antonkerner | Chicago Reader

Recent Comments

Re: “His Father's Honor

It is hard to understand the injustice done Otto Kerner when facts and motives are ignored in his prosecution.

The notion that “The owner forged a letter” was neither alleged nor proved in the case against Otto Kerner.

The notion that “They used a secret name for the stock on required public disclosures so that it wouldn't be obvious that it was race track stock” is absurd since no public disclosure was required when Kerner was Governor.

The notion that “Otto Kerner did sell out the state to horse racing interests“ is unfounded since no injury whatsoever to the state was proved in the case against Kerner.

That Otto Kerner paid for stock in a racetrack and paid a capital gains tax when he sold it was not a criminal act.

The notion that Kerner’s profit on his stock transaction was a bribe was dismissed by the courts.

In fact, Nixon & Company alleged bribery against Kerner without naming a briber.

In fact, Nixon & Company suborned perjury by both of its key witnesses against Kerner.

In fact, Nixon & Company entirely invented it’s persecution to get Otto Kerner.

Indeed, the only criminality in the Kerner case was what was done against an innocent Otto Kerner.

The truth is, the now thoroughly documented Nixon & Company dirty-hands against Kerner violated the presumption of innocence to which we all are entitled.

Posted by antonkerner on 01/07/2010 at 11:29 PM

Re: “His Father's Honor

The now published Oval Office attack on U.S. Appellate Court Judge Otto Kerner is a case study of what can happen when prosecutorial discretion is invited to run unbridled. Mike Miner’s May 28, 1971 Nixon tape excerpts capture the essence of how our nation’s chief executive and our chief law enforcement officer conspired to trash our U.S. Constitution’s due process of law, separation of powers, principles of federalism and freedom of speech.

Notwithstanding ryanwc’s characterization of my father’s stock transaction as something untoward, the effort by Nixon, Mitchell and Thompson to criminalize Otto Kerner’s racetrack ownership essentially stood on two legs: the first was bribery; the second was honest service fraud. Since the bribery counts against Kerner were all dismissed, what remains of the case against him stands on a theory of honest service fraud declared invalid by the Supreme Court in 1987 eleven years after he died.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s present questions about the constitutionality of the honest service fraud statute subsequently enacted in1988 underline the 5th Amendment due process arguments that my father initiated nearly 40 years ago, namely, that no citizen should be held to obey any law so vague as to be incomprehensible except as prosecutors dictate.

To quote from Robert H Jackson (US Attorney General 1940–1941, chief United States prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials 1945-1946 & US Supreme Court Justice 1941–1954):

‘If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is in this realm-in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies. It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.’

The victimization of Otto Kerner by his overreaching prosecutiors deserves to be remedied.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by antonkerner on 12/20/2009 at 1:09 AM

Re: “His Father's Honor

The now published Oval Office attack on U.S. Appellate Court Judge Otto Kerner is a case study of what can happen when prosecutorial discretion is invited to run unbridled. Mike Miner’s May 28, 1971 Nixon tape excerpts capture the essence of how our nation’s chief executive and his chief law enforcement officer conspired to trash our U.S. Constitution’s due process of law, separation of powers, principles of federalism and freedom of speech.

Notwithstanding ryanwc’s characterization of my father’s stock transaction as something untoward, the effort by Nixon, Mitchell and Thompson to criminalize Otto Kerner’s racetrack ownership essentially stood on two legs: the first was bribery; the second was honest service fraud. Since the bribery counts against Kerner were all dismissed, what remains of the case against him stands on a theory of honest service fraud declared invalid by the Supreme Court in 1987 eleven years after he died.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s present questions about the constitutionality of the honest service fraud statute subsequently enacted in1988 underline the 5th Amendment due process arguments that my father initiated nearly 40 years ago, namely, that no citizen should be held to obey a law so vague as to be incomprehensible except as prosecutors dictate.

To quote from Robert H Jackson (US Attorney General 1940–1941, chief United States prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials 1945-1946 & US Supreme Court Justice 1941–1954):

‘If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is in this realm-in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies. It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.’

The victimization of Otto Kerner by his overreaching prosecutiors deserves to be remedied.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by antonkerner on 12/20/2009 at 1:01 AM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.