UPDATE:  The 2013 government framed murder trial of Paul Bergrin, a political prisoner, and zealous advocate for justice, is currently underway in Newark, New Jersey in the Post Office Building on Walnut Street.  The building is located in the downtown section of Newark, and is about a 10 minute walk from Penn Station.  The Judge is Dennis Cavanaugh, 3rd floor, Room 4.           For daily updates visit :    Paul Bergrin on Trial 

THE FIRST TRIAL IN 2011 RESULTED IN A HUNG JURY WHICH WAS A COMPLETE EMBARRASSMENT FOR THE US GOVERNMENT!   And while this was good news to many of his supporters outside of the courtroom, those who were inside the courtroom knew that it should have been a not guilty verdict, as the US Attorney's office did not present a solid, credible bit of evidence linking Bergrin to the crime. . CLICK HER FOR MORE INFORMATION.

FACTS TO CONSIDER

During the Abu Ghraib Prison scandal, Bergrin sought to put George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld on the stand for authorizing the abuses at the prison. And when George Bush wanted to destroy Abu Ghraib, he was the one who was able to prevent him from razing it to the ground, by having the judge rule it a crime scene and demanding that it not be destroyed for the duration of the Abu Ghraib trials (it should also be noted that Iraqi officials were also against tearing it down as well). 

Not soon after  his arrest, came a trifecta of plea bargains from the soldiers, which resulted in the case never going to trial.  Consequently, Colonel Michael Steele never had to take the stand; testimony from his second in command, Lt Colonel Nathaniel Johnson, calling him a toxic leader and one who like to use "kill boards" and who wanted a big body count, was never heard;  and the higher ups were never implicated in their role for authorizing such unlawful Rules of Engagement.  

In April, 2009 when the Obama administration released the publication of papers proving that the White House authorized abuses, Bergrin announced his plans to reopen the Abu Ghraib prison abuse case.  But that was not to happen, because soon after Bergrin announced his intentions to reopen this case, he was arrested again in May, and this time was charged with murder.   Bergrin writes:

    

"If I had the torture memos, I would have compelled the highest levels of the government to testify at these Court-Martials, gone with a not guilty plea and exposed the hypocrisy. Additionally, Col. Pohl denied me calling these witnesses because the (government) alleged there was no nexus nor evidence in existence on the torture memos and techniques; we now know (they) existed and all the above had knowledge of....I could have reversed the convictions at Abu Ghraib and placed blame on the real offenders . . .

 

Important questions to Ask When Discussing Paul Bergrin:

• Why is it that most people have never heard of Operation Iron Triangle?

• Why was Paul Bergrin arrested in 2007?

• Why is it that the US army can admit to giving the soldiers an illegal order, but still lock these soldiers up for following the order, put them in cages, threaten them with the death penalty, sentence them to 18 years, and hold them in solitary confinement where the lights are never turned off and where they must at times beg for food, water, etc.?

•  Who are Corey Glaggett, William Hunsacker and the rest of the Leavonsworth 9?

• Why was William Hunsacker, one of the soldiers, who has done so much soul searching, denied clemency when he merely asked that the military consider taking 4 years off of his 18 year sentence for following the Rules of Engagement? He didn't ask to be released. He merely asked that 4 years be taken off of his 18 year sentence?

• And why is it that nothing happens to the higher ups in command who give them the illegal order and who sanction abuse???????

Following the case involving Paul Bergrin will help to answer most of these questions.

As someone who spent the early part of his career as a prosecutor, and as someone who was a captain in the military, Paul Bergrin saw that  things were not fair and that the justice system was riddled with inequities based on skin color and economic background.   Often he talked about how as a prosecutor he saw so many things -- such as the falsifying of evidence, the unfair sentencing based on race, and the over burdensome and unfair bail that was often placed on poor people.  As a result he became disillusioned with the prosecutorial system and decided to become a defense attorney and to pour his heart and soul into every case.

As a defense attorney, Paul didn't just simply take the big cases that would get his name into the papers. Rather, he believed that everyone, regardless of race or socio-economic status, was entitled to a rigorous defense. He truly believed that innocent until proven guilty and the right to a fair trial for everyone were the cornerstones of a just American legal system. And he applied this work ethic to everyone he defended, including the residents of Newark, New Jersey, which is where he practiced.

Today, the mainstream media, which has become nothing more than a parrot for the government's position, seek to unjustly villify him and the community he represented, by constantly referring to him as the attorney of drug dealers and gang members. To them, innocent until proven guilty doesn't exist, and their arrogant, racist and condescending attitudes about the citizenry of Newark are often reflected in their extremely biased reporting styles and propaganda. One such example is the scandal mongering hit piece, written by Mark Jacob of New York Magazine, which is a text book example of sensationalist yellow journalism at its worst.