Alberto Gonzales Ignores Case of Sexual Abuse in Texas Boy’s Prison

Hat tip to Pursey.

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, went to Denver to talk about his Project Safe Childhood campaign. He met with law enforcement leaders and three local high school students. Reporters were of course, barred from asking questions.

Embattled U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales pushed ahead in Denver today with one of his main initiatives: improving child safety against online sexual predators.

Gonzales met with leaders of the Colorado law enforcement community and three local high school students about his Project Safe Childhood campaign.

The group previewed ads designed to persuade children to “think before you post” private information on the Internet.

“This is a war. I worry about how much progress we are making…” Gonzales said, calling for teamwork. “It’s not enough to simply enforce the law.”

Well that is a noble cause, right? The protection of children is a most important issue to keep in the spotlight. But wait one freaking minute GONZO! Who are you to play the champion of a cause that has been abused by yourself? Another cover up of child predators Gonzo? This monster has to go, and he has to go now! If you think the cover-up for Mark Foley was despicable, this brings the level of GOP corruption and cover-up to a whole new level.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, both already under siege for other matters, are now being accused of failing to prosecute officers of the Texas Youth Commission after a Texas Ranger investigation documented that guards and administrators were sexually abusing the institution’s teenage boy inmates.

Among the charges in the Texas Ranger report were that administrators would rouse boys from their sleep for the purpose of conducting all-night sex parties.

Ray Brookins, one of the officials named in the report, was a Texas prison guard before being hired at the youth commission school. As a prison guard, Brookins had a history of disciplinary and petty criminal records dating back 21 years. He retained his job despite charges of using pornography on the job, including viewing nude photos of men and women on state computers.

What possible excuse could Gonzo have to just let this insane thing happen?

Angle explained to WND that he found both letters shocking.

“The letters justify not pursuing these cases because, number one, there is no evidence that any of these juveniles felt physical pain while they were being assaulted, and the letters use the word ‘assaulted,'” he said. “And then also, they rejected prosecution because none of these juveniles stated in the investigations that they resisted and objected, which of course the facts of the report show to be the case. This case developed right in the middle of Governor Perry’s 2006 re-election campaign. While Texas is a Republican state, and the Republicans expected to win, still at that time, Governor Perry was facing an election challenge from Carole Strayhorn, a third party candidate who was also a former Republican comptroller in Texas.”

He continued: “I would speculate that the political powers in Texas and Washington in the Republican Party were not interested in this sex scandal coming to light. Sutton and Gonzales let their political responsibilities outstrip their legal responsibilities, and as a result you had children who were in danger of sexual abuse and were left in that danger.”

Be sure to read the whole thing. It will be sure to make your blood boil. Gonzo has to go!

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Alberto Gonzales Ignores Case of Sexual Abuse in Texas Boy’s Prison

  1. Darrell Prows says:

    It could be worse. Remember when the whole Texas prison system was put under federal court jurisdiction because of systematic prisoner abuse. U.S. District Judge William Wayen Justice finally acted only when bodies of missing and murdered prisoners were dug up outside the fences of Huntsville. At least the kids haven’t been killed yet to keep them quiet.

  2. Ginny Cotts says:

    I’m really beginning to think that the GOP may have earned another stint as the minority party for a LONG time.

  3. Darrell

    When was that, it sounds vaguely familar?

  4. Ginny

    Can we make that a very, very, very LONG stint?

  5. oledawg says:

    Donnie,
    I agree that U.S. Attorney General is correct in “improving child safety against online sexual predators.”

    Are you angry that he is against child predators? Why would that be? Could it be that he could have a legitimate reason to pursue it and it sticks in your craw?

    After all, it is a Federal jurisdictional matter.

    Not so with your next shameless smear.

    Concerning that incident, you claim, “Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton are now being accused of failing to prosecute officers of the Texas Youth Commission after a Texas Ranger investigation”

    As you surely must know, neither the U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales or U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton have any involvement in this case.

    Just who is accusing he and Johnny Sutton? You? Jim Angle?
    What are they being accused of? Ask Jimmie Boy.
    Also, what has he ‘covered up’? Ditto.

    Unfortunately, you conveniently omit the teeny weeny fact that is a state jurisdictional matter.

    You say, “What possible excuse could Gonzo have to just let this insane thing happen?”

    For that matter, what is your excuse and how could you let it happen?

    Was it Jim Angle who misled you and got you all foaming at the mouth angry or did you get so worked up all by yourself?

    I am sure you are outraged–it literally oozes out of your smear piece.

    I can only ask why are you attacking the Federal Judicial System? Can’t you find anything at a Federal level to accuse him of?

    Who made you the Chief Accuser of all things that could ever have been done wrong?

    I could accuse you of beating your dear old mother and covering it up while hiding behind the internet.

    Who would know I was deliberately lying? Who would I be duping with my blather?

    So many questions, so much obfuscation.

    Darrell,
    I don’t remember any details about missing and murdered prisoners.
    When was the whole Texas prison system put under Federal Court jurisdiction?

    What happened to the incident concerning missing and murdered prisoners?

    While we are on the subject, Did you hear of the time President Lincoln ran amok in Washington D.C. naked and brandishing a butcher knife? Perhaps he was overwrought at the thought that someone would accuse the Texas Correctional System of murdering and missing prisoners.

    I would imagine he was angry that they forgot to count the prisoners and it took years to discover they were missing, and the bones that were dug up were from the ’20s and ’30s when prisoners who died of natural causes and had no one to claim their bodies were buried in unmarked graves.

    If not, maybe it was covered up and you missed that one.

    By the way, where were the Democrats? Didn’t they run the state then?

    Who can we blame for that?
    Oh, yes. I forgot. Wrong Party.

    Well, let’s blame the Republicans anyway. They won’t mind and our clueless voters won’t know or care anyway.

    Ginny,
    Do you think that a State of Texas problem could cause the Republican Party to stay in the minority or is it just your turn to carry the water for Donnie?

    After all, he’s carrying the water for Jim Angle. He has two buckets and they are full of it. That’s the least he can do.

    I know! Lets blame it on Katrina! Katrina was caused by President Bush. Everyone knows that! He caused that #$*%$ hurricane and aimed right at New Orleans! That’s it!
    Spread the good news!

  6. Darrell Prows says:

    http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/column?oid=oid%3A95448

    Sorry, I’m not really great at a lot of this computer stuff. It took me at least three minutes on Google to come up with this Newspaper article from 2002 mentioning Judge Justice signing his final order in the 30 year old Texas prison conditions case, Ruiz v. Estelle. The published opinions in Ruiz have stretched to thousands of pages, but are readily available. I don’t know how to bring quotes to here but Mr. Oledawg can surely do a little reading if he has any true interest in facts. It’s so much easier just to claim that nothing is true and then let the rest of the world have to work to prove you wrong. It seems like someone has spent enough time listening to right wing radio to have absorbed the general format.

    From memory I’m going to say that it is something like 42 U.S.C. 1982 or 1983 that makes a deprivation of civil liberties a federal crime. That such a crime exists, I’m going to assume, needs no actual proof, even to a conservative. It’s too much a part of the fabric of our society.

    Remember how, in the field of sexual harrassment, a superior making unwanted sexual advances to a subordinate substantiates a sexual harrassment claim because of the unequal power inherent in the relationship. Well, unless these prison guys are just so hot that they have little boys hitting on them whereever they go, it seems safe to conclude, at a minimum, that we are dealing with an element of coercion. And that, in fact, does turn this incident into a violation of federal law. At least that’s what they taught us where I got my law degree. Did they teach something differnt in the law school you went to, sir?

    It seems that there was a violation of federal law brought to some component of the Justice Department, a violation the publicizing of which would have been negative for the Texas Republican Party. The response of the DOJ to decline the case may well have been political. I’m assuming the question is “would the U.S. Attorney have faced dismissal from reaching the opposite decision”? Given this entire atmosphere, it is very reasonable to ask if DOJ made a political decision, one, if so, that should be properly embarassing to the all Republicans.

  7. Ginny Cotts says:

    Oledawg,

    It appears your reading comprehension is slightly below the level of writing on this blog.

    First, Donnie did not disagree with the importance of the child protection. He was pointing out that Fredo seems to be selective in which kids he chooses to protect from which perpetrators.

    Second, the point of the block paragraphs with sections in blue that are underlined is the writer is linking you to the original article. If you had followed that link, you would have found yourself on a fairly conservative site. It was the writer of that article who state Gonzales and Sutton were being accused. So much for the bunch of questions about that.

    Darrell has provided excellent reference to the prison case – actually recent enough that some of us remembered it.
    I also remember finding out in 2000 that while Bush was the Gov, several justice issues were decided on his watch. One was that prisoners on death row appealing their conviction had no inherent right to a qualified lawyer. The lawyer didn’t actually have to develop a case, he could sleep through the proceedings, admit it and still be OK with the State Supreme Court (and accounting office).

    The other was the state had violated Federal Laws regarding the treatment of illegal immigrants who had been caught. The State Supreme Court had decided that it was OK for Texas to do this because the Federal Laws were based on a US treaty with Mexico, that the state of Texas had not signed.

    No, I don’t carry water for Donnie. My family gets a lot of laughs about me being accused of not thinking for myself. And I’m the stand out in a clan of independent thinkers…

    The Texas GOP has sort of taken the lead role in producing a LOT of politicians that are getting caught in illegal or unethical behavior while in office (or both). Not that the GOP in general isn’t producing bumper crops of deceitful, hypocritical and immoral lawmakers. Texas is just BIGGER, as they like to rub in.

    Actually, a local businessman was helping me put a heavy item in my van last May and noticed my flaming liberal bumper stickers. He told me he was having one made that he was going to sell in his shop. He’s a lifelong (50 some years) Republican.

    NO MORE REPUBLICANS FOR 100 YEARS

    Even I wouldn’t go that far.

    Finally, you must have missed last week when that prisoner admitted planning 911 and other stuff? He was responsible for Katrina. And the Kennedy assassinations (including John Jr), and Oklahoma bombing…

  8. Oledawg,

    I’m not even gonna waste my time explaining the obvious to a right wing neanderthal baboon! Go back and read the links to more than one story that I refered to you mindless drone!

  9. oledawg says:

    Darrell Prows Says:
    “Sorry, I’m not really great at a lot of this computer stuff. It took me at least three minutes on Google to come up with this Newspaper article from 2002 mentioning Judge Justice signing his final order in the 30 year old Texas prison conditions case, Ruiz v. Estelle.”

    Oledawg Says:
    I too am sorry you must begin your response by leading with a thinly veiled example of sarcasm to illustrate your outrage and apparent damage to your pride.

    It seems that your university indoctrinator didn’t notice that you were distracted while he lectured in Sarcasm 101. I hope you were able to recover by earning extra credits by listening intently when he expounded on deflecting criticism because I have a notion that you may need it here. That is, unless you click on the ‘X’ button to your upper right and go to your bathroom to pout.

    If you are a big boy, then you must still be reading this. Congratulations! You have transcended the first step toward recovery.

    Now onward to our illuminating discussion.

    Darrell Prows Says:
    “The published opinions in Ruiz have stretched to thousands of pages, but are readily available. I don’t know how to bring quotes to here but Mr. Oledawg can surely do a little reading if he has any true interest in facts. It’s so much easier just to claim that nothing is true and then let the rest of the world have to work to prove you wrong. It seems like someone has spent enough time listening to right wing radio to have absorbed the general format.”

    Oledawg Says:
    I have indeed done a ‘little reading’ but instead of reading what a leftist columnist wrote in the rag aka
    I instead went to the source, “The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 97-21003”, preferring to instead use ask.com as my search engine, for purely personal reasons.

    I have problems accessing Google because of its shameless intrusions of one’s privacy peculiar to many other leftist organizations. However, to each his own.

    I thank the Lord that The Democratic Daily uses an ISP that is free of such shenannigans. Thank you, Pamela. You may become a conservative yet.

    Darrell Prows Says:
    “From memory I’m going to say that it is something like 42 U.S.C. 1982 or 1983 that makes a deprivation of civil liberties a federal crime. That such a crime exists, I’m going to assume, needs no actual proof, even to a conservative. It’s too much a part of the fabric of our society.”

    oledawg Says:
    Let me parse what you just said. You assume that a crime exists and needs no actual proof because it is too much a part of the fabric of our society.

    Hooboy! I cannot imagine a legal guy like you can honestly make such an assumption. Perhaps that is your dream, in another dimension perhaps, but unfortunately for you, reality is where we exist in the here and now.

    Darrell Prows Says:
    “Remember how, in the field of sexual harrassment, a superior making unwanted sexual advances to a subordinate substantiates a sexual harrassment claim because of the unequal power inherent in the relationship. Well, unless these prison guys are just so hot that they have little boys hitting on them whereever they go, it seems safe to conclude, at a minimum, that we are dealing with an element of coercion. And that, in fact, does turn this incident into a violation of federal law. At least that’s what they taught us where I got my law degree. Did they teach something differnt in the law school you went to, sir?”

    oledawg Says:
    I am certain you have no interest in comparing credentials but would rather assume a superior position when finding yourself struggling to retain your intellectual facade.

    From your eagerness to suggest a Federal solution to the egregious existence of wrongdoing, does that suggest you would hijack the state’s jurisdiction and have the Feds take over? Is that what they taught you in Socialist Law 101? Surely they are more subtle than that. I am sure those hot Texas afternoons are hard on those who party too much.

    Would it be more prudent to see how the state handles the case concerning the predatory activities of the corrections staff and if justice is not sufficiently served, intervene with Federal jurisdiction in accordance with Federal civil rights statutes?

    That is how the above Federal case No. 97-21003 aka David R. Ruiz; et al. versus the Texas prison authorities was justified, then litigated, which you are so proud to cite as your justification for Federal intervention.

    It seems odd that you were so careless to state your interpretation of pedophile abuse as “Well, unless these prison guys are just so hot that they have little boys hitting on them whereever they go, it seems safe to conclude, at a minimum, that we are dealing with an element of coercion.”
    Surely you would not use such inane sarcastic hyperbole to argue that approach before your university indoctrinator, or worse, before a judge in a court of law.
    Are we to be talked down to in this manner? Are you that arrogant? I would hardly typify that as a rational point.

    Could the real reason for your perceived outrage and conceal a hope that you may be fishing for an opportunity to advance your personal cause, such as pursuing political office? It seems to me you are advancing political ideas rather than legal ones.

    Darrell Prows Says:
    “It seems that there was a violation of federal law brought to some component of the Justice Department, a violation the publicizing of which would have been negative for the Texas Republican Party. The response of the DOJ to decline the case may well have been political. I’m assuming the question is “would the U.S. Attorney have faced dismissal from reaching the opposite decision”? Given this entire atmosphere, it is very reasonable to ask if DOJ made a political decision, one, if so, that should be properly embarassing to the all Republicans.”

    oledawg Says:
    I think I see an agenda here, such as in the odious persecution of one Rep. Tom DeLay vs the infamous bumbler Ronnie Earl. As I recall Earl called no less than four Grand Juries and multiple indictments before he found a combination that would do his bidding. The jury is still out on that fiasco.

    I must remind you to remember prior Administrations that dismissed all U.S. Attorneys shortly after they took office, because those positions were POLITICAL.

    Moreover, President Clinton, in dismissing all U.S. Attorneys held over from the Bush Administration, especially targeted the one in Arkansas who stated he was 30 days away from handing down indictments concerning Whitewater and other Clinton misdeeds. Do we really need to go back that far?

    Apparently so, since you reached back almost that far with your inept presentation to promote Federal intervention as ‘The Prows Solution’.

  10. oledawg says:

    Ginny,
    “It appears your reading comprehension is slightly below the level of writing on this blog.”

    oledawg:
    Ouch! Now that is really an insult. Those wet noodles really sting! Does that include Donnie’s?

    Ginny:
    “First, Donnie did not disagree with the importance of the child protection. He was pointing out that Fredo seems to be selective in which kids he chooses to protect from which perpetrators.”

    oledawg:
    And who or what is ‘Fredo’? Please note I must disregard your posit re: Federal vs State intervention and other important facts to consider (hint: see above response to Mr. Prows.)

    Ginny:
    “Second, the point of the block paragraphs with sections in blue that are underlined is the writer is linking you to the original article. If you had followed that link, you would have found yourself on a fairly conservative site.”

    oledawg:
    Again, please refer to above response, but ‘fairly conservative’? Surely you jest.

    Ginny:
    “It was the writer of that article who state Gonzales and Sutton were being accused. So much for the bunch of questions about that.”

    oledawg:
    Quite a dismissal, Ginny. Sounds like selective rationalization to me.

    Ginny:
    “Darrell has provided excellent reference to the prison case – actually recent enough that some of us remembered it.”

    oledawg:
    Good for you. You are younger and have far better memory than I.

    Ginny:
    “I also remember finding out in 2000 that while Bush was the Gov, several justice issues were decided on his watch. One was that prisoners on death row appealing their conviction had no inherent right to a qualified lawyer. The lawyer didn’t actually have to develop a case, he could sleep through the proceedings, admit it and still be OK with the State Supreme Court (and accounting office).”

    oledawg:
    According to yet another ‘fairly conservative source?

    Ginnie:
    “The other was the state had violated Federal Laws regarding the treatment of illegal immigrants who had been caught. The State Supreme Court had decided that it was OK for Texas to do this because the Federal Laws were based on a US treaty with Mexico, that the state of Texas had not signed.”

    oledawg:
    And the final judgment was? __________________________________________

    Ginnie:
    “No, I don’t carry water for Donnie. My family gets a lot of laughs about me being accused of not thinking for myself. And I’m the stand out in a clan of independent thinkers…”

    oledawg:
    Sorry, about carrying water for Donnie, I was being facetious. I guess you guys really need to prop each other up.
    As for independent thinking, define ‘independent’ in relation to liberal vs conservative.

    Ginny:
    “The Texas GOP has sort of taken the lead role in producing a LOT of politicians that are getting caught in illegal or unethical behavior while in office (or both). Not that the GOP in general isn’t producing bumper crops of deceitful, hypocritical and immoral lawmakers. Texas is just BIGGER, as they like to rub in.”

    oledawg:
    Should we produce lists of misdeeds of opposite parties or would you rather agree that Democrats are inherently dishonest? After all, it is their nature. Many Republican politicians are no different and seem to ineptly try to be Democrats.

    Ginny:
    “Actually, a local businessman was helping me put a heavy item in my van last May and noticed my flaming liberal bumper stickers. He told me he was having one made that he was going to sell in his shop. He’s a lifelong (50 some years) Republican.
    NO MORE REPUBLICANS FOR 100 YEARS”

    oledawg:
    Sounds like a good businessman considering where he has chosen to do business.
    Would you agree that he will sell quite a few? It sounds like your Republican neighbor is going to take a lot of money from his political rivals.
    Perhaps he was one who stayed home on election day, which is another topic altogether.

    Ginny:
    “Even I wouldn’t go that far.”

    oledawg:
    I would go farther, much farther.

    Ginny:
    “Finally, you must have missed last week when that prisoner admitted planning 911 and other stuff? He was responsible for Katrina. And the Kennedy assassinations (including John Jr), and Oklahoma bombing…”

    oledawg:
    HOHOHO! Sounds like an episode from a Geena Davis flop. But what has that to do with our topic? Jest wonderin’.

  11. oledawg says:

    Donnie the McDaniel Says:
    “I’m not even gonna waste my time explaining the obvious to a right wing neanderthal baboon!”

    oledawg:
    Well, your spelling sucks, too. I was so looking forward to having a reasonable exchange, but if you must make excuses, I am sure you have much to do elsewhere.
    I know when I cannot make silk from a sow’s ear.
    Donnie:
    “Go back and read the links to more than one story that I refered to you mindless drone!”

    oledawg:
    I reckon it takes one to know one.
    Adios, mutha

  12. Ginny Cotts says:

    oledawg,

    Hmm, not much improvement on the reading comprehension. Sorry, that conclusion was based on several of my comments that you still don’t understand.

    ‘Fredo’ is W’s nickname for Gonzales. Often noted lately to be the same name as a character in “The Godfather”. He was eliminated for poor performance too.

    Re: the accusation that Donnie was accusing Gonzales and Sutton. He was reporting on an article he linked to. I am not surprised you do not consider the site conservative.

    Yeah the article on the Texas Supreme court case was from a conservative source. A major newspaper as I recall. I don’t find it in my saved stuff now but I do know who I got it from. My then SO is a public defender in CA who limits his cases to death row inmates because he does not believe in the death penalty. The article referred to an earlier article in which the reporter challenged the 80 something lawyer about sleeping during the trial. The guy actually said something to the effect that “of course, these trials are boring”.

    As far as the immigrant case, I am not sure when or what happened, but I suspect the State of Texas was reminded that The UNITED States of America signs treaties with other countries, and as members of the Union, the individual states must comply with those treaties. Again, the article was from a newspaper, forwarded by the aforementioned SO*.

    “would you rather agree that Democrats are inherently dishonest? After all, it is their nature”

    😆 😆 😆 I am not going to go look up the stats and links to the comparisons of the number of high ranking political appointees in both parties that have been indicted, convicted, served jail time, etc. (This goes back to Reagan and Nixon) The Dems have their share. I strongly maintain that any human institution – government, business or the Catholic Church – will have it’s share of sorry humans. The GOP numbers far exceed the Dems. I know you won’t agree. We write these responses to comments like yours mostly for other people coming to the site.

    Finally. oledawg Says:
    March 28th, 2007 at 12:21 am

    “I know! Lets blame it on Katrina! Katrina was caused by President Bush. Everyone knows that! He caused that #$*%$ hurricane and aimed right at New Orleans! That’s it!”

    You brought it in to the topic with that presumably facetious comment. I responded in kind.

    There are some really good computer programs that can help you on your reading comprehension. (Mine is in the high 90’s). Check them out.

    *You may be too old for this abbreviation. Stands for Significant Other.

  13. OleDawg

    Long time no see. I won’t get in the midst of the deep conversation, since I have a lot going on these days, but I just wanted to say we’re always pleased to have you around for some good banter. 🙂

  14. Darrell Prows says:

    Dude, plenty smoke, no flame.

    Come on back when you can actually bring something to the table.

    Thanks.