams Files LaRouche Lawsuit". The New York Times. October 29, 1986. p. A28.
- ^ "LaRouche Groups to Appeal". The New York Times. Associated Press. March 5, 1987. p. A15.
- ^ Doherty, William F. (April 9, 1986). "Four LaRouche Organizations Appeal Contempt Findings, Fines". The Boston Globe. p. 30.
- ^ a b "Jailed Man Decides To Testify, Is Freed". The Boston Globe. October 25, 1985. p. 72.
- ^ a b "16 LaRouche Aides Indicted For Fraud". The New York Times. Associated Press. February 2, 1987. p. A21.
- The San Diego Union. p. A2.
- ^ Spannaus (1989), p. 236.
- ^ "3 States Bar Activities By LaRouche Concern". The New York Times. Associated Press. May 20, 1986. p. A24.
- ^ Sweet, Lynn (October 25, 1987). "LaRouchies back - new name, home". Chicago Sun-Times. p. 18.
- ^ "Loss for LaRouche Group". The Washington Post. January 10, 1989. p. D4.
- ^ "Jury finds LaRouche guilty in conspiracy and mail fraud plot". Houston Chronicle. December 17, 1988. p. 1.
- ^ "Brief for the United States in Opposition", National Democratic Policy Committee v. United States, 493 U.S. 918 (1989).
- ^ LaRouche, Jr., Lyndon H. (March 12, 2004). "The Night They Came To Kill Me". Executive Intelligence Review. Archived from the original on March 14, 2004. Retrieved October 12, 2008.
- ^ a b Mintz, John (January 31, 1987). "Prosecutor Moves to Disarm LaRouche Guards; Lawyer for Security Men Tells Judge They Would Not Resist Law Enforcement Officers". The Washington Post. p. C3.
- ^ Reid, Christine (October 8, 1986). "LAROUCHE RECORDS WERE WITHHELD". Richmond Times - Dispatch. Richmond, Va. p. A-1.
- ^ Reid, Christine (October 7, 1986). "10 LaRouche Associates Face Fraud Counts; Offices Raided". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. A1.
- ^ Roderick, Kevin (October 14, 1986). "Authorities See Pattern of Threats, Plots Dark Side of LaRouche Empire Surfaces". Los Angeles Times. p. 1.
- ^ LaRouche (1987), p. 309.
- ^ Shenon, Philip (October 7, 1986). "U.S. Charges Aides To LaRouche With Credit-Card Fraud Scheme". The New York Times. p. A1.
- ^ "Prosecutor Links Fraud To LaRouche". The New York Times. Associated Press. December 18, 1987. p. A25.
- ^ Wald, Matthew L. (July 3, 1987). "LaRouche Indicted In Plot To Block Inquiry On Fraud". The New York Times. p. A8.
- ^ Blair, William G. (March 19, 1989). "12 Lyndon Larouche Supporters Are Arrested On Fraud Charges". The New York Times.
- ^ Jackson, Robert L. (April 22, 1987). "3 Firms Linked to LaRouche Seized for Fines". Los Angeles Times. p. 1.
- ^ "U.S. Agents Take Over 3 LaRouche Companies". Los Angeles Times. April 21, 1987. p. 1.
- ^ a b McKelway, Bill (May 5, 1988). "Legality Of Move By U.S. Is Argued". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. A12.
- ^ McDonald, Amy (January 25, 1988). "AIDS Seen As Job Hazard in Some Labs". The Scientist. 2 (2): 1.
- ^ "Proposed Findings of Fact in cases 87-0795-A,87-0796-A,87-0797-A", published in Spannaus (1989).
- ^ "Larouche Documents Destroyed". Daily Press. Newport News, Va. Associated Press. September 9, 1989. p. B4.
- ^ a b Howe, Robert (October 28, 1989). "Ruling May Help Appeal, LaRouche Backers Say". The Washington Post. p. A8. Archived from the original on October 22, 2012.
- ^ "The Summary of Relevant Evidence on The Record Demonstrating Innocence of LaRouche, et al". Executive Intelligence Review. Retrieved August 9, 2008.
- ^ a b U.S. v. LaRouche, 4 F.3d 987 (4th Cir. September 13, 1993).
- ^ The FOIA search turned up a memo by James Reynolds of General Litigation and Legal Advice Section of the Department of Justice, in which he writes, "Benefit is that a trustee is immediately appointed. They are ordered to shut down the business immediately." "LaRouche—Bad Guy, But We Can't Say Why". Schiller Institute. Archived from the original on June 15, 2002. Retrieved October 12, 2008.
- ^ "Judge Postpones Trial Of Lyndon LaRouche". The New York Times. October 21, 1987. p. A18.
- ^ a b Wald, Matthew (December 10, 1987). "LaRouche Taken In By Aide, Trial Told". The New York Times. p. B17.
- ^ a b c Mintz, John (December 18, 1987). "Defense Calls LaRouche, Followers 'Most Annoying'; Trial Begins for Leesburg Group Accused of Obstructing Probe Into Its Fund-Raising". The Washington Post. p. A18.
- ^ Court records spell the name "Frankhauser" while most other sources spell it "Frankhouser".
- ^ Clark, John; Mike Weibel (January 18, 1987). "Frankhouser 'Broken' By Arrest In LaRouche Probe". The Morning Call.
- ^ Mintz, John (October 21, 1987). "Judge Delays Trials of LaRouche, Six Associates; Case of Former Ku Klux Klan Leader Frankhouser Is Severed and Will Be Tried First". The Washington Post. p. A10.
- ^ Doherty, William F. (November 17, 1987). "LaRouche Takes Fifth At Former Aide's Trial Probe Of Credit Scheme Prompted Charges". The Boston Globe. p. 67.
- ^ "Aide To LaRouche Guilty In A Plot". The New York Times. Associated Press. December 11, 1987. p. A30.
- ^ "Frankhouser Seized By FBI In Reading On Firearms Charges Police". The Morning Call. October 6, 1988.
- ^ U.S. v. Frankhauser, 878 F.2d 1571 (4th Cir. July 4, 1989).
- ^ Murphy, Caryle (November 20, 1988). "LaRouche's Va. Trial Expected to Be Speedy; Alexandria's 'Rocket Docket' Federal Court Contrasts With Site of Boston Proceeding". The Washington Post. p. A14.
- ^ Doherty, William F. (December 18, 1987). "LaRouche Called Donors 'Slime,' Prosecution Says". The Boston Globe. p. 74.
- ^ Mintz, John (October 20, 1987). "Trial of LaRouche and 7 Aides May Be Delayed; Case of One Defendant May Be Severed, Heard First in Boston Federal Court". The Washington Post. p. A6.
- ^ Mintz, John (September 22, 1987). "Jury Selection Begins in LaRouche Fraud Case; Lawyers Say Trial, Which Could Last 3 Months, Promises to Be One of the Strangest". The Washington Post. p. A14.
- ^ "LaRouche Lawyers Seek North's Notebooks". The New York Times. Associated Press. April 7, 1988. p. A17.
- ^ Quill, Ed (March 20, 1988). "Judge Says LaRouche Trial to Continue During Search for Government Infiltration". Boston Globe. p. 33.
- ^ King, John (March 13, 1988). "LaRouche Trial Slows Over Claims Of Infiltration". The Seattle Times. p. A17.
- ^ "LaRouche Trial Delayed As Judge Orders Search Of Federal Records". The New York Times. Associated Press. March 12, 1988. p. 9.
- ^ "LaRouche Aides Given Delay". The New York Times. Associated Press. May 5, 1987. p. D28.
- ^ Doherty, William F. (December 27, 1987). "LaRouche Trial Is Latest In String Of Costly Courtroom Extravaganzas". The Boston Globe. p. 34.
- ^ a b c "Jurors Excused, Cause LaRouche Mistrial". Los Angeles Times. May 5, 1988. p. 27.
- ^ "Jurors Deemed Larouche Innocent". Richmond Times-Dispatch. Richmond, Virginia. May 5, 1988. p. 2.
- ^ a b c d e f U.S. v. LaRouche, 896 F.2d 815 (4th Cir. January 22, 1990).
- ^ a b "No LaRouche Trial, Rules Federal Judge". The Boston Globe. Associated Press. March 3, 1989. p. 58.
- ^ "Further LaRouche Charges Are Dropped". Los Angeles Times. January 29, 1989. p. 4. Retrieved May 10, 2010.
- ^ "LaRouche aide from Penna turns informer, U.S. says". Philadelphia Inquirer. October 10, 1986. p. A.10.
- ^ "2 ARE SENTENCED FOR OBSTRUCTION". Boston Globe. May 18, 1990. p. 59.
- ^ "FORMER CANDIDATE SENTENCED TO JAIL". Boston Globe. February 2, 1990. p. 14.
- ^ Doherty, William F. (July 4, 1986). "Fines For LaRouche Groups Upheld". The Boston Globe. p. 46.
- ^ In Re Grand Jury Proceedings. Appeal of Campaigner Publications, Inc., et al., 795 F.2d 226 (1st Cir. July 3, 1986).
- ^ Greenhouse, Linda (October 17, 1989). "Justices Agree To Hear Plea On Miranda". The New York Times. p. A21.
- ^ U.S. v. Larouche Campaign, 829 F.2d 250 (1st Cir. September 17, 1987).
- ^ Fusion Energy Foundation v. Terry, 836 F.2d 1342 (4th Cir. January 7, 1988).
- ^ In Re Jeffrey Steinberg, 837 F.2d 527 (1st Cir. January 22, 1988).
- ^ U.S. v. LaRouche Campaign, appeal of National Broadcasting Company, Inc, 841 F.2d 1176 (1st Cir. March 9, 1988).
- ^ U.S. v. LaRouche Campaign, 866 F.2d 512 (1st Cir. January 31, 1989).
- ^ In Re Grand Jury Proceedings. Appeal of Caucus Distributors, Inc., et al., 871 F.2d 156 (1st Cir. March 29, 1989).
- ^ a b Neuffer, Elizabeth (March 22, 1989). "LaRouche Mounts Last-Ditch Bid For Hub Retrial". The Boston Globe. p. 22.
- ^ Green, Frank (April 7, 1989). "Clark Joins Motion Seeking Bond For LaRouche Appeal". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. B7.
- Christian Science Monitor. p. 3.
- ^ Murphy, Caryle (November 20, 1988). "LaRouche's Va. Trial Expected to Be Speedy; Alexandria's 'Rocket Docket' Federal Court Contrasts With Site of Boston Proceeding". The Washington Post. Washington, D.C. p. a.14.
- E.D. Va.1988). Reprinted in Spannaus (1989).
- ^ Murphy, Carlyle (December 15, 1988). "LaRouche Trial Hears Closing Arguments". The Washington Post. p. A46.
- E.D. Va.1988). Reprinted in Spannaus (1989).
- ^ South Florida Sun-Sentinel. Fort Lauderdale. Associated Press. May 3, 1986. p. 6A.
- ^ Welch, William H. (April 22, 1987). "LaRouche Said To Drain Funds From 3 Firms". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. 1.
- ^ Associated Press (December 2, 1988). "Ex-Aide: LaRouche Extravagant". Chicago Tribune. p. 13.
- ^ Spannaus (1989), p. 47.
- ^ Spannaus (1989), p. 51.
- ^ "Judgment Is Reduced in LaRouche-NBC Case". The New York Times. Associated Press. February 24, 1985. p. A20.
- ^ "Court Fines LaRouche $2,000 For Not Answering Questions". The New York Times. Associated Press. August 10, 1986. p. A24.
- ^ a b Casey, Martin (October 10, 2002). "Campaign draws attention to LaRouche Nancy Spannaus uses his sound bites". Loudoun Times. Archived from the original on January 28, 2013.
- ^ "LaRouche Appeal Is Rebuffed by Supreme Court". The Washington Post. July 4, 1989. p. B5.
- ^ a b "Appeals Court Upholds Convictions of LaRouche and Four Others". The New York Times. Associated Press. January 23, 1990. Retrieved October 19, 2008.
- ^ "Report on the Mistreatment of Political Prisoner Lyndon LaRouche". Schiller Institute. September 16, 1989. Archived from the original on July 20, 2008. Retrieved August 9, 2008.
- ^ "Larouche Campaign Goes On Effort In Va. Raises More Than $200,000". Daily Press. Newport News, Va. June 3, 1990.
- ^ Bakker & Abraham (1996)
- ^ "Larouche Set To Run Again After Walking Out Of Prison". Orlando Sentinel. January 27, 1994. p. A12.
- ^ Bakker (1996), p. 250
- ^ Weinstein, Henry (December 8, 1989). "Gave Soviets Nothing, Miller Says Espionage: The former FBI agent says his relationship with a Russian woman spy was 'the dumbest thing I did in my whole life.'". Los Angeles Times. p. 1.
- ^ "LaRouche Addresses His Youth Movement on the Subject of His Imprisonment". LaRouche Political Action Committee. July 23, 2005. Retrieved October 12, 2008.[dead link]
- ^ United States v. LaRouche, Brief of Prof. Dr. Albert Bleckmann, Amicus Curiae, No. 89-5518, published in Spannaus (1989).
- ^ United States v. LaRouche, Brief of Maitre Jacques Stul, Amicus Curiae, No. 89-5518, published in Spannaus (1989). Stul is a French attorney who specializes in political causes.
- ^ Howe, Robert F. (January 23, 1990). "Appeals Court Upholds LaRouche Conviction on Mail Fraud, Conspiracy". The Washington Post. p. A8.
- ^ "Supreme Court Upholds LaRouche Convictions". The Washington Post. June 12, 1990. p. B4. Archived from the original on October 18, 2012. Retrieved July 6, 2017.
- ^ McKelway, Bill (March 5, 1987). "SCC Enjoins LaRouche Groups". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. A1.
- ^ McKelway, Bill (February 28, 1987). "Briefs Filed In LaRouche Probe". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. B8.
- ^ "All-white jury acceptable in murder suit, court says". USA Today. January 10, 1989. p. 6A.
- ^ Terry, Mary Sue (December 21, 1991). "Attorney General Responds To Editorial". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. A12.
- ^ a b Brazaitis, Thomas J. (July 5, 1991). "Convicted LaRouche aide won't renounce his leader". The Plain Dealer.
- ^ United Press International (April 6, 1989). "Jury Convicts Fund-Raiser For LaRouche". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. 27.
- ^ "LaRouche Aide Is Convicted". The Washington Post. February 2, 1990. p. B4.
- ^ Bates, Steve (January 8, 1991). "3 More LaRouche Supporters Guilty of Fraud; Convictions in Securities Case Now Total 8; 8 Others Await Trial". The Washington Post. p. D2.
- ^ "Judge Rejects LaRouche Allegation". The Washington Post. May 30, 1990. p. D4.
- ^ "Jury Convicts Top Larouche Fund-Raiser Of Securities Fraud". Daily Press. Newport News, Va. Associated Press. October 25, 1989. p. B5.
- ^ a b United Press International (September 26, 1989). "LaRouche Associate Dismisses Attorney". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. C5.
- ^ Lovegrove, Richard (September 26, 1989). "Larouche Disciple Feuds With Lawyer". Richmond Times-Dispatch. Richmond, Va. p. 13.
- ^ Boyd, Barbara (August 10, 1998). "The Human Rights Issues in the Virginia LaRouche Cases". american_almanac.tripod.com. Retrieved October 12, 2008.
- ^ "LaRouche Fund-Raiser Convicted". Richmond Times-Dispatch. October 25, 1989. p. B3.
- ^ United Press International (September 1, 1989). "3 LaRouche Workers Are Convicted Of Fraud". Richmond Times-Dispatch. p. A2.
- ^ "LaRouche—Bad Guy, But We Can't Say Why". Schiller Institute. Archived from the original on June 15, 2002. Retrieved October 12, 2008.
- ^ Howard, Alison (May 24, 1990). "Lyndon LaRouche Leaves Prison to Testify for Fund-Raiser". The Washington Post. p. A42.
- ^ Traub, Alex (September 22, 2022). "John Train, Paris Review Co-Founder and Cold War Operative, Dies at 94". The New York Times.
- ^ "Testimony Of The Schiller Institute Submitted To The Committee On The Judiciary, United States Senate". american_almanac.tipod.com. July 13, 1998. Retrieved October 12, 2008.
- ^ This paragraph is excerpted from a longer essay by von der Heydte, which appeared as a full page ad, sponsored by the LaRouche-affiliated Commission to investigate Human Rights Violations, in The Washington Times on March 1, 1990, in Loudoun Times-Mirror of Loudon County, Virginia, on March 2, and as a half-page ad in The Washington Post on March 3. Re-printed in Spannaus (1989).
- ^ Ribeiro, Angelo Vidal d'Almeida (March 10, 1986). "Report by the Special Rapporteur". United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Retrieved October 11, 2008.
- ^ Clark, Ramsey (April 26, 1995). "Letter from former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark to Attorney General Janet Reno". LaRouche in 2004. Archived from the original on December 21, 2006. Retrieved October 11, 2008.
- ^ "The Curtis Clark Commission Findings: Exonerate Lyndon LaRouche". LaRouche in 2004. September 3, 1994. Archived from the original on December 19, 2003. Retrieved October 11, 2008.
- ^ "Statement of Mann-Chestnut Commission" (Press release). Schiller Institute. Retrieved October 11, 2008.
- ^ "Exonerate LaRouche". LaRouche in 2004. Archived from the original on February 28, 2004. Retrieved October 11, 2008. LaRouche's Schiller Institute paid for the advertisement. Amelia Boynton Robinson was at that time a board member of the Institute. James Bevel and William Warfield had been active in various LaRouche organizations.
- ^ a b Wagoner, Jana (August 25, 2009). "After suicide, Leesburg widow sues LaRouche". Loudoun Times-Mirror. Archived from the original on February 8, 2013.
- ^ Benton, Nicholas F. (August 27, 2009). "LaRouche Sued For Libel, Harassment". Falls Church News-Press. Archived from the original on September 4, 2009. Retrieved August 28, 2009.
References
- Bakker, Jim; Ken Abraham (1996). I was wrong. Nashville: T. Nelson. OCLC 35675533.
- Frankel, William (1988). Survey of Jewish Affairs, 1987. Fairleigh Dickinson Univ Press. ISBN 978-0-8386-3322-9.
- LaRouche, Jr., Lyndon H. (1987). The Power of Reason: 1988. ISBN 0-943235-00-6.
- Spannaus, Edward, ed. (1989). Railroad!. Commission to Investigate Human Rights Violations. OCLC 23870104.
External links
- Summary of the LaRouche cases on a LaRouche-affiliated site
- "The John Train Salon and the Evidence of Criminal Fraud Filed With the Fourth Circuit Court," Executive Intelligence Review website
- "The John Train Salon Delivered Perjured Testimony in the 'Get LaRouche' Trials," Executive Intelligence Review website
- "The World's Most Expensive Glass of Sherry," Chap. 33 from Dennis King's Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism
- Transcript of sentencing proceedings - Alexandria, Va., January 27, 1989
- Washington Post January 13, 1985 article on LaRouche mansion and unusual lifestyle
- Washington Post 12/23/90 article on elderly seeking repayment of loans
- "Why Lyndon LaRouche is in Jail" transcript of a national broadcast paid for by LaRouche's presidential campaign in 1992