Below is my latest article published on Linked https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/america-government-officials-trustworthy-merely-title-christopher?trk=mp-author-card

In my article, I raise the question of whether government officials demonstrate a reason to trust them when so many are engaging in sex crimes, and other assorted human and civil right deprivations, and corrupt acts. The web links in my published article, by hyperlink, unfortunately do not transfer to this website by hyper links.


Are America government officials trustworthy or merely hypocrites with a title?

The past three years have drawn light on many important societal, social, and governmental issues. From the 2014, Pew Research report on the polarization existing in America, to the estimated 1 million Americans who will be forced off food stamps in 2016, to the controversial Republican abortion rights Bill in 2015, to the controversies of Donald Trump, and the privacy rights of Americans in electronic devices.

While these stories have been front-page news across America, other stories of equal importance have risen in the media that compels us to ask, are government officials in American trustworthy. Moreover, are Americans finely reaching the boiling point in their tolerance that they are willing to confront the issues that are calling the morals, integrity, and strength of America into serious question internally and externally?

Although some government officials are certainly better than others are, the question remains in whether those in government are trustworthy. If equality of justice is to exist within America, then it makes sense that the life of equality must be proved by the equal application of laws to hold those in government no less accountable for their conduct that violates the law, or threatens the integrity of our nation, as ordinary citizens held to the law.

This article presents five categories where government officials are greatly deficient in trustworthy conduct, and surprisingly more so in the category of sexually deviant behaviors. It is surprising when contemplating the fact it is government officials who write, enact, and enforce laws that define sex crimes, that one would expect this category to be completely devoid of any such incidents.

Government Corruption In the United States

Under federal definition, government corruption encompasses a broad definition in that of a “breach of public trust and/or abuse of position,” but the definition is narrowly tailored to require a government official to receive “anything of value in return for being influenced in the performance of their official duties” in order for the act to constitute corruption. Examples of this are politicians taking bribes in exchange for their official act or decision favoring a particular party.

States also apply a narrow definition of corruption. In Missouri, for example, state law, in Chapter 576, defines corruption as a quid pro quo (this for that) scenario whereby a government official performs an act or makes a decision that is favorable to the party giving a monetary or other benefit to the government official. However, to shield government officials from criminal culpability, an exception is made in law that excludes corruption when the monetary or other benefit are given by a lobbyist or a campaign contributor. It is one of the reasons that so many people believe that the American political system is utterly corrupt.

However, Americans do not constrain the definition of corruption to something so simplistic, as to require quid pro quo scenario. For example, corruption occurs when a government official abuses their position or authority over another to engage in financial fraud like when a public administrator guardian commits social security fraud. In such incidents, there is no quid pro quo scenario because the public administrator is taking the money by force to constitute an act of fraud.

Another type of corruption can be found when those in an official or privileged position, such as an officer of the court, do not pay taxes. Such conduct does not involve a quid pro quo scenario, but nevertheless gives an official a monetary benefit. One example of this is the story on Councilwoman Kristi Fulneckey’s alleged tax evasion. What makes this particularly important is that Councilwoman Fulneckey, who is an attorney, asserts her business, Fulnecky Enterprises LLC, is a legal consulting firm. However, she purports that she did not know her business needed to be licensed at the time she was sworn into office of city council, even though she advertises that one service she provides is compliance with government requirements. Notwithstanding alleged tax evasion claims, such conduct might also constitute perjury, or the unauthorized practice of law by operating an unlicensed legal consulting firm for monetary gains.

Notwithstanding the aforementioned examples of corruption that involve monetary gains, corruption can also be defined in the broader sense that entails a government official using their title, power, position, or authority to secure a non-monetary benefit. For example, the Huffington Post compiled a list of 25 different media stories from across the United States discussing corruption within law enforcement. While some involve quid pro quo scenarios of receiving sexual acts in exchange for not arresting a suspect, many others do not involve this for that conduct, but still constitute corruption under the federal definition of a “breach of public trust and/or abuse of position.”

Another form of corruption in law enforcement comes from what CNN legal analyst and former prosecutor, Sunny Hostin, and countless others, describe as the blue wall of silence. This type of corruption does not entail a quid pro quo scenario for monetary gain, but instead involves one law enforcement official knowingly failing or refusing to report the illegal, unlawful, or unethical conduct of another law enforcement official. Sometimes it occurs because of friendships developed, and sometimes out of fear that if one official reports another then the reporting official will find himself or herself without needed backup when responding to a reported crime.

Thus, while corruption can be and should be defined in the broader term, state and federal legislators apply the most narrow definition to require a quid pro quo scenario that entails a government official receiving a financial gain or other benefits in exchange for his or her official act or decision favoring a particular party. By applying a narrow definition, legislators are able to give the false appearance of having only a minimal problem in America of government corruption, when the problem of government corruption extends much deeper.

Racial Bias Within Government

The Police Chief Magazine recognizes the term “implicit racial bias,” but trivializes it, as being something that is done unintentionally and unconsciously, on the claim that it is a natural human response based on perceptions of people because of their associated class, no differently, than the favorable treatment one gives to a senior citizen because of their age. However, for African American citizens, implicit racial bias is better defined as a clear and intentional bias that occurs because of the person’s race to reduce the person to a discriminatory second-class citizen status, which is far different from what occurs when one encounters a senior citizen.

Thus, it appears that those in government apply the term “implicit racial bias” to marginalize the effects of racial bias and seemingly rationalize and justify such, as being a natural and normal human response, rather than an intentional act. However, even if such racial bias is a pre-programmed human response, the effects forced on a particular class of people because of their race is devastating, as plainly evident by the U.S. Department of Justice suing Ferguson, Mo. officials and the discriminatory effects of the racially charged video involving a St. Joseph, Missouri police officer.

Regardless what terminology government officials want to use to explain or seemingly excuse racial bias, such acts have created great distrust among American citizens of many races for those in government. Calling it “implicit racial bias” to seemingly rationalize and justify its occurrence is merely adding salt to the injury in the effort to claim a lack of responsibility on the basis of one discriminating against a person because of his or her race, no differently than one favors a senior citizen because of his or her age.

Prosecutorial Misconduct

Prosecutors play a critical role in public trust and confidence because they are the gatekeepers between a just and unjust government. In criminal cases, prosecutors facilitate whether our government itself or by its officials becomes a dictator, for there is no greater power over the people than to deprive a person of his or her liberties. In a system of government that is constitutionally required to adhere to the Rule of Law for all being judged in a criminal case, the prosecutor is the most important person because they are the gatekeeper.

The California Innocence Project asserts that, “Prosecutorial misconduct occurs when a prosecutor breaks a law or a code of professional ethics in the course of a prosecution,” citing Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935), in which Justice Sutherland explained that prosecutorial misconduct means the “overstepp[ing] the bounds of that propriety and fairness which should characterize the conduct of such an officer in the prosecution of a criminal offense.”

Therefore, when a prosecutor engages in misconduct whether by violating a law, rule, or ethical obligation in a criminal case, it not only has far-reaching adverse economical effects on society, but also particularly chilling and unconscionable effects on the accused. This occurs when a person is falsely convicted of a criminal act the person did not commit, but is convicted because of false confessions of guilt, by junk forensic science or by prosecutorial misconduct that includes perjury, withholding exculpatory evidence, defrauding the court, and/or by violations of required ethical conduct.

In matters of law, Blackstone's formulation is the principle that: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" and if true, then the American jurist prudence system is grossly failing, as according to the National Registry of Exonerations, the present number of people falsely convicted of crimes that they did not commit is 1,761, as of the current date. While in contrast to the total number of people convicted of crimes each year, this amount is small, no injustice imposed upon a person is trivial. A large number of these cases occurred because of junk forensic science, false confessions of guilt, and threatening plea bargain strategies.

Human Rights Violations

Human rights are commonly defined, as those fundamental rights that cannot be deprived or abridged by any law, rule, or regulation. The most common among these rights is the right to life sustaining needs such as food and clean water, the right to life, freedom, and to be free of torture. However, in the United States, government officials do not recognize the term “human rights” for American citizens, because the term has been replaced with “civil rights” instead, to denote government control over the rights of American citizens.

In a country where American politicians strive to be the world police and demand that other countries ensure human rights for their citizens, one would naturally expect there to be an absence of human rights violations in the United States. However, as the 2015 Human Rights Watch report and its 2014 report points out, human rights violations in the United States occurs at staggering rates.

While the Human Rights report lists numerous categories of human rights violations, most recently are media reports involving lead contaminated water in Flint, Michigan and Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder admitting systemic human rights violations exist by widespread governmental indifference occurring. However, while the focus has been on Flint, Michigan, the fact is, the problem is not confined to just Flint, Michigan, but instead affects an estimated 2000 water systems across America, in all 50 states.

Another widely reported issue is the deprivation of food for American citizens by denying an estimated 1 million people food stamps because food is not viewed as a human right in the United States, but rather, as a privilege that is required to be earned instead. Anyone asserting otherwise is labeled a socialist to silence their voice in opposition. However, it must be pointed out that many of those being deprived food stamps paid taxes into the system while they were working, and, thus, contradicts the claim of those in government that only those people refusing to work receive food stamps.

The measure of any government is not by how those in government treat themselves and each other, but how they treat the people subject to their control. When American government officials preach to other countries about ensuring human rights for their citizens, but then violate the human rights of American citizens, it has an extremely unnerving presence of hypocrisy, monetary greed, and abuses of power.

Sexual Crimes By Those In Government

While this article has discussed numerous issues of how those in government hold themselves and each other to a double standard that presupposes an entitlement to violate laws and ethics, and deprive human rights, the most alarming issues come from those in government engaging in sex crimes, as shown by the representative sample of the publicized reports below. What is so alarming about this is the fact that those in government, who engage in sexually deviant behaviors, are the same people who write, enact, and enforce laws that judge others for doing exactly what those in government do themselves in their sexually deviant behaviors.

Judge sued for predatory sexual relationship with a child

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice resigns over Porngate scandal

Michigan prosecutor arrested for multiple acts of prostitution

Missouri Senator Paul LeVota makes unwanted sexual advances towards interns

Missouri House Speaker John Diehl sexually solicits intern

Greene County, Missouri Deputy Sheriff arrested for child porn

Florida deputy sheriff, Ted Arboleda, arrested for felony sex crimes

Three New York state troopers engaged in prostitution

DEA agents arrange prostitute for Secret Service Agent