[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
National News See other National News Articles Title: Nick Berg Enjoyed Favored Treatment from the Norman City (Oklahoma) Court In the spring of 2000, Nick Berg was arrested twice by University of Oklahoma police and accused of trespass because he was sleeping on OU couches. He was not an OU student at the time. Why was this young man from a comfortable suburb in Pennsylvania appearing to be a homeless vagrant in Norman, Oklahoma? If my suspicions are correct that he was infiltrating Al Qaeda under CIA supervision, then the appearance of being a vagrant might have been part of his pretense. Presenting himself as an alienated and marginalized American would have been necessary to enjoy the trust of Al Qaeda members. Readers are invited to take a close look at Nick Berg’s Norman city court record, which I obtained on May 18, 2004. There are some strange paradoxes in it. Go here for the document. It might be necessary to use the mouse to enlarge the scan: http://bellaciao.org/en/IMG/jpg/cou... First, observe that there were two arrests for trespassing, and two columns with dates. On the left are the dates for the arrests, and on the right are the dates of consequent court actions. For the arrest of 5/28/00, we see the symbol BF, meaning that Berg forfeited bond in the amount of $162. He did not make a court appearance. The bond forfeiture amounted to a guilty plea, and a conviction went on the record. Earlier, he had been arrested on 4/11/00. After this we see the symbol DISM CO, which means dismissal complied. We also see the date of 11/21/00 for the court action. The clerk explained this. It meant that on 5/21/00, six months earlier, Berg appeared in court and received a deferred sentence. He was told that the complaint would be dismissed six months later if he committed no other offenses within that time interval. As the record demonstrates, it was dismissed. The paradox in this record is that he violated the terms of this deferred sentence by being arrested seven days later but enjoyed obtaining a dismissal in November in spite of this. The clerk stated that this was done at the city attorney’s discretion. How do we account for this? One possibility is that the city attorney did a favor for Berg. I suspect that Berg had been a CIA operative and infiltrator taking instructions from David Boren, George Tenet, and David Edger. Boren is a powerful political patriarch in Oklahoma. It would be a trivial matter for Boren to ask a little favor from the city attorney, in order to help out one of his operatives. Take another look at the court record. Notice that for both arrests, financial sums in the amount of $162 were assessed against Berg. Why did he have to pay this amount for the charge which was dismissed? The clerk explained that for this charge, the sum was called a "fee" instead of a fine. The amount was $100. Additionally he had to pay $32 for court costs and $30 for time spent in jail. For the conviction, the $100 went on the record as a fine. I had never heard of anything like this before, and it strikes me as a questionable and extraordinary arrangement. I suspect a little "horse-trading" went on behind the scenes. The city attorney, in the process of granting the favor of dismissing the complaint, simultaneously and paradoxically came up with a way to snatch a little money from Berg for the court. He was sneaking in the back door. Related Articles at BellaCiao: FBI tells enormous lie about Nick Berg: http:///bellaciao.org/en/article.ph... Evidence of the Social Security Administration having joined the Nick Berg cover-up: http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php... http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php... Summary of my comprehensive 9/11 investigation: Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||
