State of California,
Office of the Attorney General,
Department of Justice,
P.O. Box 944255, Sacramento,
CA 94244-2550, U.S.A.
Dear Sir, I am not a U.S. citizen but I want to draw your attention to an abuse of the courts which makes the justice system of the State of California, and the United States generally, a laughingstock abroad. I refer to the case against Howard Keith Henson of Hemet CA, which is to be heard shortly in Riverside CA. Mister Henson is accused of "making terrorist threats" (California Penal Code S.422) against the Golden Era Studios installation of the 'Church' of Scientology; specifically of threatening to aim cruise missiles at it. This, in itself, is pretty ludicrous. In addition, the Riverside DA's office has  refused to take action over actual violence by CofS officials against Mr Henson e.g. driving a car directly at him, but  chosen to proceed with this even though the investigating officer said there was no real evidence of credible threat. More details are given in http://freehenson.da.ru/ The District Attorney is supposed to act for "The People" against a defendant who has offended public order or the public good, and act for the public rather than simply as an attorney instructed by the particular complainant --- who may have different and conflicting interests. In Britain complainants, misunderstanding this, are unhappy that the equivalent "Crown Prosecution Service" does not inform or consult them at every stage, as if it were their personal representative. But the Riverside DA's office has gone to the opposite extreme: the have CofS lawyers sat at the prosecutors table, and blindly follow CofS instructions and issue motions drafted by CofS, even though CofS' interests are not those of "the People" generally. In particular, the DA has issued motions asking for virtually every relevant element of the defence to be excluded, such as other witnesses to picketing at the studio or the investigating officer's recommendation that there was no case worth bringing. These go well beyond normal justice, and seem to be based on the dictum of Scientology founder L Ron Hubbard that the law can "easily be used to harass and bankrupt an opponent." Indeed they seem remarkably like motion put by CofS itself in a case against Robert Minton in Florida. There have been many problems with this DA to judge from the material at http://districtattorney.virtualave.net though I have not had time to check & verify everything said there. I understand from the RIVERSIDE PRESS ENTERPRISE http://www.inlandempireonline.com/news/stories/040601/dasuit06.shtml by Diane Harrison. Further more, I have been following the stories of pressure and harassment of witnesses in the case. Normally the DA would be representing ordinary people against gangsters, and they would harass prosecution witnesses. In this case the DA is working hand in glove with gangsters and sitting at the same court table with them, against ordinary people. When the gangsters harass defence witnesses, what help can those witnesses expect from the DA? they have little choice except to approach the federal authorities for protection. I enclose the full text of Henson's motion to recuse that DA's office from putting the prosecution case at trial, because their behaviour is inimical to fair and impartial justice. My own view is that California law empowers the California attorney general to step in if a D.A. has abused his discretion, and that there are good grounds for you to do so in this particular case. Yours Sincerely