United States now: Guilty until proven innocent


On 13 July, the Department of Justice announced a reversal of its previous judicial guidelines, entitled “Start by believing.”   This un-Constitutional gem actually instructed prosecutors to begin all investigations with the premise that the accused is guilty (rather than innocent.)

… And Justice for All

by Mustang


When our legal system prosecutes some people and not others for the same crimes, we have created systemic injustice to all Americans through the politicization of our laws.  When our legal system hides behind secret courts to consider whether they should issue warrants against our citizens, then our courts have perverted the spirit and the intent of the United States Constitution. 

When government, through the creation of secret courts, declares persons or groups of persons guilty of some crime and punishes them without trial, then that government in effect nullifies those citizen’s civil rights.  Lately, we seem to have forgotten that all persons are innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law. 

The US Congress, in league with the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation, issued a de facto bill of attainder against Donald J. Trump and got away with it.  No one seems to care about that because it was Donald J. Trump, whom no one on the political left likes.

Justice sends mixed messages“Justice sends mixed messages” by Dan4th is licensed under CC BY 2.0


“When we say, ‘One nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all,’ we are talking about all people.  We either ought to believe it or quit saying it.”  —Hubert Humphrey


And then we have the situation where literally hundreds of citizens have been arrested by federal agents and charged with a wide range of crimes relating to the demonstrations at the nation’s capital on 6 January 2021.  These are people whom the FBI arrested and retained behind bars without a bail hearing.  Many of them, so we are told, remain in solitary confinement.  Is this American Justice in 2021?


“It is not possible to be in favor of justice for some people and not be in favor of justice for all people.”  —Martin Luther King, Jr.


I’ll suggest that our government has long perverted our legal system — and to such extent that it no longer reflects the intent of the U. S. Constitution.  We should only charge people when there is a reasonable belief that they have violated our laws, such views being only after a full and impartial investigation of the facts and circumstances of some event or series of events, and then afford these people the complete protection of our laws in an open court.  The spirit of our law is “innocent until proven guilty.”  That isn’t what we have in the United States today, however.


“Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peacefully to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” — First Amendment.


“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”  — Fourth Amendment.


“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”  — Fifth Amendment.


The government’s arbitrary violations of the U. S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights have been substantial over the past twenty or so years.  It may not matter much to anyone — unless or until the government charges them with serious offenses, and then it is more than a matter of having one’s day in court.  It is the terrible effects of the accusation, observing the total weight of the government descending upon an accused’s status as a free citizen, the financial ruin of hiring attorneys in matters that can take years to resolve … all during which time the government has taken away something that unrecoverable: their reputation.


On 13 July, the Department of Justice announced a reversal of its previous judicial guidelines, entitled “Start by believing.”  This un-Constitutional gem actually instructed prosecutors to begin all investigations with the premise that the accused is guilty (rather than innocent) and then proceed in the following manner:

  1. Strive to make the sexual encounter appear to be non-consensual by teaching the complainant to seem “more innocent.”
  2. Always conceal inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements by not writing a detailed report for any victim or witness who has already provided a detailed, written summary of events.
  3. Always slant the investigative report so that it increases the chance of a conviction.  Investigators should always focus on witnesses’ statements that only serve to corroborate the victim’s account of the incident.

There can be no more remarkable example of the government’s intentional violation of citizens’ rights than the “Start by believing” investigative methods stipulated as preferred by the US Department of Justice.  As a means to ensure that state and federal prosecutors followed these guidelines, the DOJ offered “technical assistance grants” to state and federal attorneys’ offices under the “End Violence Against Women International,” amounting to $10 million.


In effect, the DOJ has encouraged prosecuting officials and law enforcement agencies to violate law enforcement ethical standards and violate defendants’ rights to honest, impartial, and fair investigations — which are always the basis for prosecution.  From the same people who continue to lecture all of us on the disparate treatment of black citizens, the “Start by believing” methodology had a tremendously negative impact on black male defendants, which significantly increased the likelihood that they would be convicted of a sex crime, even when it was clear to any investigator of average intelligence that the complainant was lying.


Meanwhile, the Center for Prosecutor Integrity notes that the DOJ continues to promote “traumatic-informed” investigative methods, which urges investigative officials to provide an empathetic ear to all alleged victims of sex-related crimes.  Again, this DOJ policy is in clear contravention to the spirit and intent of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights because it encourages biased and unethical methods in criminal investigations/prosecutions.


By the way, if nothing else, the preceding should make one wonder “what else” the nation’s Department of Justice has done to violate the rights of citizens who stand accused of breaking the law.  It should make one wonder how many innocent persons are in prison for something they didn’t do, and beyond that, wonder what kind of “lawyers” our top law schools are turning out to become rogue prosecutors (a very politicized position, as it turns out).



  1. The Center for Prosecutor Integrity, Rockville, Maryland
  2. End Violence Against Women International, Colville, Washington
  3. National Registry of Exonerations, University of Michigan, “Government Misconduct and Convicting the Innocent: The role of prosecutors, police, and other law enforcement, Samuel R. Gross, Senior Editor.
  4. Related Editorials, Center for Prosecutor Integrity
  5. International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)

Mustang also blogs at Fix Bayonets and Thoughts From Afar

Bonus: Beware the Administrative Warrants – that is what else they can do:

Bureaucrats can drop into our homes uninvited

DEA has been seizing patient records without a warrant




For all the news click on the button.


19 Responses to “United States now: Guilty until proven innocent”

  1. Baysider Says:

    What can one say? Everything else is being perverted. Now, formally, the DOJ. This started on college campuses remember. Actually, it first reared its head in the McMartin Preschool “Satanic Panic.” Now it’s graduated to adult life.

    From CPI’s website:
    Avoid asking probing or detailed questions
    “Cherry-pick” the evidence

    Looks like these are tenets long followed by congress. Not to mention LA’s new District Attorney. Bleah!!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Mustang Says:

      Yes ma’am. And who was leading that charge? Kirsten Gillibrand. What a waste of oxygen she is! Looking around at all these worthless politicians, one has to ask, “Can’t we do better than this?” The answer, of course, is no. We can’t. No one but a low-life would ever want to be a politician, so even at the polls we have but two choices: low, and lower … and lower always has the advantage in a rigged election.

      Ah … 5:00. Time for a G&T.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Baysider Says:

        Oy, did not realize that was HER. Well, politicians look for a cause that reflexively sounds good but does not hold up to the closer inspection of facts. As was said in a recent article in the Atlantic on the current frenzy of the day: ”Only the counterrevolutionary impulse would lead anyone to want to douse the flames of social justice with the fire retardant of fact.”

        Liked by 2 people

      • Mustang Says:

        @ Baysider

        I don’t want to give the impression that I think accusations of sexual misconduct should receive rolling eyeballs and a shrug of the shoulder. It is a serious issue, and it should/must be treated with all due seriousness. But there are two sides to every story. All I want is for investigators, civilian or military, to evaluate them on merit. We should be “sensitive” to those who come forward with allegations. Once that happens, however, the accused has equal rights under the law. The right to a presumption of innocence until a verdict has been rendered. This isn’t what has been going on, however. Leading this un-Constitutional cabal is Kirsten Gillibrand. Now I don’t know what would prompt an attorney to demand total disregard of investigative integrity; she’s apparently shielded by her position in the Senate (we ought to reconsider that), but it tells us a lot about this woman who obviously has psychological issues, and the pity is that no one will stand up to her. I wonder, where do all these social misfits come from that now occupy space in our Congress. Maybe she was raped by Kavanaugh.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Bill H. Says:

    Those presently in power, and I do not mean the Democratic Party which is only part of it, clearly no longer consider themselves answerable to the people of this nation. That which they have done covertly for decades is now being done openly. It goes nowhere but downhill from here.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. SKANLYN Says:

    One can’t help but think this reversal may be driven by the accusations a lady named Tara Reade made against a certain high ranking government official.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mustang Says:

      Interesting point. Playing with the dollies is not necessarily confined to one political party, but it goes a long way in understanding why there are rules for the politically elite, and a different standard for everyone else. JFK and LBJ transformed the White House into a bordello while Clinton cut it back a notch. Sammy Jones, on the other hand, after picking up Cindy at a single’s bar, is serving 50 years for what she later claimed was a close encounter of the non-consensual kind.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. nrringlee Says:

    Marxist Jurisprudence: Show me the man and I will show you the crime. The Progressive New Left in power, total power of our federal government is the clearest sign that we are at the end of our Republic.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Mustang Says:

      I agree with your conclusions. The truth of the federal government’s exercise of power over us shatters everything we were ever told about America’s promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Even the “American Civil Liberties Union” is a sham. They aren’t supporting American civil liberties; only those with whom they politically agree. Ed (below) asks a good question: where are the champions FOR the constitution? Now we are learning that the plan for kidnapping Michigan’s governor was actually an FBI scheme sold to morons. WTH …?

      Liked by 3 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        An interesting read that puts a face to the story of what is happening to those the DOJ has in their scope.

        Federal prosecutors argued Curzio should be incarcerated, not necessarily because of his actions on January 6 but because of his conduct while he was serving time for his previous offense.

        Like dozens of defendants ordered held in D.C., Curzio spent a few weeks on buses and planes before he arrived at the jail that would be his home for more than five months. “I was in solitary at the Marion County (Florida) jail for eight days then transported by bus to another Florida jail. Then they took me to Jacksonville where I boarded a plane headed to Atlanta. Then to Oklahoma federal prison. Then to a jail in West Virginia and then Virginia. I finally got to D.C. on February 3.”

        All detainees are required to quarantine in a single-man cell for 14 days under remaining COVID restrictions. But the jail conditions for January 6 defendants, which they refer to as “the pod,” aren’t much better. “It was just like being quarantined,” Curzio said. “We were locked down for 23 hours a day, only out for an hour to shower, talk to family, and talk to our lawyers.”


        Liked by 1 person

      • Mustang Says:

        Interesting, bunks. I had not considered the “Covid-19” isolation scheme. I wonder how many convicted rapists they had to release in order to accommodate 3,000 domestic terrorists … which seems to prove that federal prosecutors are way smarter than the average bear. We should assume then that all the federal government needs to ignore the Constitution is a convenient pandemic. Brilliant.

        Liked by 1 person

      • bunkerville Says:

        I am surprised that they haven’t simply set up camps similar to what was done to the Japanese during WWII… Don’t think they haven’t thought about it. After all history repeats itself.

        Liked by 2 people

  5. markone1blog Says:

    Although I was in grade school at the time, I remember how Hubert Humphrey was considered by many to be on the left fringe of the Democrat party. Now, it would seem that Joe Biden would have him caucusing with the Republicans.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mustang Says:

      Humphrey’s problem was that he was from Minnesota. There is nothing “normal” about Minnesotans. Beyond that, he never became a peacenik until he imagined that it would carry him to the White House. Can you imagine being beaten in a political race by Richard Nixon, whom everyone despised? It makes me laugh to think about it. But you’re right. The Democratic Party was pro-Marxist back then, but ten times worse now.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. Ed Bonderenka Says:

    ” It should make one wonder how many innocent persons are in prison for something they didn’t do,”
    You mean like those in confinement in DC and elsewhere because of their involvement in a protest of the hijacking of the US Government by the left.
    I wonder where the legal challenges are by conservative legal organizations you’d expect to step up.

    Liked by 5 people

    • markone1blog Says:

      In the case of Paul Allard Hodgkins (sentenced to a 9-month prison term for entering the capitol with a flag), he definitely trespassed (if one can trespass after being waved in by Capitol Police). However, as I noted in my own post today, I wonder where the 14th Amendment has gone? If we still have equal protection under the law, why haven’t those who set fire to the outside of the Portland federal courthouse (with people inside) been put in prison?

      Then again, if we still have a 1st Amendment, how is Biden able to get with Facebook to stop misinformation (especially after his performance on Wednesday during the CNN “town hall?”

      Liked by 3 people

    • Mustang Says:

      Mark, the field of law is a study on words. Don’t confuse “equal protection” with “equal treatment.” As indicated in the post, we have Constitutional guarantees for the freedom of peaceful assembly, but that hasn’t stopped the government from sending demonstrators off to the gulag. You know that Biden and Pelosi are behind this disgusting plan to punish anyone who dared to question the federal government on 6 January, just as you know Biden’s DOJ appointees conspire with one another to effect “selective prosecution.” There’s nothing American about that, but neither was there anything Constitutional about federal reconstruction (1865-1877). We never learn anything from history.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Mustang Says:

      @ Ed … exactly, sir.

      Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: