Home-Menu

PAMPHLETS FOR A BETTER HUMANKIND Addressing The Micro- And Macro-Problems Facing Humankind, And Providing Achievable Solutions; Going Where The Politically Correct Dare Not. (While the SOLUTION offered herein may not be a panacea, and may be provocative, it is offered as a positive step to correct the problem presented.)

LARRY A. BURNS IS A CRIMINAL HIDING BENEATH A JUDGE'S ROBE
David Scott Harrison, (c) 2008

Larry A. Burns, United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of California, at San Diego, is a criminal cloaked in the respectability of a judge's robe (a raven robe, fittingly). How can such a brazen assertion be directed towards a sitting federal judge; lack of fear, perhaps, or failure to realize that we live in a country of government oppression and persecution? I am indeed aware, yet proceed despite the fear and dangers. Nevertheless, the assertion -- Larry A. Burns is a criminal -- can be broadcast to the world because it is the truth, a truth neither the dishonorable Burns nor any other individual denounced in this writing dares to bring litigation against me for libel. Nor will Burns, et. al., respond to or rebut any of the other assertions made herein. What Burns will most likely do is pressure federal and state law enforcement agencies and state prison authorities to silence me. He may also retaliate in other ways, as he has done in the past.

In 1990, Burns prosecuted me for the murder of my ex-wife, Ann Jenkins. At the time, Burns was an Assistant United States Attorney ("A.U.S.A."), but prostituted himself to the District Attorney's Office as a Special Assistant District Attorney so that he could prosecute me in state court for a murder that state agents did not believe I was responsible for. By use of innumerable illegal acts Burns succeeded in convicting me which, ironically, not long thereafter benefited Burns by his being moved from the United States Attorney's Office to the federal courthouse as a magistrate.

Do not misunderstand, Burns was not promoted from A.U.S.A. to magistrate, but was forced out of the United States Attorney's Office due to his illegalities in my case and many other cases (Who says crime doesn't pay?). Burns was moved laterally, from one government position to another because he was a malefactor in the United States Attorney's Office (NOTE: As we all know, the government typically deals with the worst sorts within their ranks by use of lateral moves and promotions). That is not to say the move was well-accepted by all the sitting judges in the district court. There were angry disagreements between the judges, some of whom argued vehemently that Burns' presence would defile the entire courthouse. Too few of those judges, however, had the courage or principles to absolutely oppose Burns' move to a magistrate position, although a few of them did make a show of protest by walking out of the meeting when the vote was taken on Burns' acceptance. Government bureaucracies and politics being what they are, Burns was moved in as a magistrate and eventually promoted to a judgeship position. That does not change the fact that his criminal acts were the direct cause of his move to the district court. Let's review some of Burns' bad acts.

Burns prosecuted me for a murder that all the while he was in private boasting to defense counsel, Alan May, he was "morally certain" I did not commit, but "bet" he could "win a conviction." He won the bet, thus I was convicted for a murder I am 100% morally and factually innocent of. To "win" the bet, Burns coached government witnesses (scripted testimony); negotiated and paid for massaged testimony; suborned perjury; threatened defense witnesses against testifying; protected government witnesses known to be thieves and con artists (e.g., freeing from custody Alan Scott Pace, who then went on a nationwide crime spree); protected from state and federal prosecution. Harry Wanket, who was an admitted and unashamed incestuous pedophile; gained direct access to defense strategies and evidence by offering bribes of government employment to defense investigator William Cassidy; prior to trial, Burns presented a Contract offering that if I would agree to a polygraph test as to the murder, and in the event I passed the test, no prosecution would occur. I jumped at the opportunity -- for the obvious reason that I am innocent. At the conclusion of the test, however, Burns had a private whispered conversation with his hand-picked examiner, and immediately took personal possession of all test materials (questions, answers, graphs, everything). Burns has concealed those materials to this day -- the materials were never placed into any case files and no other person has ever seen them. Burns has refused every request that he produce, and answer questions concerning, the secreted test materials; and there is evidence alleging Burns has taken bribes in other cases. Sympathetic judges have shielded Burns from accountability by obstructing appeals and dismissing lawsuits, so he has never had to answer (yet) for his illegal acts in my case and many other cases. There is more.

Burns did not stop his criminal acts once I was sent off to prison. Before my appeal of the murder conviction, Burns had crucial evidence destroyed. He has since used his position and power to shut down efforts by my supporters.. For example, The Western School Of Law, in San Diego, had looked deeply into my case for a very long time. Then, Burns had a discussion with the project head of The Western School Of Law. The case was immediately dropped without much explanation (there were inferences able to be drawn that Burns threatened to have funding to the school's innocence project cut off if the school persisted in championing my cause). Burns has also kept biological evidence discovered at the murder scene from being deoxyribonucleic acid ("DNA") tested. DNA testing could identify the real perpetrator(s) of the murder. Burns does not want the identity(ies) of the perpetrator(s) to ever come to light, because it would prove what he had boasted all along, and what I have never wavered in shouting, that I am 100% innocent. One of Burns' accomplices, San Diego District Attorney, Bonnie Dumanis, has for many years denied me access to the biological evidence from the murder scene, spending hundreds-of-thousands of taxpayers' dollars in litigating against my simple want to gain access to the biological evidence for DNA testing (NOTE: I have repeatedly offered to pay for DNA testing, at no cost to the taxpayers). Additionally, the District Attorney's in-house DNA Project, then-headed by George "Woody" Clark, now a sitting state court judge, never denied that the facts of my case far surpassed all criteria required by Clark's DNA Project for DNA testing of biological evidence, e.g., 100% circumstantial evidence case, identity of the perpetrator in dispute, and DNA testing could identify the real perpetrator(s). But Burns, Dumanis and Clark have not and do not want the truth to be known. Dumanis knows the favors a federal judge can provide, as well as what lies on the other side of that coin. She also knows the exposure the City of San Diego faces, not only for falsely prosecuting and imprisoning me, but for her years of wasteful efforts to keep the truth from being found out. Dumanis is no doubt protecting Burns and others, whose careers would be significantly soiled upon proof that each of them played a part in my bogus prosecution, erroneous conviction and ongoing false imprisonment.

Judges of the San Diego District Court (including, but not limited to, Brewster, Miller, Rhoades, Sabraw and Singleton) and judges of the San Diego Superior Court (including, but not limited to, Moon and Lester) have invariably circled around Burns to shield him from accountability and responsibility for his criminal acts; thumbing their collective noses at preeminent law of the United States Supreme Court, ignoring well-established law and definitive Orders of the United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit, as well as those federal judges (excluding Singleton) in every instance refusing to abide by the explicit Order -- issued by their own past-Chief Judge of the San Diego District Court -- that recused all judges of that courthouse from presiding over any matter involving Harrison and Burns.

THE SOLUTION: It is clear from the unanswerable assertions herein that the named criminals do not have the courage or principles to uphold the Constitution or laws of this land. The solution, then, is to remove immunity protections. Hold Burns and his accomplices liable for their crimes (expose them to prosecution and civil litigation), lest their weapons of oppression and persecution be aimed in your direction."

If you have any questions or comments, or would like to correspond with Dave, please Contact Me. Home-Menu