Federal Witch Hunt Succeeds: Piekarsky and Donchak Convicted of ‘Hate Crime’

Digger, Diggers Realm, October 15, 2010

Derrick Donchak and Brandon Piekarsky were convicted of what is being called a federal “hate crime” yesterday in Scranton, PA in the beating death of illegal alien Luis Ramirez. They face life imprisonment and are expected to be sentenced in January 2011. The first thing you should know about this federal case though is that the conviction wasn’t on a “hate crime” statute, but a statute of the federal Fair Housing Act. Yes, you did read that right. I’ll explain that in a bit.

The witch hunt by the federal government against Piekarsky and Donchak began when they were found not guilty for causing the death of Luis Ramirez in Shenandoah, PA in July 2008. Both were convicted of simple assault in May 2009 and sentenced to at least 6 months in June 2009.

I covered the Shenandoah trial extensively day by day. I found the evidence and testimony at trial in 2009 to be consistent with their convictions and sentencing. You can read the day by day trial coverage, which included a charge of ethnic intimidation–the state version of “hate crime”–at some of the links below.

I will not rehash the whole trial here, but I will state that if I believed that these two were guilty of murder I would be the first to point that out, but as you review the trial in the above links I believe you too will come to the same conclusion that I did.

The first trial–Why Donchak and Piekarsky were found not guilty

Here is a basic rundown of the events that occurred and why the teens weren’t convicted of murder.

Six teens who got some booze after a town carnival type event were wandering around town. They came upon 25-year-old illegal alien Luis Ramirez in a park late at night, around 11:30PM, alone with a severely underage girl (13) who just happens to be the younger sister of Crystal Dillman. Dillman, who claims that Ramirez was her fiance and has two children with him and a third from a previous relationship, later received an undisclosed sum from People Magazine for a three page article and $25,000 from a victim’s advocate fund. Testimony by Ramirez’s friends say that he was drinking prior to going to the park. At the recent federal trial the 13-year-old girl was called Ramirez’s “girlfriend” in court.

The teens approached him asking them what they were doing there. A fight ensued and slurs were thrown from both sides as it progressed. One teen, Brian Scully, who took a plea deal in the case says he punched Ramirez and knocked him to the ground and said that he was the one yelling “go back to Mexico”. Scully says he heard no racial slurs from Piekarsky. Another teen, Colin Walsh, who took a plea agreement and is facing 9 years, with hopes to have his sentenced reduced to 4 for cooperating, claims that he also punched Ramirez. The teens then started to leave. During the fight Ramirez got up and had time to make phone calls to multiple people. He could have walked away. The teens walked away at this point. Scully testified that Ramirez then charged them from behind punched him in the head. A second fight ensued.

Walsh testified “Walsh: I took Ramirez down with a solid ‘uppercut hook’ and saw him hit his head”. Ramirez hit his head on a curb. Scully claims he tried to kick the unmoving Ramirez in the head but missed then claimed Piekarsky kicked him in the head. Walsh says he doesn’t remember Scully trying to kick Ramirez, but claims Piekarsky did, but he made many contradictory statements in his testimony such as shoe colors etc. and stated “Walsh: me, Piekarsky, Donchak and Scully kicked the fallen Ramirez.” at one point. No physical evidence was ever introduced. No shoes with blood etc. And as noted all of them had been drinking which brings all of their detailed testimony into question.

The charges of murder arose because Ramirez died two days later due to head trauma. However, at trial Dr. Daniel Brown, a neuropathologist who had examined Ramirez’s body on Aug. 1, 2008, testified:

“I observed a blood clot between his brain and a protective covering, and blood in an area usually containing spinal fluid. The left side of his brain had extensive contusions and swelling. Because of motion of the brain, an injury to the back of the brain caused an injury to the front. No evidence of trauma to the right side of his brain.”

Injuries consistent with a moving head hitting a stationary object.

Note the pathologist says the cause of death was a moving head hitting a stationary object, not a moving object hitting a stationary head. Thus the only physical evidence in the case points away from a kick causing his death.

With all of the testimony, lack of evidence and the testimony of teens who were drunk at the time, it was not a shock to see the two acquitted of murder. Also due to the low threshold of racial slurs, it was also not a shock that they were acquitted of state ethnic intimidation charges. I would just like to point out that if this had been a racially motivated attack, there would have been no lull in the fighting, no time for Ramirez to make multiple cell phone calls and no second attack. The teens would have jumped on Ramirez and beat him to death from the start. Yet they did no such thing. After the initial fight they went to leave and Ramirez attacked them.

The verdicts, evidence and testimony were not good enough for some though.

Illegal Alien Support groups demand a witch hunt–and get it!

As soon as the verdicts and sentencing came down illegal alien support groups in the country which had been rallying in Shenandoah prior to the trial–including MALDEF, La Raza and LULAC–vented their rage and put out their tentacles to their contacts within the federal and state government. They declared that it was a sham trial because it was an all-white jury. One of those tentacles reached Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell who contacted the Federal Department of Justice urging them to prosecute the two. And just a little over 6 months after their sentencing the feds indeed did so. In December 2009 the federal government indicted Donchak and Piekarsky on federal “hate crimes” charges and the witch hunt was on.

As you now know, Piekarsky and Donchak were convicted of those charges yesterday. There is also unsurprisingly no outrage from illegal alien support groups that the jury was all-white for this trial–as that was simply a straw man argument from the start since Shenandoah is a mostly white area. What you would be shocked to hear though is on what charges they were convicted of. As the papers blare that they were indicted of a “hate crime”, the true charge has nothing to do with hate, it has to do with preventing illegal alien Luis Ramirez from living where he wants to.

Yes, this charge is under the Federal Fair Housing Act. Here is straight from the Department of Justice’s proud press release on the kangaroo conviction of the two–from their civil rights division.

The jury found the defendants guilty of violating the criminal component of the federal Fair Housing Act, which makes it a crime to use a person’s race, national origin or ethnicity as a basis to interfere, with violence or threats of violence, with a person’s right to live where he chooses to live.

There are no Civil Rights for illegal aliens

First, I would just like to point out that recently many have been confusing civil rights with human rights and this is just such a case. Civil rights are those bestowed on a citizen by their country. Immigrants, both legal and illegal, have no civil rights in this country. That is one of the cherished benefits of becoming a citizen. This has been obfuscated by these race pandering groups and attorneys looking for cases and persecutions. They try to confuse you into believing that our system works on human rights and it does no such thing. The UN works on the human rights system. The United States works on a defined civil rights system as outlined in our constitution. A violation of Luis Ramirez’s claimed “human rights” has no place in our courtroom. And as he was not a citizen of this country he has no civil rights, so the civil rights division of the Department of Justice is outside of their jurisdiction.

Second, after reviewing the original case above which was a charge of murder and “ethnic intimidation”, why is the federal government using some housing clause to prosecute two young men. Piekarsky was only 17 at the time and Donchak was just over 18. How were they depriving Luis Ramirez of where he lived because he got in a fight with them in a park late one night?

Obviously this is the only charge that they could make stick against these two and it should outrage every American that the federal government would go to such length to convict a citizen on unrelated charges just to bow to the whims of the illegal alien lobby. These groups are using the justice system to prosecute people they do not like by trying to make you believe that crimes are segmented between murders that were nice murders and murders that were hateful murders. But going beyond this, no murder even occurred in July 2008, it was an accidental death due to a fight. Yet, these two face life in prison.

Double Jeopardy–Piekarsky and Donchak were tried twice on the same charges

Another item that should should be brought to the reader’s attention in this case is the violation of Piekarsky’s and Donchak’s constitutional rights. As I pointed out in an earlier article on this case, under the fifth amendment of the US Constitution it states quite clearly “[no person shall] be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb”. As the two have already faced “ethnic intimidation” charges under the state of Pennsylvania, they should not be allowed to be tried once again for the same incident and the same charges after being acquitted.

The Department of Justice seems to have tip-toed around the fifth amendment by charging them with some Fair Housing Act clause, but as anyone can tell by the headlines in all of the papers, this charge had nothing to do with violating Ramirez’s right to live in a house in Shenandoah and everything to do being charged with a “hate crime”. As they tout quite clearly it is because they were white and he was Mexican and that is why they were charged and convicted. This is all word play to violate their civil rights under the constitution.

The fifth amendment was put in place just for such a situation. So that the local, state and federal governments could not charge someone over and over with the same crime in order to eventually get a conviction. It prevented retribution, harassment and corruption. Quite clearly though the illegal alien lobby has managed to get the federal government to take retribution for them and any citizen should take heed at the power of these groups. They are more powerful than you might have imagined and have friends that will back up their goals and efforts even at the federal level to send a message to those opposed to illegal immigration that if you even look at an illegal alien wrong you better watch your back.

Denial of bail why? Are Piekarsky and Donchak a threat?

Piekarsky and Donchak were denied bail and now sit in a federal prison while they await sentencing. This is just one more injustice placed upon them. It is the federal government, with no prior evidence or reason, claiming that these two are such a risk of violating another persons federal Fair Housing Rights that they should be locked up until sentencing. With all that can be found in this one incident, I don’t believe I could find one logical or reasoning person who reviews the Donchak/Piekarsky case who would believe that their previous convictions and actions as law abiding citizens would come to the conclusion that they would do such thing again.

Attorneys for Donchak and Piekarsky say they will appeal the conviction. I applaud them for that, but with the current corruption and obvious vendetta-style actions taken by the Department of Justice on behalf of supporters of illegal aliens I seriously doubt they will get a fair appeal trial.

They have an agenda that threatens your rights

The case of Donchak and Piekarsky is not only a travesty of justice it is a direct warning that our rights are not ours and that they can be violated at will by those in power. You may read other news reports on this case. Many will not delve into the actual case as I have done. None will address the injustices that this case brings forward in regards to violating individual citizen’s rights. They will not address how this same type of tactic of Double Jeopardy may one day be used against you because corrupt individuals in this country have an agenda that you are getting in the way of.

There is a concerted agenda in the case of illegal alien Luis Ramirez. It was a tailor -made situation for those calling for an amnesty for illegal aliens–but only if they could get a conviction of Piekarsky and Donchak. It didn’t take the Pro-Hispanic racist groups long to exploit the situation. In December 2008 they included Luis Ramirez in a filing with the Organization of American States (OAS). The OAS is a group that is trying to claim some jurisdiction over the sovereignty of the United States. They used Luis Ramirez in a filing entitled “Latinos Not Protected In US”, as an example of the hate against Latinos in the United States. The ruling in the Piekarsky/Donchak case threatened their claims–and they were none too happy. They had to get a conviction of the two or their agenda could not move forward.

Those in support of illegal aliens will celebrate and simply publicly state that these white boys got what they deserved because obviously they were hardcore racists. They will claim “justice” has been done. Those words coming from their lips are quite simply disgusting. They want their agenda of open borders and unmitigated illegal immigration to continue and those who get in their way should be made an example of. They have no idea of the word justice. They have no idea of the rights of our constitution. They have no respect for the rule of law. And the “Justice” Department has followed them down that hole.

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.

Comments are closed.