These are serious charges and should not be taken lightly. Certainly every attempt to destroy my credibility will be made by the culprits involved. As father of an innocent man who was falsely accused and wrongfully convicted of crimes that he did not commit and, in fact, never occurred.  My son, David Roland Hinkson, is sitting in prison, a victim of false imprisonment, as I write this book.

David is a charismatic person, who became one of the many "Targeted Individuals" in the U.S. who, because of his political speech, has been singled out to be eliminated by the conspiracy. The conspiracy fears that individuals such as David who are willing to speak out against corruption will foment an opposition against them and their dirty deeds that will foil their plans to turn America into a socialist nation. 

As David’s father, I am aware that I am automatically considered both biased and non-objective. Regardless I can't close my eyes to the truth that I have seen. Nor will I be silenced.

So here's a story of treachery, deception and crime by officials as it unfolded and how it is being manipulated by willing participants inside and outside of our government.  I welcome any credible evidence that disproves the allegations I make here because I have looked, and to date there is none. The statements made herein are accurate, but I have tried to not overstate the enormity of my discovery of this conspiracy.  I ask the reader to consider: Is there a crime more cowardly than one orchestrated (or conspired) by agents of an all powerful government against helpless victims?

David was set up by members of this conspiracy and falsely accused as he stood before the so-called bar of justice.  He had believed that the rule of law prevailed in America.  He believed that there was truly a "Presumption of Innocence" that worked for him; and if those who made salacious allegations against him could be shown to be liars and impeached, he would prevail.  Now he has learned that the "Presumption of Governmental Regularity and Correctness" has replaced the Presumption of Innocence. He now understands that he is the victim of the corrupt, broken legal system which now operates in the Country of his birth.  He is learning first hand a hard lesson as to how the system really works but has paid an extremely high price to gain that knowledge.  If only we had the benefit of 20-20 hindsight while we were facing the future, many adjustments would be made in the way his case was presented which–would have at least showcased the corruption and would have proven there was no truth in the allegations against him.

Nonetheless, during the middle of his trial, the judge willfully lied from the bench about the content of official government file laid before him; then based on that lie, the judge made a finding of fact which was completely false and issued a ruling denying the admission of a critical piece of evidence that would have set David free: his excuse for excluding this evidence was that it would “confuse the jury.”  The record is clear that the judge lied, but there seems to be no forum in which the fact of his deception can be presented to overcome David’s 43 year prison sentence in SuperMax (U.S.P., Florence, Colorado).

David was the founder and sole owner of a company called WaterOz (that employed over 40 people between 2000-2003) when suddenly he began his journey through hell at the hands of the federal government.  He had previously sued several agents of the IRS and Justice Department for racketeering, because they were conspiring to bring false criminal charges against him through a baseless grand jury indictment.  Part of the testimony in that grand jury was that David was responsible for the death of a certain individual who is still alive today. 

It was the Assistant U.S. Attorney who actually encouraged a witness to tell this lie to the grand jury–which is the crime of subordination of perjury.  But that government attorney has never been charged with this crime.  Not only was it disruptive to David's live, his work as an inventor and to his business to have his employees constantly scrutinized,–and traveling great distances to answer questions at grand jury proceedings–it was disconcerting that a federal prosecutor was actively advocating for and encouraging witnesses to tell lies against him under oath.

In 2000, former Idaho County Prosecuting Attorney (PA) Dennis Albers, was again running for re-election.  He had been ordered by the Idaho Supreme Court never to seek that office again because of his corrupt performance in the 1980 trial involving one Elven Joe Swisher, who later became the government’s star witness against David case.  David had learned that the Idaho Supreme Court permanently barred this prosecutor from ever running for the Prosecutor’s Office again and used that information to oppose the election of Albers as the Idaho County PA.

Unfortunately, David had a run-in with Albers over a case where a non-employee sued David for half of his business. The case resulted in David having to pay over $100,000 in damages and created some bad blood between David and Albers.  During the election campaign David sent out 10,000 letters to the voters in Idaho County reciting the fact that Albers had been admonished by the Idaho Supreme Court never to seek election as the PA again.  The reason for the restriction was Albers past serious ethics violation in speaking to a juror during the 1980 criminal trial against Joe Swisher.  Albers was soundly defeated, crestfallen from the loss of an assured victory, and he swore to take it out on Hinkson–which he did.

“You belong in jail and I’ll put you there and take your business,” Albers swore. Thereupon Albers orchestrated an unrelenting attack on David by conspiring with others, including the woman who claimed she had once been a WaterOz employee.  Ironically, the dietary supplement products which David had invented, including ionized metals such as silver, gold, zinc and copper, all helped this woman recover from a serious illness, a lung infection, that nearly took her life.  But, no good deed goes unpunished, so she, along with others, proceeded with their attempts to destroy David and steal his business.

The informants fabricated stories accusing David of various crimes that he did not commit and in fact did not occur.  These crimes were simply the figment of the informant’s imaginations¬–as will be shown later in this book.  But, and this is one of the important lessons learned: the U.S. Government has ways to make an informant lie for them in order to up hold the goals and objectives of their conspiracy.  There were many in the employ of the government, or who relied upon the government for favors who made lying against David their stock and trade.

There was a woman named Mariana Raff, a pathological liar, who had stolen $6,600.00 cash from David.  She worked as his house keeper for a time and learned where David kept his mad money.  Further, Mariana helped her family members steal over $80,000.00 from David in a Mexican real estate purchase scam.  Part of the motivation for Mariana to lie against David was that she recognized that with David in jail, neither this woman nor her family would be accountable or responsible for the stolen funds. The government finally had to admit their knowledge of the fraud when her credibility was finally destroyed by repeated criminal acts she committed such as burglarizing a drug store and a post office, to mention a few of her crimes.

Central to the issue of vindictive prosecution is the government’s continued pursuit of claims that agents in the government knew or had reason to know they were not true.  David had worked as a volunteer paralegal–according to his testimony in a Tax Case trial in the late 1980s and early 1990s near Las Vegas in Clark County, Nevada, (where he lived in the early 1990s).  It was while he was working as a legal assistant that he observed and then became interested in exposing government corruption. 

In one instance, he printed and distributed over 600,000 fliers in Las Vegas in his effort to expose a corrupt scheme involving a fee to pay for saving, what supposedly was, an endangered species.  Actually, the fee was known as the “turtle tax” and was collected to build facilities where the turtles were euphemized because they were propagating at such a great rate in the desert–turtles have no natural preditors.  These fees were intended as environmental mitigation fees but were being collected unlawfully and used for politicians like Harry Reid to engage in illegal land development, all under the auspices of the Endangered Species Act.

David charged the County commissioners and other State and federal officials with unlawful profiteering at the expense of property owners.  Four out of five Clark County commissioners were not re-elected largely due to David’s efforts.  Later David ran for Clark County commissioner but was defeated. During the same time period, he helped ranchers and farmers avoid seizure of their lands by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.  He asserted that the BLM was misusing the Endangered Species Act by misquoting the law and saying that it gave them powers–that did not exist in the law–to do whatever they wanted to do.

After he moved from Nevada, he built his WaterOz factory in Idaho and began manufacturing and distributing dietary supplement mineral waters.  Eventually he became the subject of the IRS investigation for failing to file personal income tax returns and employment tax returns.  Previously, David openly confronted the BLM and other federal agencies including the IRS on the Lou Epton show [in Las Vegas], which also demonstrates that he really believed they operated fraudulently. He actually invited confrontation with them; but rather than engaging in a debate, they choose to attack David secretly with false charges that he intended to murder three federal officials.

David faxed a notice to a top Agent of the IRS in Idaho that he intended to file a civil suit against him. This suit would establish his Seventh Amendment right to impanel a common law jury to decide whether he was required to file tax returns even though he believed that he didn't owe any individual federal income tax.  He realized that there is no law in the United States of America requiring the average citizen to pay an income tax, that it is, in fact, un-Constitutional.

After receiving notice of David's intent to file a civil lawsuit, the Agent immediately made an official referral of David's case to the IRS Criminal Investigations Division (CID). This Agent fabricated a phony accusation that David threatened to harm an ex-employee.  That employee at David's tax trial testified that the IRS Agent's testimony was false–regardless of a misunderstanding or an outright lie.

IRS agents began spreading rumors in his community of Grangeville, Idaho, that David was a “dangerous person” and that he was involved with a group known as the “Mountain Man Militia.” A vicious rumor perpetuated by various government workers is that David “put crates of guns into the WaterOz warehouse.” He was also falsely accused of killing people with his products, of having followers and claiming he is a god.  The government perpetrated other venomous rumors based on the alleged statement of the disgruntled ex-employee that David had fired for theft.  Such rumors were started, perpetuated and embellished by seemingly responsible government employees whose intent it was to alienate David from any community support.

Of greater concern is the fact that the government failed to exercise any control over their agents allowing them to become “rogue agents.”  These agents have used their authority and credibility to develop a “false persona” for David and to used such authority illegally to obtain his financial records.

David was eventually tried and convicted of a "Structuring Charge" based upon his bank not reporting a withdrawal from his account and of paying his employees on Thursday and Friday in an amount exceeding $10,000; however, this was contrary to Congresses’ intent (the intention was to prevent money laundering–particularly by drug dealers).  These withdrawals were proven to be payroll funds–which is specifically exempt from the Cash Transaction Report (CTR) requirement.  Thus, he was tried, convicted and sent to prison for a non-crime.

An FBI Agent admitted his own perjury.  Once cornered, when the tape-recording of David's request for an attorney was presented, this FBI agent admitted that he had previously testified “erroneously.”–in other words he admitted that he had lied on the witness stand.  The Court ruled, however, that it was of no consequence.  When David had reported the theft of $6,600.00 by his female employee, instead of the authorities arresting her they arrested David.  He asked for his attorney but was denied.  David had a hidden self-activating tape-recorder in shirt pocket, recording his request for an attorney.  When the FBI agent was questioned at a detention hearing, he said, “Defendant did not ask for an attorney.”  The tape confirmed that the FBI Agent just plain lied.

The government agents brought in other so-called "witnesses," all of whom received some form of compensation from the government for their testimony.  In prosecuting David the government based its prosecution on perjured testimony, which the government knew was perjured.  They knew that after the grand jury indicted David, it was not inclined to indict on a second occasion–which is when the prosecutor used the rubber stamp.  The grand jury refused to indict David in August 2001 and again in early April 2002, but the superseding indictment was not dated until June, after the grand jury was adjourned.

The records of the grand jury were then sealed.  The fact that the prosecutor was a named defendant in a $50 million lawsuit by David filed after a grand jury adjourned (without indicting David) demonstrates that the criminal indictment was merely retaliatory; it shows intent to vindictively prosecute the defendant.

David knows that he has been prosecuted vindictively for exercising his "First Amendment" Constitutional rights to express his political beliefs concerning the income tax system, corruption in government and in health related issues.

Justice and law require that prosecutors tell the jurors when they know that a witness is lying. Prosecutors, of course, want to get a conviction–few even care if the accused is innocent even though prosecutors have a dual role and are sworn to uphold the Constitution and do justice.  But prosecutors have developed the attitude that if defendants are wrongfully convicted, “it's not my fault; they can always seek an appeal."  By law, prosecutors may not speak to jurors outside the presence of the grand jury.  Nor can they withhold exculpatory evidence.  Cases of abuse have come before the courts where prosecutors presented perjured testimony and questioned a witness outside the presence of the grand jury and then failed to inform the grand jury that the testimony was exculpatory.  Other cases include failing to inform the grand jury of its authority to subpoena witnesses, operating under a conflict of interest, misstating the law and misstating the facts on cross-examination of a witness.  But remember, under Title 5 of the United States Code, judges, prosecutors and even investigators are all allowed to receive payments for convictions they participate in obtaining–which is legalized bribery.

Justice Sutherland of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit made it clear:

"The prosecutor's duty is to protect the fundamental fairness of judicial proceedings.  That assumes special importance when he [the prosecutor] is presenting evidence to a grand jury . . . and that the costs of continued unchecked prosecutorial misconduct before the grand jury are particularly substantial because there the prosecutor operates without the check of a judge or a trained legal adversary, and is virtually immune from public scrutiny.

"The prosecutor's abuse of his special relationship to the grand jury poses an enormous risk to defendants as well.  For while in theory a trial provides the defendant with a full opportunity to contest and disprove the charges against him, in practice, the handing up of an indictment will often have a devastating personal and professional impact that a later dismissal or acquittal can never undo.

"Where the potential for abuse is so great, and the consequences of a mistaken indictment so serious, the ethical responsibilities of the prosecutor, and the obligation of the judiciary to protect against even the appearance of unfairness, are correspondingly heightened."

David's case is a good example of such abuse.  It has cost David and his family an excess of four million dollars, so far, paid for his defense.  It was likely that the trend of his growing company, which was only grossing three million dollars a year, could now be astronomical.  Worst of all–an inventor, who truly is a creative man, innocent of the charges against him has spent seven years in the most sever conditions of incarceration in the United State and is facing a virtual life sentence.

David was detained by federal agents under a fraudulently-obtained detention order based on the perjured testimony of an FBI agent who repeated as hearsay, what Marianna Raff supposedly told him. The use of such perjured testimony from a former disgruntled employees who had a vendetta against David, when the FBI agent did not bother to conduct an independent investigation to verify what had been said, was obstruction of justice, a separate crime committed by the FBI agent.  The government has consistently interfered with David’s jail housing by directing the Ada County Jail to periodically move him to solitary confinement, and to reassign him to higher levels of security and to restrict his living privileges.  The obvious intent of his captors was to increase his level of stress, cause greater isolation and induce a psychological breakdown.  David's physical safety was threatened when he was placed in a jail cell with an individual who strangled another inmate to unconsciousness in David's presence (after the strangler had demanded money from defendant). 

Sammy the Saudi Arabian Terrorist was housed in the same Ada County Jail at the same time as David.  It was alleged that Sammy had used his computer to commit the crime of Terrorism.  Sammy was allowed to use his computer while an inmate in the cell next to David, and David was denied the use of his own computer.

Certainly, this story sounds excessive.  But the truth can be very stunning.  This book proposes to reveal the events as they occurred.  It is not written for the average audience where entertainment is the goal.  Hopefully, the reality of David's ordeal will open the eyes of those who feel comfortable that our current system of justice will treat people fairly–the proof is that it likely will not.  I'm a realist.  But I'm sure that there are at least of few insightful persons in the public who will join in David's struggle for freedom.  For the righteous and honorable to prevail doesn’t depend as much on one’s ideas or abilities, but on the courage one has to take risks and to act.

Mark Twain wrote, "In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him. For then it costs nothing to be a patriot."

[1B] It's was cold outside on Thursday, the 27th day of January, 2005.  The Federal Court Building in Boise, Idaho, was surrounded by numerous Home Land Security guards dressed in black full-body- armor and armed with automatic weapons–security was tight. 

Faye (David’s mother) and I along with Wes arrived at the Building, moved quickly down the shiny corridors into the modern, brightly-lit Court Room on the 6th floor; we took our seats.  Moments later guards, followed by Federal agents, opened the door leading into the spectators gallery.  They shuffled in the with the notorious David Roland Hinkson who was chained like an animal.  Tension filled the air.

An aisle divided the seating in the spectators gallery of the court room.  Four people for the defense (David's mother, father, wife and brother) sat on the left half of the gallery.  Thirty-four, most of which apparently had worked to get David convicted, sat on the right.  All were anxiously awaiting the return of the jury for their verdict.

We find the Defendant guilty as charged for the solicitation of murder of three Federal officials. . . ."

" Tonight we celebrate!"

• Sheria Law
• Constitutional Law
• Noahide Law
• Law
• Martial Law
• Common Law
• Supreme Court
• Go Back

Related in this Category