News

Haeg’s hell

dave haeg 1

Defendant Dave Haeg prepares for the takedown/Tim Twohy photo

To understand why a small mob of law enforcement officers converged on the Alaska state courthouse in downtown Anchorage Monday to head off what looked to be a simple hearing heading rapidly toward a full-scale riot, you have to go back more than a decade in time to some dead wolves and track forward from there the crazy saga of David Haeg.

Haeg is a man who after years of dwelling on a questionable conviction for aerial hunting came into a courtroom looking for some form of justice only to end up face down on the floor with six court officers on top of him in front of a crowd of screaming supporters and his sobbing daughter.

He was then tazed, handcuffed and led off jail. 

But this only begins to capture the craziness of a story about state officials who might, or might not, have lied; of a state court judge, who might or might not have conspired to convict an  innocent man; and of a man who in some ways never really grew up.

At the center of all of this is Haeg, an emotional, 51-year-old who never got past that stage we all go through in childhood where we think life should be fair. It’s not. At some point in time, it wrongs all of us. It kicked Haeg in the gut.

Back in 2004, Haeg helped gun down some wolves in Central Alaska because he thought that was what the state wanted. Only a year earlier, the Alaska Board of Game had approved a predator-control program calling for aerial wolf hunts.

The program quickly exploded into a public relations nightmare. Outside animal-rights activists threatened a tourism boycott. “Howl-ins” were organized in major U.S. cities as a form of protest. 

“In Alaska, the wolf wars have taken a sobering turn for the worst,” the New York Times opined on March 14, 2004. “In nearly 20,000 square miles of the state it is now legal for private citizens to shoot wolves from airplanes and helicopters. In one district the limit has been increased from 10 wolves a year to 10 wolves a day.

“In these districts, the new regulations call for an 80 percent ‘temporary’ reduction in the wolf population. But a reduction on that scale is merely likely to be the first step towards the total elimination of wolves.”

With the country’s most influential news organization expressing such views, Alaska tourism businesses were near panic and putting pressure on then Gov. Frank Murkowski to do something. But the Game Board in Alaska is a quasi-independent state entity, and the wolf-control program had the support of a significant number of Alaskans.

No politician in his right mind would want to wade into that quagmire, and there was an easier political path – a path that emphasized the wolf-control program wasn’t a project run amuck but a carefully monitored program to control wolves in limited areas of the state where they were harming moose and caribou populations.

Enter Haeg, a big-game pilot and guide.

Legal until not

Haeg and friend Tony Zellers, a shooter, applied for and obtained a state permit to shoot wolves in a kill zone in state Game Management Unit 19D, an approximately 8,000-square-mile area surrounding the community of McGrath on the north side of the Alaska Range in vast Central Alaska.

Both Haeg and the state agree on this.

Haeg and Zellers shot nine wolves. The state and Haeg agree on this, too.

The agreements pretty much end there. The state eventually charged Haeg with shooting the wolves 80 miles outside of the boundary of the kill area. After the charges were levied, Haeg was portrayed as a rogue, out-of-control hunter violating the rules for a closely controlled state program.

The portrayal fit nicely with the state’s intent to make it appear it was maintaining close oversight on its wolf-control program.

Haeg contends a state Fish and Wildlife Trooper helped promote the rogue-hunter image by doctoring maps to make it appear he had gone far outside the aerial, wolf-kill zone, and more than that, Haeg argued that he had only been doing what the state wanted.

The best evidence is the wolves were shot 20 to 30 miles outside the control area boundary, but well within GMU 19D, the management unit in which the Alaska Department of Fish and Game wanted to reduce wolf numbers.  And there is no doubt the state wanted wolves dead in GMU 19D.

Feeling unfairly prosecuted, Haeg sought the help of attorney Brent Cole.

A lifelong Alaskan, Cole once oversaw the prosecution of fish and wildlife violations for the state.  After he went into private practice, he became well-known as a legal “fixer.” He has a reputation as an attorney adept at settling cases.

When rich and influential Alice Rogoff, the publisher of the state’s largest newspaper, botched a float-plane landing, clipped a tree, almost killed a bald eagle, and crashed into the waters of Halibut Cove adjacent to the community dock in 2016, she called in Cole to help clean up the mess.

Cole saw to it that Alaska State Troopers who arrived on the scene shortly after the crash never got to talk to Rogoff about what happened, or make her blow a breath test as they would after a motor vehicle accident with similar damage.

What else transpired is unknown, but Rogoff managed to hang onto her pilot’s license despite a very public demonstration of questionable skills, although she did, at least temporarily, lose her floatplane rating.

Unfortunately for both Haeg and Cole, Haeg is not a settling kind of guy. Haeg did sit through a five-hour, plea-agreement interview. Instead of helping settle the case, it did the opposite.

The state used statements made during that interview to charge Haeg with hunting wolves from the air to benefit his guide business.  The argument was that killing wolves reduces predation, reducing predation increases prey populations, and more prey could increase the chances for Haeg’s hunters interested in killing moose, caribou or Dall sheep.

After the latter charges were filed, a state official involved with the seizure of Haeg’s airplane told the guide that he’d never get it back.

“It was then that I realized I wasn’t being treated fairly,” Haeg told (Kenai) Peninsula Clarion reporter Jerzy Shedlock in 2012 in a rare moment of understatement. 

But that’s getting ahead of the story.

blurb

Convicted

Haeg was in 2005 convicted of illegally hunting wolves from the air. He contends District Court Judge Margaret Murphy, Alaska Wildlife Trooper Brett Gibbens  and his own attorneys conspired to convict him.

Haeg appealed his conviction, claiming state prosecutors used perjured witnesses and violated the rules of evidence, and that Judge Murphy had prejudiced his defense, among other things. The Alaska Court of Appeals eventually sent the Haeg case back to the lower courts to consider some very limited issues, and it has bounced around in the court system ever since.

Whether Murphy and Giibbens did or didn’t do anything wrong has never been proven, but Superior Court Judge Stephanie Joannides, who was pulled into the case in 2010 to review Murphy’s behavior, concluded the trooper and the judge were too close and Murphy shouldn’t be handling the case.

Joannides granted a motion removing Murphy from further involvement “due to concerns over the appearance of impropriety.” 

At one point during Haeg’s initial trial, court records reveal, Murphy said she needed to go to the grocery story to get some Diet Coke and figured she would just “commandeer Trooper Gibbens and his vehicle.”

There is more, much more, about all of this at the Alaska State of Corruption website Haeg started in 2009.  You can exhaust yourself reading through the files linked there. For better or worse, Haeg is a man obsessed with clearing his name. And he contends there is “widespread corruption” within the Alaska legal system.

And there are no doubt Alaskans among whom those accusations resonate.

The charge itself is impossible to prove or disprove unless money changes hands in the United States, and Haeg has offered no suggestion of that. But there is also little doubt that the legal system in Alaska is, by and large, a community of friends and acquaintances.

“All politics are personal,” some unknown sage observed long ago, and most life in America today is politics. From the outside looking in, it is hard to ignore the Alaska legal system is governed by the unwritten rules of a club.

The first rule of any club is that unless you are member, you are a nobody. The second rule is that all club members go along to get along. Directly challenge this unwritten rule, and you will be either politely asked to leave or expelled.

The recognition of this construct in the justice system has in recent years focused heavily on race and gender, but it goes beyond race and gender.  It is sometimes as much about class in an America most like to believe free of class.

“When Paulette Brown was sworn into office on August 4 as the first woman of color president of the American Bar Association, she outlined as one of her key initiatives the association’s No. 3 goal — eliminate bias and enhance diversity,” the American Bar Association magazine reported in 2015. “Brown said that while significant progress has been made in combating more explicit inequalities, implicit bias – the subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle prejudices we may unconsciously hold – is a more understated and equally harmful threat to our justice system.

“And she emphasized that ‘none of us are exempt from having implicit bias.’  Citing reports that say the legal profession is the least diverse in the nation, Brown said there is an increasing lack of confidence in the justice system. She cited a recent Harvard study that showed 66 percent of African-Americans said they had not much or no confidence in the system’s fairness, while 53 percent of Hispanics expressed similar misgivings.”

Not alone

Those African-Americans and Hispanics are not alone. Race and gender aren’t the only diversity missing in the legal system. As in most professions in the U.S. today, including journalism, you won’t find many people connected to the blue-collar world working as lawyers.

Haeg and his crowd, on the other hand, are pretty much a blue-collar group either by upbringing or current employment. At least 50 of them, probably more, dragged themselves to the hearing on Monday because they thought Haeg had been the victim of injustice.

More than a few came from the Kenai Peninsula where Haeg lives. Others were from across the state. There were a signifiant number of Alaska Natives. A few men wore Trump hats. No matter what the national media might write about Trump, his simplest political message – “drain the swamp” – strikes home in parts of this country.

Haeg himself was alone at the attorneys’ table. He long ago gave up on lawyers. So, it was just him, a couple briefcases and a box stuffed with papers.

After the judge left, he said, “I’m going to stay. If you want to arrest me and drag me out, that’s the only way I’m leaving.”

He then started reading.

“This is what I wrote to the Court of Appeals,” he said.

Minutes later, he was on the floor being tazed and cuffed. And then, as he requested, he was dragged out.

Now, not to go too personal in a news story (the author hates writing in the first person), there are some observations reflecting journalistic bias that must be made.

What happened to Haeg in the Anchorage courtroom on Monday – viewed through the eyes of an educated (if you can call the University of Alaska Fairbanks an education), middle class (if just barely that now), white and white-collar reporter accustomed to how the system works (probably the most important thing here), what went down in the courtroom seemed reasonable in the moments in which it was happening.

The judge entered. He dismissed some of the issues Haeg wanted to argue in a legal hearing. He ordered a new hearing for February. And he left the courtroom.

Haeg elected to stay and present his long-prepared arguments to an audience of a couple dozen people, the courtroom being unable to accommodate the crowd that had shown up for the hearing. His arguments seemed to go on for tens of minutes with a court officer shouting regularly “Mr. Haeg,  Mr. Haeg.”

His daughter started crying early. Had I been asked, as a professional witness, the time into the hearing the tears started, the guess would have been five minutes more or less. Thus it was a bit shocking to later watch the video of what happened and see that the tears started much earlier and that law enforcement officers descending on Haeg only about three minutes and 45 seconds into his spiel.  The video seems to compress time.

Whether the tension in the courtroom distorted time then or the video distorts time now, I cannot say.

What can be said is that those in the courtroom were angry, many of them very angry. Their shouts said it all. There was a lot of profanity, and more:

“They’re killing him.”

“Excessive force.”

“You must be ashamed to be state troopers in this state.”

The reactions were not unlike those from angry crowds of Black Lives Matter supporters. It was hard to ignore the sense that the gap between the American ruling class and the American working class is ever-widening.

“This is a complicated, ugly case,” Haeg friend Tim Twohy said after Haeg was dragged away.

It is also a case that has dragged on too long, a case that floated around the Alaska court system for 13 years because judges see enough in Haeg’s accusations to keep the case alive, but not enough to want to rock the system.

Haeg appeared Monday to be a man pushed to his limit.

The end result, according to Alaska State Troopers spokeswoman Megan Peters, is that he has now been charged with disorderly conduct for violating an order to leave a courtroom.

dave haeg 2

Dave Haeg is escorted out of the court room/Tim Towhy photo

Advertisements

42 replies »

  1. A post this morning (January 20) from David Haeg’s Facebook pages
    Alaska, State of Corruption
    Stop Alaska’s Judicial Corruption

    “Anchorage District Attorney Richard Allen called yesterday and told me that he dropped the disorderly conduct charges against me, so I will not be arraigned on January 26. I told Allen I had hoped to be prosecuted on those charges so I could present the evidence there that I am prohibited from presenting in Judge Morse’s court.

    Allen stated he has never had anyone hope to be prosecuted, stated he is following my case, and stated he understands why I am trying to present the corruption evidence in any manner possible.”

    Like

  2. In 1963 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that all evidence aware to the District Attorney, that may be favorable to the accused, be turned over to the defense.

    This type of evidence is called exculpatory evidence. The rule established by the Supreme Court is called the Brady Rule. (After the case Brady v Maryland.)

    There is no law that can be used against District Attorneys that violate this rule. However if a judge on a case orders a District Attorney to turn over Exculpatory Evidence and does not the District Attorney can be held in Contempt of Court.

    Recently the State of New York Chief Justice (Janet DiFiore) has ordered all judges in her state to automatically demand the district attorneys turn over all potential Exculpatory Evidence to the defense at least 30 days prior to trial.

    No such demand happening in Alaska.

    However, Senator Ted Stevens conviction from 2008 was thrown out (after he lost his reelection bid) because the District Attorneys in his case withheld Exculpatory Evidence. Government never punished those Alaskan District Attorneys who broke the rule.

    It is documented that current District Attorney Scot Leaders (Kenai, Alaska- 3rd Judicial District) withheld exculpatory Evidence in his prosecution of David Haeg back in 2004. I wonder with Leaders in leadership position, how many of his Assistant District Attorneys follow his lead?

    Senator Ted Stevens was a rich and powerful senator. David Haeg and the rest of us are not.

    In the words of MLK-“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

    Like

  3. This is the most poorly written, one-sided article I’ve ever seen. You gloss over and dismiss the courts argument and glorify Haegs. Here’s a link to the court case where you can see for yourself how incredibly LENIENT the courts been about this

    https://www.leagle.com/decision/inakco20161221008

    They actually decided to hear Haeg out in an accusation he made about the judge supposedly having ex-parte contact with a witness and the ONLY person who says this happened was Haeg.

    Your article completely skipped over the at least two other violations Haeg was in which were absolutely proven.

    1) He hunted on the same day he was airborn
    2) He took the game he was supposed to hand over to the state
    3) He hunted wolverines who were illegal to hunt at the time.

    They found physical evidence of these crimes. Plane tracks that matched Haeg’s upwards of 40 miles outside his killzone. Wolf hides that he was legally required to turn over were found inside his home.

    I think it’s obvious what happened here. Haeg didn’t care about the rules and thought no one would enforce them. He was wrong. He thought it was a government conspiracy that he was brought up on charges for breaking a law he didn’t think mattered. Now he’s obsessed with getting back at the government and sees conspiracies everywhere.

    I know the type all too well. He’s just digging the hole deeper and he’s dragging other people down with him…

    Like

    • thanks for the post, Darsky, but where did you get the idea only Haeg observed the exparte contact? there were a lot of people who knew about that. as to the rest of it, you’re generally right. but it isn’t quit that simple. state officials encouraged Haeg to do what he did. he is obsessed at being found the one responsible for doing what he thought government wanted him to do

      Like

  4. As an aside to the main thrust of this article how exactly is the new woman of color head of the American Bar Association going to eliminate bias, yet improve diversity? Diversity for the sake of the diversity is bias.

    Like

  5. I have read this article and the comments thoroughly and my 52 year annalists of fact and fiction is this:
    A MAN / WOMAN IN THIS COUNTRY IS GRANTED AN SPEEDY AND JUST TRAIL BOTH OF THESE HAVE NOT TAKEN PLACE HERE,
    Also the system of fairness or due to the lack of just that “Time” was abused by the system itself. Human dignity and respect also was abused too!
    When viewing a snapshot that was taken of the Judge standing like a portrait in the background without a word to defuse the situation is appalling to the untrained eye.
    If pride was set aside in both the Man seeking Justice and the Judge reviewing the facts was of less importance this article would never had been written ! God save the King

    Like

    • If you were knowledgable about all the details of this case then you would know that David had attorneys represent him at the begining of this case and they turned out to be corrupt on various levels. ( As an aside I am a seasoned litigation paralegal from the Midwest who became enmeshed in assisting a rare honest attorney in Alaska when I moved up here 27 yrs. ago. The case I worked was so corrupted by the Borough atty. who was representing defendants who were borough employees that he was “relocated” to Bethel and replaced with an atty. from Fairbanks. Long story short;
      the judge, plaintiff’s first atty. and appellate judge were all corrupt. Never before encountered such a hot mess of corruption till I experienced Alaska “color of law” judiciary. Never. I have become fairly acquainted with the facts of David’s case and it too is a very hot mess of corruption. The difference with David’s case and all the many corrupted cases that came before his and after is this: David is firm in his belief that justice should still be an essential component of a constitutional republic. And yes Mr. Medred, David insists on having his uncorrupted day in court. He refuses to just shrug his shoulders and slink away, mumbling about how this is just the way the swamp system works. If a jaded acceptance of a very broken system is the only acceptable (mature was implied by Medred) response to this travesty then we have nothing more than a banana republic, or worse. I’m pretty certain David would much rather be doing something much more pleasant than slogging his way through the Alaska State putrid cesspool of a judiciary. But evil will prevail unless someone stands strong and says enough is enough. Thank you David.

      Like

      • Susan: i’ve spent too much time in the Alaska wilderness. it teaches you life is a bunch of goddamn compromises. it’s impossible to have the six-inch tall, windproof tent that you can stand up in to get dressed in the morning.

        Like

      • Craigmedred,
        To equate Alaska’s wilderness with how humanity should treat each other is just plain foolish. Human beimgs are driven by their own self interest. Governments are establish to strive to keep self interest in check.

        But perhaps I am wrong. Many believe might makes right. So governemnt bureaucrats have the power over us like the Alaskan wildreness does and we must submit.

        Hogwash. Throughout history people tolerate injustice for a time. But never forever. It is the reason the founders codified the Second Amendment for the people to reestablish Life,Liberty and pursuit of Happiness when government fails to do so.

        Like

  6. As Dave’s friend I’ve involved with this over10 years. Met you after your 1st article. Spoke to you at this hearing.
    Wanted to thank you for writing this detailed story on Dave. The whole thing is way beyond disturbing.

    Like

  7. Why the total misrepresentation that he was “dragged from the courtroom”? They took plenty of time helping him get up and walking him out. To people who don’t watch the video they will picture him lying on the floor and being dragged by his arms or legs out of the room. Completely wrong.

    Like

  8. “The first rule of any club is that unless you are member, you are a nobody. The second rule is that all club members go along to get along. Directly challenge this unwritten rule, and you will be either politely asked to leave or expelled.”

    As a member of the Alaska Bar Association for more than 40 years, and an Alaskan for more than 60 years, I can promise you that neither of your “rules” are correct for either the Alaska Bar or the Alaska judiciary. Nor are your “rules” exactly high water marks for objective reporting on your part.

    Alaska’s legal system is a human institution. All human institutions have flaws and failures. It may be that in Haeg’s case we have a failure. But, if so, it doesn’t excuse anyone’s disobeying a lawful order. It doesn’t authorize petulant, futile displays. It doesn’t require the Alaska Court System – already seriously struggling from funding cutbacks – to accommodate a citizen who wants to act out, disrupting the rest of the court’s calendar.

    Your characterization of Brent Cole is dead wrong, too. But that’s a separate issue.

    I went to law school in Chicago in the 1970s. I know exactly what judicial corruption looks like. Alaska does not have a corrupt judicial system. It does have hard cases, and it has disappointed litigants who cannot believe or accept that they are wrong. Those disappointed litigants have to find someone else to blame. Often they claim “The other guy lied.” Or, as here, “The system is corrupt.” But that doesn’t mean you or must or should believe them.

    Like

    • damn. you’re old.
      i know attorneys persona non grata in the Alaska legal community. granted, they haven’t been disbarred, but they’re not exactly welcome in the club. it’s a fact of life that most people want to be accepted. that human trait is often exploited. the Nazis were champs at it.
      personally, i don’t think our judicial system is corrupt. i think it’s actually pretty good. it’s also not perfect. if you think personalities and friendships don’t enter the picture, you’re just being naive. and if you don’t believe that “the other guy lied,” and often on a regular basis, you shouldn’t be practicing law.
      people lie in court all of the time. humans are liars by nature. it’s what makes the job so hard for the judicial system. see “I did not have sex with that woman…” or just read the study: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.597.8906&rep=rep1&type=pdf
      sorting all of this out is one damn hard job. i know some judges as friends. i empathize with what they have to deal with, and it is the reason the system is far from perfect.
      this is also the reason, i would surmise, that Brent Cole, an attorney i happen to like, plea bargains a lot of cases. it is the wise thing to do. i have no doubt that Dave Haig would have been better off if he’d settled this one, no matter how much he thought the system had abused him, and moved on. he didn’t. it is what is worst about Americans and best.

      Like

  9. Other than a farewell letter to the editor in the old Voice of the Times when I retired, my last quote in the media as a public official that I know of was on the occasion of the Murkowski Administration ignoring my advice and trying to put on an “Employee Appreciation” event at noon on the 8th Floor deck of the State Office Building in Juneau. Anyone who knows anything about public employee unions knows that there is no way in Hell they’re going to tolerate a Republican Administration having an “employee appreciation” event, but stupid people in the administration, of which there was no shortage, insisted on going through with it. The unions did just as I’d said they would; they stormed the SOB singing songs and carrying signs with their pet, pre-arranged media accompanying them. OK, they were trespassing and violating their labor agreements. I ceremonially confronted them and told them they were trespassing and violating their contracts. The leader, a professional staffer, said, “well, do something about it.” Others commented on my ancestry and sexual proclivities. I said, something like “don’t break anything,” and walked away. A reporter came to me and asked me why I didn’t try to do anything to them. I replied that “I wasn’t going to give them their Saul Alinsky moment.” I learned a long time ago that you never, ever did what they wanted you to do.

    I really don’t understand why the Court System and the Court Services Officers – they’re not State Troopers – gave Haeg and his supporters what they wanted. They have other court rooms, they can rearrange things; there was no reason in the world to taze, cuff, and forcibly remove Haeg. The very worst thing they could have done to him is let him drone on for hours with nobody paying any attention. The media has an attention span in milliseconds if nothing exciting is happening.

    This was just dumb! They just reinforced every bad thing Haeg and his supporters believe about them. And I’ll add that I don’t totally disagree with Haeg and his supporters; the legal/judicial system is a club, but in my time I had the advantage of sorta’ being a member of it. That said, I also knew it well enough to not trust it very much, and that’s not because I think it is some corrupt conspiracy, but rather because it is so self-interested and often outright dumb. Anytime you’re dealing with government, if you have a choice of explaining something as either conspiracy or incompetence, always take incompetence, and government will defend its incompetence to the death, and that’s usually your death – in figurative, but sometimes actual, terms.

    Like

  10. We can all debate the details here. But lets look at this from the 10000 foot level. No, lets make it the 50000 foot level. It’s not 1950 anymore. Its 2017. What got Mr. Haeg to where he is – is bloodlust. Getting his jollies from gunning down animals from an aircraft. Like it or not, this type of activity is not embraced by the large majority of American people. So if your life is torn apart because of your conviction for killing animals for amusement, then don’t be surprised. The numbers are not on your side. People that think you, and others like you, are sick bastards are not going to give a damn about you. And they will be amused when you have to suffer … after your bloodlust made countless animals suffer.

    Like

    • A little early to be imbibing, isn’t it James?
      Thanks for informing us of the date and giving us all a look at this issue from the 50000 foot level. And who would have guessed that it was Haeg’s “bloodlust” that got him into this mess!
      Your clear-headed look, from 50k ft. no less, suggests that all of these issues should be determined by “majority of American people,” but its my guess that Alaskans might beg to differ here (at least on State land).

      Like

      • my question is why “making a living” to these types always includes a few snogos, atvs, a jet boat, a camper, a new truck, a 3000 square foot house…

        note i’m not speaking specifically to this case, as I don’t know haeg’s lifestyle. I just always found the economics a little funny…the $15k snowgo to haul in a few grand of furs every year; paying for a flight to kill a few wolves… call me crazy, but you can buy a hell of a lot of beans and rice for that money.

        Like

      • While some may require $15k snogos, most use tundras, skandiks or other tractor type machines that cost much less and last quite a while. Further, while most businesses intend to make a profit not all do but if one is intending to make a profit then your situation doesn’t make sense.
        And its always possible that the fur take is much more than a couple of grand a year, too.

        Like

      • have you seen what a used tundra goes for these days?? In all seriousness I don’t mean to disparage anyone, everyone is entitled to their own lifestyles and recreational activities. But cries of subsistence or making a living coming from urban trappers don’t always sit right with me.

        Like

    • James, you do realize he was saving the lives of Elk, Caribou, and countless outher animal species by deprededating an over population of wolves who are decimating native populations? I am sure you have a solid understanding of wildlife management and husbandry. I am sure you have vast knowledge of land management as well. If the world thought like you many many species of animals would have been long extinct. Because “bloodlust”

      Like

  11. ” At the center of all of this is Haeg, an emotional, 51-year-old who never got past that stage we all go through in childhood where we think life should be fair. It’s not. At some point in time, it wrongs all of us. It kicked Haeg in the gut.” Only a child would submit to such a corrupt system, an adult will stand up and do something.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. The corrupt justice system is Alaska is systemic and probably our largest problem, and I don’t mean that hyperbolically. I never hear the end of the problems that people have, and the inappropriate behavior of, those in the justice/law enforcement sector.

    Like

  13. You have no right judging David Haeg. I know what the corrupt justice system in Alaska does to people. A decade of fighting for justice, a fucking decade. I also have a case of injustice and many things have happened to prove I was telling the truth. I also had a conspiracy that involved the state troopers, the court system and the DOL. I had multiple incidents of them trying to set me up and finally it worked. They had me wrongfully arrested and imprisoned on a totally false charge to get me to drop an appeal. You have no idea the damage it does to a person’ life. It also causes PTSD, it’s like being in combat. People die from having to deal with the corrupt court system. My case happened during the time Sarah Palin was the governor also. I was run out of Alaska and am still being stalked and harassed to this day. You have no idea what you are talking about! Alaska is corrupt as hell. David Haeg has no idea just how amazing he is, he made it to the 9th circuit, he was able to get evidence they tried to hide from him. For most of us we get nowhere as we can’t afford help and certainly will not get it from the public defender agency. My first public defender was a falling down drunk with alcoholic lesions on her face, the next two also had issues.

    Like

    • Maybe re-read the article. And then post quotes of where Mr Medred is ” judging”. It’s unbiased reporting. Just because it is about an issue you are passionate and sensitive about, that doesn’t’ t make it “judging”.

      Like

    • Celia: there’s a difference between judging and describing. sometimes it’s better to fight. sometimes it’s better to drop things and just move on. i’ve known Dave Haeg almost from the beginning of this. i personally like the guy. in most parts, in life, he managed to move on and build himself a decent life. but there is a legitimate question as to whether it has been good for him or for his family to keep battling on this front. as a man who has charged a few windmills, i admire his determination but that doesn’t necessarily mean he has made the right decision for himself and his family. the observation had to be made. i’ve seen more than a few people burn themselves out and wreck family relationships because of their steadfast determination to do the right thing. at some points in life, there can come a tough decision between doing the best thing and doing the right thing. i can’t decide what’s right for Dave. but as a reporter, it is my job to point out that this dichotomy exists.

      Like

      • Interesting response. It reminds me of an old saying. The fear of loss is more powerful than the hope for gain.

        Much of the problems this nation faces revolves the above.

        Ignore the problem, the fight ain’t worth it.

        Let somebody else fix it I i am too busy.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s