Part 9 of 9: Drugging America...Sabotaging Government Contract Pilot

Drugging America 

A Trojan Horse 

By Rodney Stich
CHAPTER NINE 

Sabotaging Government Contract Pilot 

Retaliating Against “Uncooperative” 

Members of Congress 

Matthews interested California Congressman Robert K. Dornan in the drug-money bribes. On February 2, 1996, Dornan notified Matthews that he was initiating a congressional inquiry with U.S. Customs Service. The possible consequence of this congressional “snooping” was that a large amount of money was funneled into the congressional election for Dornan’s challenger, resulting in Dornan losing the election. Because of election irregularities, Dornan challenged the election results, but with a Democrat in the White House controlling the Justice Department, the challenge went nowhere. 

The Prophetic Statement of 

the Texas DPS Agent 

“In the end, they’re gonna screw you,” was the statement made to Matthews by Texas Department of Public Safety officer Kenneth Dismukes. And he was right! Matthews was learning too much. Discovering the bribing of government officials and politicians just made matters worse for Matthews. In Fort Lauderdale, AUSA Terrence J. Thompson obtained a grand jury indictment against Matthews for the two holiday drug runs that occurred almost three years earlier, and which were known to Justice Department prosecutors during that entire period. Something triggered the need to get Matthews out of the picture. Government agents even authorized Matthews to fly other government operations after the holiday drug loads, something that they would not have done if Matthews had really flown unauthorized drugs into the United States. 

In obtaining the indictment against Matthews, the prosecutor had Pablo Escobar‘s aide, Jimmy Ellard —who played a key role in the death of 110 people in the bombing of the Avianca airline—provide testimony to the grand jury. Ellard was in prison and was promised his release and other benefits if he testified against Matthews, as the prosecutor wanted him to testify. 

Customs Arresting Matthews for 

Drug Loads They Authorized 

Customs Internal Affairs agents—the same agency that authorized the flights—arrested Matthews on June 26, 1992, charging him with drug offenses related to the holiday drug loads. 

During several telephone conversations with Texas DPS agents, and particularly Robert Nestoroff, Thompson learned that Texas DPS and federal agents would testify that Matthews had authorization to fly the two holiday runs. Thompson tried to get Nestoroff to deny Matthews had such authorization. Nestoroff replied that taped telephone conversations between himself and AUSA Dave Hall showed that Matthews had authority to fly the loads. Thompson said that Nestoroff should keep these tapes from Matthews’ attorneys, a clear violation of the requirement that prosecutors provide the defense with any exculpatory information. 

Nestoroff replied that it was required by law to provide such evidence to the defense. Thompson said he had no intention of making the tapes available. Nestoroff then said that Matthews‘ attorneys already had copies of the tapes. 

Replacing the First Indictment 

Realizing that these tapes undermined his charges against Matthews and that Texas DPS personnel would not commit perjury for the prosecutor, Thompson obtained on September 7, 1993 another indictment to replace the first one. The second indictment eliminated the charges of conspiracy to bring drugs into the United States between 1985 and 1988, relying primarily upon the statements to be made by Jimmy Ellard —a former aide to Pablo Escobar — who was a prison inmate with years of imprisonment remaining on his sentence. 

He was in prison because of Matthews‘ earlier undercover work for Texas DPS and Customs agents. Now, Justice Department prosecutors were offering the incarcerated convict the opportunity to get back at Matthews, and be released from his long prison sentence—by testifying as Justice Department prosecutors wanted him to testify. Further, he would be allowed to keep his drug-tainted assets, and as an extra bonus, would be protected against being charged with criminal perjury for his perjured testimony. Ellard couldn’t lose. 

The Public Would Not Do 

Too Well in This DOJ Scheme 

The public would not do too well in this DOJ scheme. They would lose the drug catching efforts of Matthews, and have inserted into the community a major drug kingpin responsible for thousands of pounds of cocaine entering the United States! 

Ellard‘s testimony consisted of unsupported statements that he had seen Matthews haul drugs into the United States from 1984 to 1988, and that Matthews had paid over five million dollars to Texas DPS agent Robert Nestoroff for protection and Customs agent Richard Cardwell for AWACS schedules. 

Summary of Problems Using 

Major Drug Kingpin Ellard 

There were a few problems using Ellard as the Justice Department’s star witness against Matthews. For instance: 

• Ellard had been a major drug trafficker who brought tons of cocaine into the United States. 

• Ellard played a key role in the death of over 100 people. 

• Ellard was also indirectly connected to the United States’ Number-1 drug cartel target.

• Ellard was formerly a Texas police officer, making his violation of trust an even worse offense under federal criminal law. 

• Department of Justice personnel were releasing into the general population an extremely dangerous criminal. 

• Ordinary men and women were being arrested and imprisoned by the same Department of Justice attorneys for possession of M&M amounts of cocaine. It is probable that almost the entire federal prison population sentenced collectively to hundreds of years in prison would have brought into the United States, or dealt in drugs, that were far less in quantity that Ellard had admittedly brought in. 

• Government offices would be further corrupted by the culture in the Department of Justice, which spreads, cancer-like, throughout government and society. 

Possible Reasons for This 

Convoluted DOJ Conduct 

Something smelled rotten here, and the answer might be found in why the Department of Justice would want Matthews taken down, silenced, and discredited. When Department of Justice officials block the arrest of a major U.S. drug lord by sabotaging the contract agent hired by Customs to bring about his arrest, it suggests cover-up of a government connected drug operation. Something doesn’t ring correctly smells when a key aide to a major drug kingpin, guilty of many murders and responsible for tons of cocaine smuggling, is given his freedom by Department of Justice lawyers in exchange for testimony leading to the imprisonment of a contract pilot seeking to bring about the arrest of the drug kingpin! Here are a few reasons why the Department of Justice officials might have wanted Matthews imprisoned. Matthews knew of: 

• Drug loads flown into Guantanamo Bay Naval Air Station and into the United States on behalf of Customs and DEA agents, part of the widespread smuggling of drugs into the United States by government personnel and government agencies—a major scandal waiting for the public to recognize. 

• Drug money going to purchase U.S. Attorney’s positions. 

• Drug money going to the Democratic Party. 

• Matthews was a threat to the Pablo Escobar organization—which had close ties to CIA drug smuggling operations. 

Ellard‘s Plans to Blow Up Drug Planes 

Matthews told me how Ellard designed the bomb that Escobar used to blow up the Avianca airliner and the reason for placing the bomb on the aircraft: kill two people Escobar wanted eliminated. Matthews knew this information from prior conversations with Escobar and Ellard. Matthews wrote: 

Ellard had proposed a plan to Escobar, to rig his drug planes with explosives while the drug plane was parked on the strip in Colombia at night, and had asked me to detonate the charge with a remote control device from a surveillance airplane if the drug plane was being followed, in order that his drug pilots could not testify against him if caught. Escobar went behind Ellard’s back and attempted to devise a plan to shoot down the interdiction plane instead of his drug plane in order to save his load. I was first compelled to see that neither of these plans were carried out. My next priority was connecting Stadter to the air-drop operation in the Gulf. I also wanted to maintain a bridge to Escobar after Stadter went down. Numerous loads of cocaine hit the street in the process. 

Using Another Major Drug 

Trafficker Against Matthews 

Another witness used by the prosecutor against Matthews was Nelson Emmons, the drug trafficker that Matthews had earlier targeted in a DEAdirected operation that resulted in Emmons receiving a 17-year prison sentence. Now, Justice Department prosecutors offered another major drug trafficker his release if he testified against Matthews, using the prosecutor’s transcript. 

Over 100 Cocaine Loads 

Into the United States 

The Justice Department prosecutor coached Ellard and Emmons on the testimony he wanted to hear. During cross-examination, Emmons was forced to admit to smuggling over 100 loads of cocaine by boat into the United States. It can be assumed that these huge drug loads played key roles in many drug overdoses, murders, and other crimes. 

Emmons testified that Matthews profited by helping him make the transition from drug smuggling by boat to drug smuggling by plane by teaching him to fly twin-engine aircraft. In order for the government to have a basis for seizing Matthews’ home, Emmons fabricated testimony stating that Matthews sold drugs from his home. With Emmons and Ellard, it was a case of “Tell me what you want me to say and I’ll say it.” 

Chief of Texas Department of Public 

Safety Supported Matthews 

With credit to the Texas DPS and their agents, especially Nestoroff, they testified in Matthews‘ behalf, along with many other government agents. The Texas Department of Public Safety took the position they would not be part of any cover-up or perjury, and they provided evidence showing that Matthews’ activities were authorized. 

In August 1992, AUSA Terrence Thompson had visited Texas Department of Public Safety headquarters in Austin, Texas, and met with DPS assistant chief of law enforcement, Mike Scott. Thompson advised Scott that he was investigating Matthews‘ role in the Christmas Day and New Year drug flights. This set off alarm bells with Scott. “We immediately laid out the whole story on the task force investigation for him.” Scott later said. A Dallas Morning News article on January 29, 1995, said: 

Thompson got mad when I confirmed that Bob Nestoroff, if subpoenaed, would testify truthfully that those two flights were sanctioned by the federal government. Thompson refused to receive copies of DPS records on the task force, including recordings Sgt. Nestoroff made of phone conversations with federal authorities who acknowledged that Mr. Matthews‘ efforts were sanctioned by the government. 

Texas DPS agents recorded conversations with AUSA David Hall showing that state and federal agents authorized Matthews to fly drugs into the United States. When Thompson learned that these tapes were made available to Matthews’ attorneys, Thompson was furious. Scott testified to this reaction, and testified as to how he told Thompson that the tapes would have to be made available to the defense. Scott testified, substantiating the prosecutor’s obstruction of justice tactics: 

Thompson appeared upset on the telephone. I explained that they probably got the copies through Mr. Burton [Charlie Burton, Nestoroff‘s attorney from Austin, Texas]. But I said, “Mr. Thompson, it shouldn’t have mattered anyway because under discovery you would have had to divulge the existence of the tapes.” And he said, “I had no intention of telling them that I had the tapes.” 

Texas DPS Testified Matthews‘ 

Holiday Flights Were Authorized 

Texas DPS Chief Michael Scott continued his testimony, revealing that much of the information contained in those tapes was inconsistent with the theory of the government in its prosecution of Matthews. He explained that the first indictment the Justice Department prosecutor filed against Matthews involved the December 25, 1988, and January 1, 1989, drug loads that had been authorized and were known by Texas DPS and Customs agents. 

Government Immunity for Period 

Covered by Second Indictment 

Testimony also brought out the fact that even if Matthews had brought drugs in during the period covered by the second indictment he had been given immunity twice for any private flights he might have conducted during the periods from 1985 to 1990. Matthews had been an undercover agent for the Texas DPS, DEA, and Customs offices for this entire period of time and had been given carte blanche authority and immunity. 

Typical Justice Department 

Threat Against Witnesses 

Scott further testified about the DOJ’s prosecutor threatening DPS agent Nestoroff : 

Suddenly, Bob [Nestoroff ] got hit with subpoenas for bank accounts, phone records, everything. He had his security clearance with Customs jerked. We saw it as intimidation, a hint that Bob should not testify at Matthews‘ trial. 

Scott testified that after DOJ prosecutor Thompson learned that Matthews‘ attorney had the tapes showing he had authority to fly drugs, Justice Department prosecutors dropped the charges. And then promptly fabricated new ones— offering a prisoner his freedom to testify against Matthews. The prisoner was to testify that Matthews had furnished AWACS schedules to Ellard and Emmons from 1986 to 1990, which Matthews had allegedly purchased from government agents. 

Texas DPS Agent Robert 

Nestoroff Supported Matthews 

Texas DPS agent Robert Nestoroff testified about a meeting held in November 1990 at Lakeside Airport in Houston. This was a meeting where government agents agreed that Matthews‘ prior flights—if they had been without authority—would be wiped clean from the slate if he helped with some specific operations for Customs and cooperated with the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area task force (HIDTA). In response to a question asked by defense attorney Ronald Dresnick, Nestoroff testified: 

Farley said that they wanted to clean the slate with Mr. Matthews and that they had some things that they wanted him to do and they would like him to come over and work for them.[Referring to the “clean state” statement] That everything that occurred with his past was forgotten and that they wanted to talk to him and get him to work for them for a group they had over in Houston, Houston HIDTA, High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area task force. I felt like, I told my captain that what Farley had wanted all along was coming to fruition, that he wanted to use Mr. Matthews as a CI [Confidential Informant] and that we would probably be cut out of the deal. 

Referring to efforts by U.S. Customs in Houston and San Antonio to use Matthews, Nestoroff testified that agent Richard Nichols called him and said that his agency would “like to bring Matthews into the organization.” Responding to questions about whether Justice Department prosecutors wanted to prosecute Matthews, Nestoroff replied: 

I thought it was pretty rotten that they told the man he could do one thing and then they tried to lie their way out of it. I felt that what they were doing, dropping the investigation [of Stadter ] was at least in part a vindication to me. 

DPS Tape Recordings Showing 

DOJ  Attempts to Suborn Perjury 

Nestoroff provided tape recordings revealing Justice Department personnel trying to get him to lie and deny the fact that Matthews had been given authorization to fly the drug loads. The introduction of these tapes into the trial infuriated the Justice Department prosecutor. Nestoroff testified concerning a December 14, 1988 meeting, relating to the upcoming “holiday load” drug runs: 

The gist of the December 14th (1988) meeting, which was attended by myself, Lieutenant Dismukes, Rodney Matthews, Tom Grieve, Jim Dukes, and Dave Hall, was the upcoming Christmas-New Year’s trip and what in fact Mr. Matthews was supposed to do. He was told that if in fact he was placed in the position of having to run the load, that he should go ahead and do so. [Matthews was] an excellent informant. You see, this is an informant that didn’t mind going and putting himself in danger and going into the lines of dangers several times for us, and he never questioned it. He was one of the best informants that I ever had. 

Nestoroff stated he reported his activities to his immediate supervisor, Kenneth Dismukes and that these meetings were made known to DPS Captain Don Cohn. Nestoroff added: 

This didn’t sound right, but we had a subsequent meeting with the Assistant U.S. Attorney [Dave Hall ] assigned to the investigation, and I got the same story from him. He told Mr. Matthews that he had authority to do what Mr. Grieve wanted him to do, including flying to Colombia, if need be, to pick up a load of cocaine and bring that load of cocaine back into the United States. And as far as Grieve was concerned, he started out by saying that the load could get away, if necessary, if it had to. 

Nestoroff testified that Customs was alternating between whether to prosecute Matthews or Stadter, the drug lord that Matthews and other government agents were trying to arrest. Nestoroff was asked, “Now, going back to late January 1989, there were these meetings and these meetings were to determine whether Mr. Matthews would be prosecuted or not. Whatever happened to the Stadter investigation?” 

Nestoroff replied that charges were dropped against the Stadter drug organization, including Vic Stadter, his pilot Greg Thompson, and his associate Diane Borden. In effect, the Department of Justice tactics not only released from prison into the general population Ellard and Emmons, but also resulted in investigations being dropped against other suspected drug traffickers. The Department of Justice’s conduct raises serious questions about what were the Department of Justice’s real motives. Nestoroff continued, as he testified about the meeting where Matthews refused to fly drugs without authorization: 

Then Mr. Grieve said that it was possible to get Customs authorization for Mr. Matthews to fly a load of cocaine if he was put in the position to do so, but that if it was necessary for him to be put in that position, that he should be vague in his response to what he was telling us, so that if they didn’t have specific information, then they wouldn’t have to interdict the load if it came in. 

They’re telling Mr. Matthews to be vague and if he’s going south (Central and South America for drugs), to use coded messages or be very vague about what he was doing. And just let us know that he was going south to do a trip. 

DOJ Devoting Major Attention 

to Discrediting Matthews‘ Witnesses 

Seeking to discredit this testimony, the DOJ prosecutor repeatedly sought to discredit Nestoroff by charging—without any evidence—that Matthews had bribed him to avoid arrest, and acted to discredit Customs agent Cardwell by stating that Matthews bribed him to provide AWACS schedules. Seeking to discredit Cardwell, the DOJ prosecutor sought to discredit his employment application by alleging, without evidence, that Cardwell had lied about the amount of piloting hours he had so as to get a pilot’s job with Customs. 

The prosecutor alleged that Matthews sold AWACS schedules to drug cartels, which helped to avoid interdiction and assisted in bringing 50,000 kilos of cocaine into the United States. In the mindset of Justice Department prosecutors, the drug traffickers bringing in the huge quantities of drugs were entitled to their freedom in exchange for life-in-prison of the person who allegedly sold them AWACS schedules! 

25 Government Witnesses Versus 

Mass Murderer: Guess Who Wins! 

Twenty-five government agents and two assistant United States attorneys testified in Matthews‘ defense. Contradicting their testimony were the two major drug kingpins and the mass murderer. It would be difficult to more clearly depict the arrogance and corrupt culture in the Department of Justice that permits such mentality to control the awesome power of the Department of Justice. 

At that time, the United States considered Pablo Escobar Gaviria the most dangerous narco terrorist. He was responsible for many bombings that killed and maimed hundreds of innocent people, including the deaths of 110 people on the Avianca aircraft. He was one of the most brutal of all drug traffickers. Dozens of buildings were bombed as he brought a reign of terror upon Colombia. 

Escobar converted drug trafficking into big business, responsible for shipping huge amounts of cocaine into the United States. Escobar, sometimes known as the “Godfather,” had been listed by Forbes magazine in its list of the top 100 non-U.S. billionaires (July 1988). He brought individual drug traffickers into a cartel that increased the quantity of drugs coming into the United States. At that time Escobar was considered the most dangerous of all drug traffickers, surely Number One on the U.S. list of drug traffickers. The expenditure of vast U.S. efforts and funds were made to capture Escobar and his associates. Jimmy Ellard was a close associate or partner to Escobar, and now being handsomely rewarded for testifying against a government contract agent who had been responsible for his earlier imprisonment. 

DOJ Prosecutor Praising Pablo 

Escobar‘s Top Aide and Aviation Terrorist 

For the Department of Justice personnel to use Escobar’s close aide to sabotage a contract government agent, to allow that aide, Jimmy Ellard, to sit alongside the U.S. Attorney in court as if he was an honorable person, reflects the sordid culture in the U.S. Department of Justice. And it coincides with what I have documented for the past 30 years about the arrogance and criminality in that misnamed government agency. With the help of the Department of Justice, in the Matthews case, the Escobar group proved that the bad guys really do win, with help like they received from DOJ personnel. 

In Jest, DOJ Using Escobar 

as a DOJ Witness 

In a moment of jest, Matthews wrote, “Thinking back on it all, it’s probably a good thing for me that I didn’t bring about Escobar’ s arrest; looking at [DOJ prosecutor] Thompson’ s way of doing things, Escobar would have been one more government witness against me.” 

DPS Agent Kenneth Dismukes 

Confirmed Matthews‘ Authority 

Testimony by DPS Kenneth Dismukes told how Matthews was brought to a Customs meeting at which Customs wanted to use Matthews in undercover operations, particularly into the Vic Stadter investigation. Referring to Customs agent Rich Nichols, Dismukes testified: 

Rich Nichols informed us that they [U.S. Customs] were part of a task force, a financial task force, and they wanted to use Mr. Matthews to fly a load of cocaine to the Vic Stadter organization, trying to infiltrate them in that manner. 

Referring to Matthews‘ statement during the meeting, Dismukes testified: 

He would be willing to do it, but having known those people [drug traffickers] from the past, they would expect him to more or less fly a test load, and if that went through, then they would go for a bigger deal. He was told to fly a load of dope, if necessary, to get on the street for distribution. I had warned Mr. Matthews that he’d be taking a risk and I advised him not to do it. I told him if something happened and something went wrong [such as media publicity] he’d be left hanging out to dry.

DEA Agent McDaniel Supported 

Matthews‘ Authorization 

DEA agent Frank Michael McDaniel from the Houston DEA office testified on behalf of Matthews. He testified that the DEA, U.S. Customs, the Justice Department, and the Texas Department of Public Safety had all given Matthews carte blanche authority to carry out drug interdiction operations. Referring to confidential informants and undercover agents, McDaniel said:

We have people that have been charged with another crime, particularly narcotics, that are working to reduce their sentencing in that particular case that they’ve been charged with. We have others that have specialized services that they can provide to help us in an undercover role, and then we have others that are there for other different type of motivation, for money, or to reduce the flow of narcotics in this country and various other things like that. 

McDaniel was asked, “What was your understanding as to the capacity or the role that he was acting?” 

Matthews was a pilot and could assist us in our undercover operation of taking one of his aircraft, flying to a clandestine airstrip or a rural strip in Central or South America and transporting the shipments back to the United States for us, where we could have the narcotics seized in the custody of the traffickers in the United States. 

McDaniel explained, in response to a question as to how it was determined how much to pay Matthews : 

We would discuss it with our supervisors and determine the amount of risk that was taken by him and the amount of overhead and different items, we would come up with a figure and then submit that request to Washington, D.C. 

McDaniel testified about the $200,000 the government still owes Matthews. He testified about the great dangers faced by Matthews in his government directed and authorized activities. McDaniel testified that the work was “extremely dangerous for the pilot” and that when undercover pilots go to pick up a drug load at the destination, “sometimes people will kill the pilot and take the aircraft.” 

Confirming Non-Dipping 

In response to questioning about whether Matthews ever diverted any of the drug loads to his own use, McDaniel testified: 

In our undercover role [as drug buyers], the traffickers would inform us before [Matthews ] even arrived in the United States how many kilograms of cocaine would be loaded on the plane, and then we would be accountable to those traffickers for delivering a certain quantity of that cocaine into the hands of their associates in the United States. 

Washington Customs Supervisor 

Supported Matthews‘ Authority 

Customs supervisor Charles S. Harrison from Washington, D.C., who was Agent In Charge of the Houston office from 1986 to 1992, testified that he knew that the Drug Enforcement Administration utilized Matthews in undercover drug flights, after the Houston and San Antonio offices intended to prosecute Matthews for the holiday drug loads. Harrison testified he knew AUSA Dave Hall and other government agents authorized Matthews to haul drugs into the United States, including the holiday drug loads. 

Customs Agent Nichols 

Confirmed Matthews‘ Authority 

Customs agent Rich Nichols was one of the agents who recruited Matthews to infiltrate the Stadter group. Nichols testified that Matthews had government authority to haul drugs as part of government directed undercover activities. He described the 1988 meeting that was attended by Customs personnel Thomas Grieve and Jim Dukes, and DPS personnel Kenneth Dismukes, Robert Nestoroff, himself, and by Matthews, during which plans were made for Matthews to infiltrate the Stadter organization.  

Government Instructions to 

Matthews Had to be General 

Nichols testified that the instructions to Matthews had to be general in nature, and that it was up to Matthews to infiltrate the organization in whatever way was necessary. Nichols testified about a second meeting in August 1988 attended by himself, Robert Nestoroff, Rodney Matthews, and Special Assistant United States Attorney Dave Hall who was heading the financial task force of which Nestoroff was a member at that time: 

The purpose of that meeting was to acquaint Mr. Hall with Mr. Matthews, and we did discuss at the second meeting the flying in of contraband cocaine. Specifically Mr. Matthews said, “You realize in order for me to get close to Vic Stadter, I’m going to have to fly some [drug] loads,” and I said that’s not gonna be a problem. 

Matthews Had Implied Government 

Authority To Fly the Holiday 

Loads to Obtain Evidence 

Under an important recognized doctrine of law, Matthews had implied authority to transport the two holiday loads as part of the plan to obtain evidence on a large drug-smuggling operation. Implied power is power to carry into effect the orders given to infiltrate a major drug cartel and includes all steps that are necessary to carry out that purpose. Ballentine’s Law Dictionary describes “implied authority” as follows: 

Implied authority is authority of an agent, circumstantially proved, which the principal is deemed to have actually intended the agent to possess. This is authority of an agent arising independently of any express grant of authority, as from some manifestation by the principal that the particular authority in question shall exist in the agent, or arising as a necessary or reasonable implication in order to effectuate other authority expressly conferred, embracing authority to do whatever acts are incidental to, or are necessary, usual, and proper to accomplish or perform the main authority expressly delegated to the agent. Annotation: 55 ALR 2d 27, Section 4[a]; 3 AM J2d Agency Section 71. (19Am J2d Corp Section 953) 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

Testifying for Matthews 

Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas I. Meehan, Jr. from the Houston office testified that AUSA Dave Hall (out of the Washington office of the Department of Justice) on assignment to the San Antonio office, had told him that Matthews was authorized to fly drug loads. Matthews’ attorney, F. Lee Bailey, asked Meehan during the trial: “In essence then, you, as a prosecutor, understood that what Rodney had done had been within his charter in Hall’s opinion, and there would be no criminal case?” Meehan answered in the affirmative, that Matthews did have authority to carry the drugs that he carried. 

Referring to a memorandum that Meehan wrote after talking to AUSA Hall, Meehan testified: 

After Mr. Matthews and Greg Thompson had been arrested, Dave Hall and a fellow named Bob Nestoroff from the Department of Public Safety in Texas arrived in Houston to talk about whether those charges were going to be pursued by us. During that meeting, the understanding I had from Hall was that although Matthews was working on the Vic Stadter case that Hall considered the load of cocaine that had come in on the 31st as part of that, [even though] he had been unaware it was coming in at the time it came in. I had that same understanding from Bob Nestoroff, and that also applied to a different shipment, a considerably smaller shipment at Christmas time.

Carte Blanche Authority to Fly Drugs 

Bailey handed Meehan a report that Meehan had earlier prepared and asked: “Did Dave Hall use any words that are perhaps unusual in the narcotics business when it comes to the operation of a confidential informant as respecting this case and Rodney Matthews ?” Meehan responded: 

Carte blanche, certainly. I know that Hall told me that in his opinion the shipment into Fort Bend County [Matthews‘ airstrip at Damon, Texas ] was part of the Stadter investigation. As far as he was concerned, Matthews had carte blanche to do anything he had to do in connection with that case, and consequently that was the defense to the charge, and I dismissed the charges. 

During this questioning, Meehan testified that he knew that the pilot arrested with Matthews on the New Year arrest “was a member of the Stadter organization and a fellow that Matthews was trying to deliver to the government.” 

DEA Agent Garner Confirmed 

Matthews‘ Authority 

DEA agent Jerry Garner‘s testimony supported the testimony given by McDaniel. Garner testified to the government-authorized drug pickup by Matthews : 

Mr. Matthews provided transportation of drugs. He provided a service for us. He was instructed to go to a specific location, pick up cocaine, and return to the United States, which he did, and he did very well. 

Late Discovery of Perjured 

Testimony in Matthews‘ Trial 

Although many government agents courageously came forth and gave truthful testimony, there were government agents who knew the path to advancement in government, and that included lying as Justice Department prosecutors wanted them to lie, or to give half-truths that had the same effect as lying. Customs agent Ken Cates gave testimony that fit into this category. This deception came out during a later trial when attorney Daniel Cogdell of Houston compared the transcript of testimony given by Cates to the grand jury that indicted Matthews with a memorandum that Cates had previously written. Cogdell read from the Customs report that Cates had written several years earlier: 

During these meetings, these federal officers posed little, if any, restrictions on Matthews‘ proposed criminal activities, which clearly were to include smuggling of narcotics into the United States, which were destined for the Stadter criminal organization. 

Cogdell then read from the transcripts of testimony Cates had given that led to the jury indicting Matthews. Cates testified to the grand jury that he had interviewed the agents at the meeting that authorized Matthews to fly drugs and that Matthews was not given authority to haul drugs into the United States. Cates omitted the fact that Nestoroff, Dismukes, Hall, all agreed during the meeting that Matthews had been given authority to fly drugs into the United States. By omitting key facts, Cates lied to the grand jury, permitting an indictment to be handed down. 

Cates was next in line to San Antonio SAC Neil Lageman. By placing the blame on Matthews for the holiday loads, this would take the blame off San Antonio Customs and off Department of Justice officials who authorized the multiple loads of cocaine to hit the street. Neil Lageman issued the early 1989 memorandum charging Matthews with illegally flying drugs into the United States on Christmas and New Year’s Day. 

Lageman Severely Criticized for 

Protecting Drug Traffickers 

Lageman was severely and repeatedly criticized in a 1535-page House report for repeatedly blocking the prosecution of major drug traffickers. Cates later resigned from U.S. Customs Service and Lageman was transferred. (It is standard practice in government to transfer incompetent people to another location and often promote them in the process, especially in the Federal Aviation Administration where I had insider knowledge.) 

Exculpatory Evidence Seized 

From Matthews by DOJ 

While Matthews was in prison waiting for the trial to start, government agents and prison officials seized most of his documentary evidence, including government checks that constituted payment for flying drugs into the United States. One was a $40,000 check paid to Matthews by Houston HIDTA/DEA for one of several such flights. 

AUSA Thompson kept many exculpatory documents from Matthews‘ defense team that had been seized from Matthews’ home and his prison cell. These included a critical document involving AUSA Meehan‘s testimony concerning the carte blanche memo, fax correspondence with Houston DEA and Miami Customs, tape recordings and photos, and the Lageman memo that constituted a cover-up. Also withheld from Matthews’ defense, but not discovered until after the trial, were tapes made by Ellard on a small recorder that Ellard had sent to his wife which described the benefits he would receive in return for testifying against Matthews, and other papers. 

Assassination Attempt Against 

Matthews by DOJ Witness 

On January 13, 1992, before an indictment was handed down, an assassination attempt was made upon Matthews and his wife. He had received a call one evening from a person saying, “This is important, it’s about Jimmy Ellard,” and asked Matthews to meet him at a nearby 7-11 store. Only Ellard would know that Matthews would have been receptive to a person using Ellard’s name. At that time, Matthews didn’t think it was a hit team because they would not have used Ellard’s name. Upon arriving at the 7-11 outlet in his pickup, a man opened the door on the passenger side, slid in and shouted, “Let’s go to your house. Now!” 

Matthews realized his wife was also an intended victim since she had heard Ellard‘s name from the caller and would be a witness against Ellard to Matthews’ murder. Upon pulling out onto the street, Matthews swerved the pickup hard, throwing the gunman off-guard. He seized the gun and during the struggle three shots were fired, narrowly missing Matthews. The gunman then jumped out of the pickup and ran off. 

The assassination attempt on Matthews occurred shortly after Ellard discovered from his attorney, Bill Norris, that Matthews was responsible for his Drugging America—A Trojan Horse 264 1985 arrest. Ellard’s attorney had discovered this fact after Matthews had gone to another attorney in Miami seeking legal help in getting Miami Customs to release the twin-engine Merlin they had seized. During their discussions, Matthews had casually mentioned he was responsible for Ellard’s arrest. It was by sheer chance that Matthews contacted that particular Miami attorney, who was a friend to Ellard’s attorney, and who passed along the information that Matthews had given him. It is also believed that AUSA Thompson told Ellard about Matthews being responsible for his arrest. With Ellard’s murderous background, the prosecutor surely knew that Matthews could be Ellard’s assassination target. 

DOJ Prosecutor Denied 

What the Evidence Proved 

When Matthews‘ attorney tried to bring to the jury’s attention the attempt to assassinate Matthews and that the attempt was probably directed by the prosecutor’s chief witness, the prosecutor sought to discredit the assassination attempt story. Otherwise, it would adversely affect the credibility of the prosecutor’s main witness. Testimony by local law enforcement officers showed that an assassination attempt did occur. Judge Ursula Ungaro-Benages blocked presenting any evidence on the matter, assuring Matthews’ attorney that “he would not need to bring that up to win this case.” Either she misjudged the jury’s reaction to the evidence, or she was helping to protect the Justice Department’s sham action against Matthews. Her overall conduct indicates the latter. 

Standard Problem with Defense Lawyers 

Matthews encountered problems with his defense lawyers, something that appears throughout these pages, and throughout all of my books. His first lawyer, Marty Raskin, wanted Matthews to “cooperate” with the prosecutor, saying at one time, “Only Thompson can help you.” Matthews then hired Miami lawyer Ronald Dresnick who in turn brought in F. Lee Bailey. (Dresnick became a state judge after the Matthews trial.) To be on the safe side, Matthews hired Ralph Gonzales to sit during the trial and keep an eye on Dresnick and Bailey. 

During the trial, Matthews asked Dresnick and Bailey to bring witnesses in who approved Matthews’ role in Operation Shanghai —the plan to kidnap Escobar, which would show government officials authorizing him to violate the law for an undercover operation. Matthews said Bailey told him he didn’t want to drag the government officials through the dirt. 

Dresnick opposed bringing in the government officials to testify about the plan to kidnap Escobar, saying it would weaken the defense. That made no sense and protected the prosecutor’s case against Matthews. At that time, Escobar was the most publicized target of U.S. law enforcement, and showing Matthews’ attempts to kidnap him would hardly weaken the defense; it could, however, weaken the prosecution. Who were they trying to protect? It is very common for attorneys to present a weak defense to avoid antagonizing government attorneys with whom they will be working throughout their careers. 

Evidence Of Matthews‘ 

Innocence Ignored by Jurors 

Strong evidence of Matthews‘ innocence was introduced during the trial. One document, an 18-page confidential Texas DPS document dated February 15, 1989, gave details of Matthews’ government-approved undercover operations, stating in part:

12. Customs Special Agent Grieve advised Matthews that, if necessary, approval could be obtained for him to fly a load of Cocaine. Grieve advised Matthews that he should continue with his attempts to infiltrate the smuggling organization and, if placed in a position of flying a load of Cocaine, should make case agents aware of the situation but to keep details vague because if the agents had specific information, the agents would be required to interdict the load. 

13. On or about August 1, 1988, at the request of Matthews, another meeting was held in San Antonio with Assistant United States Attorney Dave Hall to clarify the government’s position regarding Matthews’ culpability if in fact Matthews was required to fly a load of Cocaine for the Stadter organization. Hall advised Matthews that if in fact Matthews was placed in a position of flying a load of contraband, Matthews would not be prosecuted if the case agents were aware of the situation beforehand and would not be placed in a position where Matthews would have to testify in court. Hall instructed Matthews to do whatever was necessary to infiltrate the Stadter organization. Present at that meeting were Investigator Nestoroff, Matthews, Hall, and pilot Nichols. 

26. Matthews advised that a Thanksgiving smuggling trip was possible and that he would be required to fly the trip with Thompson [Stadter’ s pilot]. Grieve again reminded Mathews to communicate with Investigator Nestoroff but not to be specific because if specific details were known, then Customs Service would be required to interdict the load. 

31. Nestoroff advised Cardwell that Matthews was involved in an undercover capacity with a large smuggling organization and that Matthews felt that any obvious indication of surveillance on the airstrip might alert suspects of law enforcement presence. [Houston Customs agents were in the process of sabotaging the undercover operation approved by San Antonio Customs agents.] 

47. Matthews advised that there was still a possibility of a test load, which, if intercepted, would compromise any larger loads. Special Agent Grieve advised Matthews that, if necessary, a load would be allowed to get through to California but that if Matthews was intercepted by surveillance or radar, then there was no way that Grieve could intervene and that the task force would “take care” of Matthews and keep him from being prosecuted. 

49. Grieve again advised that a load would be allowed to reach California if necessary to remove Matthews from risk of exposure and to increase the possibility of identification and arrest of other members of the Stadter organization. Grieve emphasized that the ultimate objective of the investigation was the arrest of Stadter. 

50. Grieve reminded Matthews that he was to be vague about specific details of any smuggling trip because if he provided specific information, then it would increase the risk of premature action by the Customs Service. Grieve advised Matthews to provide only cryptic information regarding the trip. In fact, if a load was to be brought in over Christmas, Matthews was jokingly advised to use the phrase, “It’s going to be a white Christmas.” 

69. Nestoroff briefly explained to Farley the ongoing smuggling investigation on Stadter and the involvement of Matthews to Supervisor Farley, and requested that Farley either contact Assistant United States Attorney Hall or the Assistant United States Attorney in Houston and brief them regarding the participation of Matthews before placing Matthews in jail. Nestoroff also advised Farley that Matthews had stated that Thompson was using the alias name Kevin Cook and that Thompson was allegedly a fugitive out of the Los Angeles area. 

73. Hall advised that as far as Hall was concerned, Matthews was operating within the guidelines that Matthews had been given and that the information would be provided to investigators at a meeting scheduled for Monday morning, January 2, 1989. 

Customs Protecting the 

Stadter Drug Organization 

The DPS memorandum, marked “DPS Sensitive,” described how Customs Service Supervisor John Farley in Houston was advised of a highly sensitive undercover operation into the Stadter drug organization occurring at Matthews’ airstrip at Damon, Texas, and not to undermine the operation by conducting an obvious surveillance. Despite being advised of an undercover flight about to arrive at the airstrip, Customs agents from Houston were there and arrested Matthews and Stadter’s pilot, Thompson. 

The Real Reason For 

Arresting Matthews 

This arrest was ordered by Houston Customs despite the fact that they knew it was an authorized undercover operation, and knew that by making the arrest it would permanently destroy the ongoing multi-agency attempt to arrest Stadter and bring a halt to his organization’s drug smuggling activities. The arrest made Stadter realize that Matthews was conducting a government undercover operation to infiltrate his drug organization. The question arises as to whether government agents wanted to eliminate Matthews, or they wanted to protect a major drug operation. 

Sworn Affidavit Details 

Government Authority to Matthews 

Other evidence surfaced. A confidential Texas DPS affidavit prepared by Nestoroff (October 23, 1991) stated in part: 

Matthews has been actively working as a cooperating individual for the Texas Department of Public Safety Narcotics Division (“TDPS”) since 1984. I have been his contact agent since that date....Matthews had been advised by an Assistant U.S. Attorney that he had “Carte Blanche” in this investigation and that he “would be taken care of” if problems developed....Matthews has provided information and assistance over a period of eight (8) years which has resulted in the seizure of large quantities of Cocaine and Marijuana by Texas DPS, US Customs, and DEA and to the conviction of numerous defendants for violation of both state and federal laws. He has also supplied valuable intelligence information regarding numerous large scale smuggling operations in the United States, Mexico, and Colombia. 

Approving Lie Detector Test Until 

it Supported Matthews‘ Innocence 

To provide further proof that Matthews was testifying truthfully, Matthews’ attorney motioned the court to allow Matthews to be polygraphed on the key issues. The court approved giving Matthews a polygraph test, and approved the person conducting the test. But after the test showed Matthews answered the questions honestly, and that he did not fly unauthorized drug loads, AUSA Thompson objected to the admissibility of the polygraph test based on lack of notice to the government. 

The government surely couldn’t be prejudiced by having evidence presented that would determine Matthews’ innocence or guilt! Under law, the prosecutor’s responsibility is to insure justice, not to put innocent people in prison. The test arose because of the prosecutor’s questioning, and the prosecutor had plenty of time to address the test results. The polygraph operator had been used by the Justice Department in the past on its own cases and surely was considered competent and reliable to conduct the test. The prosecutor couldn’t challenge the competency of the polygraph examiner, George Slattery, nor that the test was not performed correctly. 

Under law in the Eleventh Circuit, polygraph tests are admissible, upon meeting six tests. The court concluded that the six issues that must be met were met, except possibly for prior notice. The only issue was notice to the government, whether the issue was collateral or central, and if prejudice outweighed the probative value. Matthews faced life in prison, and Judge Ungaro was willing to allow this to happen on a minor technicality. 

Matthews‘ attorney argued that the polygraph issue did not arise until the prosecutor’s chief witness, Jimmy Ellard, testified on cross-examination. Judge Ursula Ungaro-Benages, insuring that the prosecutor’s case would not be undermined, refused to allow the exonerating key parts of the test results to be made known to the jurors. 

Matthews‘ Target—Escobar 

Killed on Day Matthews Testified 

Ironically, the same day that Matthews was to testify during trial in November 1993 about the plan for Matthews to kidnap Escobar, Escobar was killed in Medellin, Colombia. 

Pattern of Prosecutorial Misconduct 

and Inflammatory Lies 

AUSA Thompson engaged in a pattern of lying, deceptive arguments, and inflammatory statements throughout the trial. During the final closing argument, Thompson held up a large photo of the military jet that Matthews purchased and he said to the jury, “This is what Mr. Matthews was going to use to shoot down U.S. Customs interdiction planes.” There was never any evidence introduced to support that inflammatory statement. Because this statement was made during the prosecutor’s final argument, there was no opportunity to contradict it. 

Using a Bright Red Plane to 

Shoot Down U.S. Aircraft? 

I saw a picture of the jet; it was painted bright red. This is hardly the color Matthews would have used if he was intending to shoot down government aircraft. The prosecutor’s argument was ludicrous, and the jury swallowed it. 

Prosecutor Comparing Matthews 

to Saddam Hussein was Ironic 

In his inflammatory statements to the jury, Thompson linked Matthews to Saddam Hussein and Muammar el Qaddafi, and appealed to the jury’s patriotism, which required finding Matthews guilty: 

When faced with an enemy, the United States doesn’t blink when looking into the cold stare of a Muammar Qaddafi or Saddam Hussein, and they don’t blink when they stare into the cold, greedy eyes of this defendant. And that’s what this case is about, ladies and gentlemen. 

Prosecutor’s Reference to 

Iraq was Especially Ironic 

The prosecutor’s statements equating Matthews with Saddam Hussein was especially ironic since it was Matthews who had paid for and had arranged for the non-publicized defection of an Iraqi pilot and aircraft. Matthews had invested part of his assets and undertaken a complex plan to bring about the defection of an Iraqi pilot and Iraqi aircraft, contributing to what could have been a major public relations victory for the United States. Thompson —as corrupt a prosecutor as one would find anywhere—had the audacity to link Matthews to Saddam Hussein! 

Misstatement of Drug-Related Assets 

During the trial, the prosecutor referred to the expensive planes that Matthews owned, implying that he acquired them from non-authorized drug flights and that his Customs handlers knew nothing about them. He owned at various times several Mitsubishi turbo-prop aircraft, each with a value of almost $1 million. In reality, Customs did know about the aircraft, had even flown in them, and had contracted with Matthews to use the planes. On one flight from San Antonio to Tampa, Florida, Matthews carried Customs agents Thomas Grieve and Jim Dukes and AUSA Dave Hall. The purpose of that flight was to have Miami Customs release a plane that had been earlier seized from Matthews by Miami Customs agent Gene Wilkinson. 

Judge Revealed Key Exculpatory 

Facts Without the Jury Present 

Without the jury present, Judge Ungaro-Benages admonished the prosecutor for the false statements made against Nestoroff and Cardwell that misled the jury into thinking Matthews was guilty. She said, “What was presented at trial certainly did not amount to criminal wrongdoing by any stretch of the imagination with respect to either Cardwell or Nestoroff.” 

“Sick, Symbiotic, Manipulative, 

and Exploitative Relationship” 

Judge Ungaro-Benages severely criticized government agents: 

Mr. Matthews has been really used by the United States government...periodically Mr. Matthews would get busted and periodically the Government, with a wink and a nod,...would say, okay, Rodney, well, if you’ll just fly a few more loads for us, we’ll forget about it....The government’s very ugly underbelly... sick, symbiotic, manipulative, exploitive relationship with Matthews that culminated in a trial that pitted the United States government versus the United States government....[The government’s conduct was] an embarrassment, and the United States government in many respects should be ashamed of itself....Mr. Matthews has been really used by the United States government. 

The prosecutor had based much of his case against Matthews on the argument that Matthews bribed Nestoroff and Cardwell, and this argument probably resulted in the guilty verdict. Now, without the jury being present to hear the judge’s rebuke of that position, the judge revealed the absence of any support for the prosecutor’s argument. The judge had allowed this false argument to influence the jury and then compounded the outrage by inflicting a greater sentence than required upon Matthews. She was aiding and abetting each of the outrages and corrupt acts perpetrated by the DOJ prosecutor. 

Naive Jury Believed the 

Prosecutor’s Argument 

Despite the many government agents who risked their careers to testify on Matthews‘ behalf, the jury, ignorant of the widespread government misconduct, partly of their own choosing, held Matthews guilty. They knew that he would probably be imprisoned for the remainder of his life. They share guilt for making possible the continuation of the corruption so prevalent in the most corrupt and most dangerous of all government agencies: the U.S. Department of Justice! 

Judge Orders Three 

Life-In-Prison Sentences 

In February 1994, Judge Ungaro-Benages sentenced Matthews to life imprisonment on a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) conviction, on the pretense that Matthews had transported into the United States 50,000 kilos of cocaine. This was the cocaine that the DOJ witnesses smuggled into the United States, and which Matthews knew nothing about! This was bizarre! First she criticizes government agents for misusing Matthews, and then she sentences Matthews to life in prison!

$169 Million Judgment Based 

on Terrorist’s Perjured Testimony 

Further rubber-stamping the Justice Department prosecutor’s fraudulent charges, Judge Ungaro-Benages held that Matthews had made more than $169 million profit on the 50 flights—made by Escobar’s aide—Jimmy Ellard, and Emmons. The judge used figures based on Ellard’s perjured testimony. If any profit were made, they would be made by Ellard, his partner, Pablo Escobar, and Emmons. And much of this profit would shortly be made available to Ellard as the DOJ prosecutor moved to have Ellard released, placed in the witness protection program, and allowed to keep millions of otherwise forfeitable assets. 

Explaining the $169.2 Million Profit 

Matthews explained how the DOJ prosecutor made the profit argument to the jury: 

There was no evidence whatsoever that I made $169.2 million profit. Even Ellard claimed he only made $20 million. The $169.2 million was based solely on prosecutor Thompson’ s arithmetic that 50 loads (flown by Ellard’ pilots) equaled $500 million in profit and my profit out of that was $169.2 million. That was the craziest thing I’ve ever seen in a U.S. court. The government charged me with Ellard and Escobar’s drug flights. 

My indictment included a long list of expensive racehorses and other properties I have never ever heard of. All of Ellard‘s planes and everybody else’s planes were listed on my indictment. I had put away less than one million for emergencies, which the attorneys took in short order. I worked in Unicor prison Industries for over two years making about 75 cents an hour trying to help with expenses while the government was charging me with making a profit of $169.2 million. This is strictly tooth-fairy tales and the judge knew it was a sham to whitewash the first sham conviction. 

In addition, Customs personnel seized Matthews‘ Fort Lauderdale residence that had been in the family name for years, and the family heirlooms that had no relationship to any possible drug offense. After seizing the home, Miami Customs agents used it for their personal residence, destroying the family heirlooms that had been in the family for centuries. 

Government’s Refusal to 

Pay Its Debts to Matthews 

Matthews was arrested in June 1992, at which time the government owed him $240,000 for the last five flights that he had flown. Four of these flights were simply providing transportation, hauling drugs from Colombia to destinations in the United States at the direction of Customs and DEA agents. The other flight was flying two fugitive drug traffickers to the United States. The government never denied owing him the money; they simply refused to pay. During Matthews’ trial, government agents testified that the government owed him the money. But to now pay would undermine the prosecutor’s charge that Matthews had no authority to work for the government. It would also reveal the shipment of drugs ordered by government agents. 

Going after Government 

Agents who Testified Truthfully 

Justice Department’s prosecutors retaliated against many of the people who testified for Matthews, including DEA agents Jerry Garner, J.D. Morman, and Mike McDaniels ; Customs agents Tony Singleton and John Farley, and Texas DPS agent Robert Nestoroff. The Justice Department went after a businessman and friend of Matthews who testified at the trial, Tony Dinorcia. As a result of the government’s retaliation, Dinorcia lost his business, Marble Edge, a factory and installation business that employed about 75 people in Palm Beach, Florida. 

Seeking to Bring About 

Matthews‘ Death in Prison 

Justice Department personnel didn’t give up on Matthews after bringing about his life-in-prison sentence. With control of the federal prisons, they could inflict further harm upon him. Many murders occur in prisons that often eliminate inmates who have highly sensitive information against government officials. 

In late 1993, Justice Department personnel transferred Matthews from the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Miami to the North Dade Detention Center, placing Matthews in a small 18-man cellblock for about three weeks with a witness who would be testifying against Matthews, Frank McGuire. This could be expected to result in a violent and possible fatal confrontation. When this failed to produce a confrontation, Matthews was placed for several weeks in a cellblock with a Cuban national, Carlos Duque, and eight of his Cuban friends. Matthews’ previous testimony resulted in Duque receiving a 40-year prison sentence. This was a volatile and life-and-death situation that resulted in Matthews receiving several serious beatings. 

Request That Court 

Punish AUSA Thompson 

After Matthews was sentenced, former AUSA Peter Aiken filed an 18-page motion with U.S. District Judge Jose Gonzalez, requesting that AUSA Terrence Thompson be punished for withholding key data from the defense. Aiken referred to two tape recordings sent from a Texas prison by Jimmy Ellard to his wife, advising her that AUSA Thompson agreed to reward Ellard for testifying the way the prosecutor wanted him to testify. Also, that Ellard’s wife would not be prosecuted, that Ellard’s prison sentence would be immediately reduced, that he would be released after a brief period, that he would be placed in the witness protection program, and he would be allowed to keep his drug-acquired assets. This was a clear case of purchased testimony, barred by statute. 

DOJ Paying Ellard $2000 

While in Prison 

Aiken discovered these tapes during the final stages of another and subsequent trial in which he defended a Fort Lauderdale aircraft broker, William Safarie, who was acquitted on December 8, 1994. Aiken learned that the DEA gave Ellard $2,000 while Ellard was in prison, and that government agents had evidence showing Ellard’s wife to be actively involved in money laundering. Under federal rules, such exculpatory evidence must be turned over to the defense before the start of the trial. It had been known for years that prosecutors routinely violate this rule, allowing thousands of defendants to receive long prison terms, while the prosecutor escapes any consequences for his or her corrupt actions. 

Justice Department Payoff to 

Terrorist and Escobar Associate 

Waiting several months after the Matthews trial ended, AUSA Terrence Thompson quietly filed a motion with Judge William Zloch to carry out his end of the deal: release Ellard from prison and into the general population. Ellard’s past was not unknown to the judge. 

Objection Letter from Former U.S. Attorney Protesting Release of Airplane Bomber 

and Major Drug Trafficker 

In response to the Justice Department’s motion to release Ellard from prison, attorney Peter Aiken wrote to Judge Zloch stating that the purpose of the letter was to “bring to your attention certain facts and circumstances surrounding a defendant who has a pending motion for a sentence reduction before you.” Aiken wrote, 

As a former agent, former Assistant United States Attorney, member of the Bar and citizen of this country, I was shocked at what I perceived to be the unconscionable deal given to Jimmy Norjay Ellard by Assistant United States Attorney Terry Thompson. 

In the Safarie case, Ellard admitted to importing into the United States of America in excess of $1 billion in cocaine. He admitted to being a former law enforcement officer, who as a fugitive on drug charges, imported into this country in excess of fifty thousand kilograms of cocaine. He admitted to being Pablo Escobar‘s partner, and further, admitted being the only gringo who could sit with all four Colombian cartels. He admitted to meeting with Pablo Escobar and providing Pablo Escobar with technical expertise as to how to construct bombs with plastic explosives and radio activated detonators for the purpose of blowing up airplanes. 

It is true that he testified that it was his understanding that the bombs would only be used to kill their own drug pilots, if it appeared apprehension was imminent. However, Pablo Escobar then used Jimmy Ellard‘s plans to bomb the Avianca Airline and kill in excess of one hundred ten people. Jimmy Ellard testified that he was present with Pablo Escobar when they passed around photographs of three informants who had been skinned alive.

Jimmy Ellard testified that he was aware that his partner, Pablo Escobar, had assassinated the vice-presidential candidate of the country of Colombia. What was even more shocking was the fact that Jimmy Ellard admitted and testified in my trial that he was in the process of setting up a cocaine network to infiltrate the Communist world with cocaine, with Pablo Escobar as his partner. 

I was further distressed to learn that when Pablo Escobar declared war on the people of Colombia, it was Jimmy Ellard who made a phone call to arrange for the purchase of Stinger missiles and guns for Pablo Escobar.... As Judge Ungaro-Benages said in her comments, there can’t possibly be a more evil man than Jimmy Norjay Ellard. 

Jimmy Norjay Ellard has in fact already beaten the system. He testified in the proceeding in front of Judge Gonzalez that as a former law enforcement officer, he knew how to plea bargain and that it was “the American Way.” He testified in my trial that he knew at the time he made the decision to become a smuggler that if he was apprehended, he would be able to trade that information for light treatment. He has in fact successfully used his knowledge as a law enforcement officer to substantially beat the system. 

In this transcript, he describes and predicts how he is going to manipulate the government. I learned of this transcript, not as a result of its voluntary production by Mr. Thompson, but as a result of successfully prevailing on a motion to compel favorable evidence. I urge the court to read this transcript because it will provide to the court a very clear picture of one of the most evil, manipulative, vile defendants to ever appear before a court. 

I recognize that Mr. Terry Thompson has filed a motion to further reduce Mr. Ellard‘s sentence. I urge this court not to do so.... If there were true justice, Jimmy Norjay Ellard would be extradited by the country of Colombia, prosecuted there, and shot before a firing squad. He is responsible for the deaths of one hundred ten human beings. He is responsible for $1 billion in drugs within this country. The fifteen-year sentence meted out by this court is a fraction of what he truly deserves.... In these times, where street-level drug dealers routinely receive fifteen and twenty-year sentences for two or three ounces of crack cocaine, it is an absolute miscarriage of justice to let someone like Jimmy Norjay Ellard escape with a similar sentence. 

Aiken brought out the fact that the Justice Department had allowed Ellard to keep most of his many millions of dollars of drug-related assets. 

           DOJ Benevolence for Terrorist, 
             Airliner Bombing, And Drug 
               Kingpin not Available to 
                  Individual Americans 
Judge Zloch released Ellard, despite Ellard’s threat to the public as shown by his prior murderous conduct. Possibly the thousands of people whose husbands, wives, mothers, sons, or daughters are in prison with long sentences for minor drug offenses—anything is minor compared to Ellard—deserve to have similar benevolence given in their cases! 

Aviation terrorism was obviously not a target for the Justice Department gang, as shown by the Justice Department’s protection of Ellard, the felony retaliation of a government agent going after the New Jersey terrorist cells funded in part by drug activities, and the many other corrupt Justice Department acts detailed and documented in my three books. Is it any wonder that aviation terrorism and other major crimes can occur! 

Ellard Again Arrested for Drug Smuggling Offenses, And Again Protected by Department of Justice Attorneys 

Ellard voluntarily entered the federal witness protection program, which enabled him to return to smuggling drugs into the United States, as the Justice Department group surely recognized. And as expected, he returned to his drug smuggling activities. He was arrested in September 1998 by federal authorities in New York. 

Despite his arrest on charges of bringing large quantities of drugs into the United States, DOJ personnel arranged for his release. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette investigative journalist Bill Moushey wrote to Matthews on March 23, 1999, explaining what he heard about Ellard : 

I have just heard that charges were dropped against Jimmy Ellard because he produced taped recordings that contradicted the New York feds who said Ellard had no authority to do the [drug] deal in question. I understand that he got into the deal because the feds were going to allow him to make $40 million from a large cocaine deal. 

Ellard and Escobar Cartel 

Protected by the CIA 

Repeatedly, the large drug traffickers, those reportedly tied in with CIA drug trafficking, either don’t get charged, go free, receive light sentences, or are released from prison with no publicity. If the information that I have received from my CIA and other deep-cover contacts for the past ten-plus years is correct, that the CIA has close ties with some of the drug cartels, it would explain why Escobar and Ellard were protected by DOJ personnel. It would also explain why Matthews might have been targeted because he threatened to inflict serious damage upon the CIA-connected drug organizations. 

DOJ Again Protecting the 

CIA-Drug Cartel Coalition 

When this conduct is compared to the many reports that I have received over the years from CIA and other insiders who reported CIA drug trafficking with drug cartels and organized crime, the most logical conclusion is that the Escobar cartel was supplying drugs to the CIA and Matthews was interfering with this arrangement. 

Matthews‘ Appellate Remedies Sabotaged 

Under law, Matthews had various legal remedies available to overturn the injustices inflicted upon him by Justice Department attorneys, the judge, and even the jury. Matthews’ appeal (Appeal case 94-4480) was heard in Miami by three judges in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The court granted Matthews’ attorneys the right to present oral argument, but retracted this authority after the government packed the courtroom with government officials. The three judges were intimidated by the large block of government personnel in the courtroom. Instead of correcting the violations of Matthews’ civil and constitutionally-protected rights, the three-judge panel denied the appeal. 

Matthews‘ Attorney Scared by 

the Block of Government Officials 

Matthews explained how scared his appellate attorney was during the appeal appearance: 

Customs officials packed the Miami courtroom for the appeals hearing, attempting to give the appearance they were there in the interest of justice while they were actually there in the interest of a high-level cover-up. The corrupt officials were effective, for the appeal court judges declined to hear oral arguments they had previously scheduled. 
[That is the reason for calendaring a hearing in a court of appeals: present oral arguments. The written briefs have been filed prior to that time.] 

My appeals attorney, Thomas Dawson, was still shaking at our meeting the next day from the subtle but effective intimidation. Dawson said he felt fortunate he made it out of the courtroom and out of Miami without incident or accident. Dawson was thoroughly shaken. He never filed another motion in my case even though he was paid and I had requested he appeal to the Supreme Court [Petition for writ of certiorari]. 

Prosecuting Government Agents 

Who Gave Truthful Testimony 

In October 1994, after Nestoroff and Cardwell gave favorable testimony in Matthews‘ trial, Justice Department prosecutors obtained indictments from a grand jury against them. The Department of Justice charged them with conspiring to help Matthews evade arrest, to avoid drug charges, giving perjured testimony during Matthews’ trial, and giving Matthews AWACS schedules—all based upon the statements of their star witness—Ellard ! 

The same Justice Department employees who had just used government power to pay for suborned and perjured testimony from a major drug trafficker were now charging government agents with perjury and obstruction of justice for testifying truthfully! 

Government Agents Fearful 

of Giving Honest Testimony 

During Matthews‘ trial, F. Lee Bailey said to Matthews, “Both men expressed fear of retaliation for testifying against the government. Mr. Nestoroff was very much concerned that there would be retribution. He was afraid if he testified truthfully he’d be indicted.” 

DOJ’s prosecutor Thompson filed charges in Miami against Nestoroff and Cardwell, where he had more control over the grand jury and the prosecution process. But defense attorneys for Nestoroff and Cardwell moved to have the case transferred to Houston, which was then ordered by Judge Jose A. Gonzalez. 

In another abuse-of power retaliation, Thompson threatened former state prosecutor Ralph Gonzalez who had testified favorably for Matthews, on the basis of Gonzalez’s handling of a government-sanctioned marijuana case in Richmond, Texas.

Threatening or Retaliating Against 

a Witness Is a Federal Crime 

It is a federal crime to threaten a witness or to retaliate against a witness for having given testimony. 35 But who is there to prosecute the Justice Department employees perpetrating this offense when the same government employees are authorized to initiate such prosecution? 
35 Title 18 U.S.C.’ 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant  SQ (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, or threatens another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to SQ 
(1) influence, delay or prevent the testimony of any person in an official  proceeding: shall be fined... or imprisoned... or both. [1988 amended reading]" Title 18 U.S.C. § 1513. Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant. (a) Whoever knowingly engages in any conduct and thereby causes bodily injury to another person or damages the tangible property of another person, or threatens to do so, with intent to retaliate against any person for SQ(1) the attendance of a witness or party at an official proceeding, or any testimony given or any record, document, or other object produced by a witness in an official proceeding; or 
(2) any information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense..."

Finally, Street-Smart Texas Jurors 

The Justice Department prosecution of Nestoroff and Cardwell occurred in Texas, and the jurors were not rubber-stamping the prosecutor’s charges. The jurors in the Nestoroff-Cardwell trial took less than two hours to find Nestoroff and Cardwell not guilty of the charges. One of them, Howard Weaver, said afterwards, “Frankly, we pretty much thought this case was a joke. This case should never have been brought to trial. We all thought the prosecutor appeared to have a vendetta against the two.” The jurors felt that the charges against Nestoroff and Cardwell were retaliation for testifying in defense of Matthews in the Florida trial. The Texas media gave a great deal of publicity to the charges against Nestoroff and Cardwell. A Dallas Morning News article stated in part, 

Supporters say [that Nestoroff and Cardwell] are victims of a vindictive U.S. prosecutor who obtained conspiracy indictments against them in the wake of a state-federal drug investigation turned sour. As described in interviews with attorneys and state and federal drug agents, the charges against the two lawmen grew out of a multi-agency drug sting in Texas marked by miscommunication and foul-ups. 

Customs officials refused to discuss the case against Agent Cardwell, but DPS Director Col. James Wilson said Sgt. Nestoroff is a scapegoat whose reputation in a distinguished career, has been trashed. At the heart of the issue, DPS official say, was testimony in Miami by the two lawmen at the 1993 federal trial of Texas drug pilot Rodney Matthews, who was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. Those statements angered the prosecution and led to the indictments, the DPS officials say. Col. Wilson said, Bob (Nestoroff) went in and told the truth, and there’s clear indications it angered the prosecutor. The prosecutor has certainly implied we were obstructing his efforts. And that is a blatant lie. 

So convinced were Texas officials of Nestoroff‘s innocence that they kept him on the payroll during the charges and the trial. 

Personal Tragedies Narrowly Averted 

Nestoroff and Cardwell could be locked in prison today, with a life in prison sentence, if those jurors had been the typical naive, illiterate about government misconduct, rubber-stamp jurors that are responsible for destroying the lives of so many innocent people. That’s how close these two agents came for having the backbone and character to testify honesty. This is a rare commodity in today’s government and society. Another plus that saved them was the courage of some Texas papers that printed the truth rather than the usual cover-up and protection of government corruption. 

Media Coverage Favorable to Defendants 

A Dallas Morning News article on January 29, 1995, stated: 

The Feds said to Matthews: “Do whatever you need to do.” The phrase ’carte blanche’ was used time and again. According to a DPS official who was briefed on the meeting. “As state officers, we can’t authorize breaking the law to make a case. The feds, however, can. Justice Department officials confirmed that federal law, under strict limits, allows undercover operatives to set up drug deliveries to help make cases.” 

DPS and federal agents familiar with the task force investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity, outlined the following scenario: On Christmas Eve 1988, Mr. Matthews phoned Sgt. Nestoroff, telling him, “It’s gonna be a white Christmas,” that is, he would fly in a load of cocaine the next day. Sgt. Nestoroff alerted a Customs supervisor and was told the information would be passed on. Mr. Matthews landed in Florida on Christmas Day with 1,400 pounds of cocaine. 

Instead of following orders to notify authorities immediately, he loaded the cocaine onto a truck and drove to California. DPS, officials said. There, DEA agents, unaware of the Texas-based investigation, seized the drugs. The charges were dropped after task force officials intervened. The resulting DEA protests created bad feelings within the task force agencies, a DPS agent close to the task force said. “Suddenly, it became clear that Customs didn’t have it together on this investigation,” he said. 

Mr. Matthews resumed his undercover role. A few days later, he phoned Sgt. Nestoroff that he’d bring in another drug flight New Year’s day. Sgt. Nestoroff passed the word to Customs officials, who again said they would pass on the information. 

Apparently, not everyone got the message. Mr. Matthews plane was targeted by Customs radar as a possible smuggler as he flew into Florida from Colombia. Mr. Matthews, with radar-detection equipment aboard, changed course for Texas. Landing at his private strip in Fort Bend County, he unloaded the cocaine onto a truck, DPS officials said. Meanwhile, Customs officers in Houston, apparently unaware that the flight might be government-sanctioned, surrounded the landing field. Agent Cardwell was part of that team. 

When officers stopped Mr. Matthews as he drove away, he told them he worked for the government and asked them to phone Sgt. Nestoroff. Sgt. Nestoroff told authorities to contact the Justice Department officials heading the task force, DPS officials said. Again, no charges were filed. The relationship between DPS narcotics and Customs had now become strained. 

“This whole thing was instigated by the federal government. But when it blew up, they blamed everyone else,” a longtime DPS agent said. “Later, there were some backdoor apologies. But nothing official.” 

Sgt Nestoroff‘s supervisors advised him to tape any phone calls from federal authorities about the Matthews case. “We were learning the hard way that we had to watch our backs all the time,” the longtime DPS agent said. 

Customs Retaliated Against 

Cardwell for Truthful Testimony 

Houston attorney Mike Ramsey, defending Cardwell, said his client had received no official support from U.S. Customs but was supported by state and federal drug agents across the state. “Here’s a guy with a good reputation, a background free of taint. A lot of folks in Customs and other agencies are ready to testify for him. They feel the government’s gone after a good guy for no reason.” Internal pressures finally forced Cardwell to leave government service. 

In a July 8, 1996, letter to attorney Daniel Cogdell of Houston, Matthews explained Jimmy Ellard‘s involvement with placing bombs on airliners and other airplanes: 

Jimmy Ellard attempted to contact me to activate a remote controlled explosive device that would be concealed on Ellard’s own drug planes in the event they were interdicted and followed while approaching the U.S. Ellard suggested I activate the bomb from an observation plane. Ellard’s plan was to kill the drug pilots he had hired before they were captured by U.S. authorities, to prevent them from identifying him. Ellard may be hesitant to deny this on the stand, having since learned of my collection of tape recordings. 

Mr. Ellard solicited Mr. Escobar’s help in accomplishing this murderous plot while at the same time attempting to gain Escobar’s confidence by a demonstration of evil deeds, comparable to Escobar’s. Mr. Escobar embraced Ellard’s idea on the surface and used a modified version of Ellard’s plan to bomb the Avianca airliner, killing persons that threatened his security. 

Escobar’s concern was losing a load of cocaine and his own security; he had no concern that Ellard might be exposed or that he himself would be exposed as a drug trafficker, which was already a well-known fact. Without Ellard’s knowledge, Escobar sent two of his sicarios to see me in Florida. They relayed Escobar’s modified plan to shoot down the U.S. interdiction plane instead of the drug plane. His plan was to shoot down the interdiction plane from a specified point on the ground with rifle fire. After reaching the U.S. coastline the interdiction plane would be following close behind the drug plane, also at low altitude. 

In successfully neutralizing Ellard’ s murderous plot to kill his own drug pilots, and Escobar’ s modification of the plan to shoot down the interdiction plane, I explained the following logistics to Escobar’s sicarios: The chase plane will sometimes be at a higher altitude, or maybe there will be more than one chase plane, one at a much higher altitude and it would be impossible to bring it down with rifle fire from the ground. I convinced them the only sure way the U.S. Customs chase plane could be brought down was with a faster jet fighter type plane equipped with at minimum, 50 caliber machine guns. 

Escobar’s men believed I was furnishing AWACS schedules that facilitated many of their drug flights. They had been fortified with cash and were under instructions from Escobar to give me anything I needed in assistance. To console Escobar and his men, I agreed to purchase a surplus military jet fighter and reinstall the 50 caliber machine guns, all at their expense. This is where the HA-200 surplus military jet fighter/trainer came into the picture. It was agreed that Ellard would not be told of the plan. Apparently Escobar did not want Ellard to know his people were in contact with me. 

There was never any real intention on my part to reinstall the 50 calibers. I knew I could delay the proposed machine gun installation for a year or two or until the objectives were accomplished. Escobar’s men gave me the money to purchase and refurbish the HA-200. After the purchase, I showed them the machine gun ports and the lead weights in the nose compartment that kept the plane in balance while the machine guns were removed. 

The main point of all this goes to the credibility of government witness Jimmy Ellard. While it may be true that Ellard did not intend to kill those particular people on that Avianca Airlines flight, he intended to kill other people on other airplanes to save his own hide. Had I not neutralized both those plans, at the risk of being prosecuted, Nash and McGuire and a few U.S. Customs pilots would be in the beyond with the Avianca passengers on that ill-fated flight. 

That same letter referred to Matthews‘ attempt to placate Escobar a year later when questioned about why the machine guns had not been installed. 

After about a year, Escobar’s henchmen surprised me at my Ft. Lauderdale hangar, wanting to see the 50 calibers, while brandishing their own machine pistols. They insisted on meeting the aircraft mechanic who was to be paid $200 thousand for installing the 50 caliber machine guns. To make the ruse work and in an effort to satisfy Escobar’s men, I drove them to Ft. Lauderdale Executive Jet Service, at that time called Don Haines Aviation. It was located on the opposite side of the airport and had performed most of the maintenance on the HA-200. I explained I would have to take the money in and pay the mechanic as he refused to make the deal known to anyone else if he was to do the work. [Don Haynes Aviation was later renamed F.X.E. Jet Center when Dan E. Karns took over from Don Haines] 

Escobar’s men waited and watched while parked outside in front of the office as I carried their $200 thousand in to pay the mechanic. I was on the spot in reference to what to do with the $200 thousand. The owners, Don Haynes and Dan E. Karns, had previously complained to me about financial problems related to the IRS locking their doors. 

This was a perfect opportunity to offer them assistance in the form of a cash loan. They gladly accepted the loan, and it was put on their company books and my company books as a consulting fee to be paid back to Rod Aero Aircraft Brokerage in installments to be worked out with my accountant, Ronald Briggs and his CPA accounting firm. Should Mr. Briggs testify again, he would surely testify truthfully to this, as he was unaware of any wrongdoing. However, he was aware that Rod Aero and myself provided covert type flying services for the U.S. government and were paid in the form of cash, checks, and airplanes. 

The letter went into how Matthews discovered Ellard‘s role in the bombing of the Avianca Airliner: 

I did not learn of Escobar’s and Ellard‘s involvement in the Avianca flight bombing until Ellard bragged to me that “We took out some snitches on that Avianca flight; we snuffed the son-of-a-bitches,” referring to himself and his alleged partner Pablo Escobar. In talking about it, Ellard swelled with pride. I asked Ellard if he knew how many of the people on board were targets. He answered evasively, saying, “We got all of them.” Ellard went into detail about the explosion and the mangled bodies strewn all over the place, while bursting into an excited hideous laughter. 

No End to Misuse of Federal 

Power by DOJ Employees 

To insure that Matthews‘ life was as miserable as possible, AUSA Terrence Thompson told the prison that Matthews was an extreme escape risk, and that he was planning to escape using hostages. Matthews wrote, “I suppose the objective is to keep the pressure up on me, it just seems kind of absurd since I was never in prison before, much less attempted escape.” Matthews, a non-violent person, would be one of the least likely inmates that would try something as foolish as escaping from the maximum-security prison at Leavenworth. 

Tactics to Keep the Media from Matthews 

Not content with having destroyed Matthews’ family and with sentencing him to life in prison, Justice Department attorneys, through their prison administrators, put Matthews into solitary confinement on April 30, 1998. A little known fact of prison life is that many prisoners commit suicide in solitary confinement. Another in the bag of tricks used by Justice Department lawyers is to place a deranged prisoner—one who may have already murdered—in with a prisoner they wish to target. 

This transfer into solitary confinement followed the threat by Assistant Executive Warden Bob Bennett that if Matthews went ahead with an ABC Television Primetime interview, he would end up in the “hole,” and that is what happened. Prison authorities tried to justify their actions on the position that Matthews’ sister, Wanda, reimbursed someone outside the prison $25 for the stamps they used on behalf of Matthews. [huh...wtf? DC]

Still not satisfied with what they did to Matthews, the DOJ prison officials transferred Matthews in November 1998 to worse conditions. They placed him in a cage-like environment which the prisoners call the “Dog House,” where he remained confined 24 hours a day in a small cell, in a 100-year-old building with inadequate heating in the winter, and inadequate cooling in the summer. 

America’s Devil Island 

Matthews wrote about his living conditions: 

They finally moved me to the infamous Dog House, a 100-year-old disciplinary unit without adequate heating or cooling. Windows are broken out and birds fly in and out at will. Two men are stuffed into a 4 2 x 9’ cell locked-down 24 hours a day without enough room to walk. Prisoners are not usually provided warm clothing; consequently you must stay under the covers in the bunk to keep from freezing. 

The tiny open bar-faced cells are stacked five levels high with surrounding catwalks. The noise is deafening at times, especially when prisoners on a regular basis mimic the living conditions by barking and howling like dogs. Thus the name “Dog House.” 

This place is seldom without the screaming and murmurings of the paranoid schizophrenics who are housed here. Violent or tough guys are broken easily and quickly by four-pointing them until they become submissive (i.e. strapping them to a concrete bunk at all four limbs). After a few days of urinating and defecating on themselves and eating like a dog on its back, they quickly realize it’s not at all like the movies. 

To break the more sophisticated, they are placed in special cells that aren’t talked about, with the small window painted over, little or no ventilation, poor heating or cooling. They will then deliberately place one certified-nut after the other in your cell, the worst psychotics they can muster, guilty of the most heinous murders you can imagine. 

Matthews‘ January 1, 1999 letter stated: 

It is below freezing in my cell here in Dog House unit and I have no warm clothes. This makes it difficult to write as my fingers become stiff from the cold. I must get back under the covers to warm up. The ice forming on the toilet water is my thermometer. 

On January 5, 1999, I wrote a letter to Warden J.W. Booker demanding to know why he had put Matthews into this crowded cage-like unit. He replied with a letter for me to get Washington authorization to allow prison officials to release information to me. It was a typical bureaucratic run-around. 

I contacted Primetime producer Jude Dratt concerning the inhumane and retaliatory treatment Matthews received as a result of granting the ABC show an interview. She said prison authorities gave her the run-around also. I was disappointed that Primetime could not have aired a show dealing with retaliation against people who expose government corruption. 

Customs Agent Reveals 

Customs Cover-ups and Lying 

The ABC documentary aired on July 8, 1998, toned down the gravity of government misconduct, but was still strong when compared with the usual cover-up by the mainstream media. Mark Conrad, a Customs veteran and chief of Customs Internal Affairs division in Houston, appeared on the show and showed extraordinary courage. Conrad said on the ABC News documentary, “It is a cover-up that continues today.” 

Asked by DOJ to Commit Perjury 

Conrad retired in December 1998, and in a January 1999 letter to me he provided further information about the problems in Customs and the Justice Department. He stated very strongly he did not trust AUSA Terry Thompson. Another former AUSA I talked to, Ronald Tonkin, had even stronger words for Terrence Thompson. 

Prosecutor Asking Government 

Official to Commit Perjury 

Conrad said he was “asked to lie by the DOJ prosecutor during a court trial in Fort Lauderdale, to ignore blatantly false representations to a federal judge in San Diego, to lie in an internal investigation.” This is the type of conduct that sends people like Matthews to prison with a life-in-prison sentence. 

Criminal Charges Against 

Former AUSA Rozan 

In 1994, the U.S. attorney in Montana filed criminal charges against former Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Rozan, charging him with mail fraud and money laundering. These charges related to the Montana ranch that was placed in his control by Matthews, and which Rozan conveyed to his law partner, as if it was his own. (District of Montana, Missoula Division CR-95-30-M-CCL-01; CR-94-39-M-CCL-01) Because of Matthews’ peripheral involvement with Rozan, Matthews was called to testify against him. Tape-recorded evidence that was subpoenaed in Miami was used in the Montana prosecution. 

One Justice Department 

Attorney Protecting Another 

For various complex reasons, U.S. Attorney Terrence Thompson came to Rozan‘s rescue, producing a bogus document to undermine the Montana prosecutor’s charges against Rozan. Rozan had previously cooperated with Thompson in withholding evidence in the Matthews‘ trial and now Thompson, in exchange, returned the debt to Rozan by giving false testimony and producing a forged document into the Montana trial that undermined the prosecutor’s case. 

During one of several meetings in 1993 and 1994, before his transfer to Leavenworth and while Matthews was in prison at Allenwood, Pennsylvania, Customs agent David Smith from the Great Falls, Montana office, and AUSA Jim Seycora from the Helena, Montana office, visited Matthews in prison. The purpose of the visit was purportedly seeking information for their prosecution of Rozan and his law partner Sid Berger. 

During these conversations, Seycora and Smith brought up the subject of Nestoroff and Cardwell, which was rather strange since they had no role in the Montana case. Matthews responded that Nestoroff and Cardwell were being falsely accused by DOJ prosecutor Terrence Thompson and that they were innocent of the charges that Matthews paid them $5 million for AWACS schedules. 

A significant part of the Montana prosecutor’s case against Rozan relied upon Matthews telling the truth. During Rozan’s trial, Thompson testified in Rozan’s defense and produced an unsigned memorandum allegedly prepared by Customs agent Smith which said that Matthews told Smith that he had paid Customs agent Richard Cardwell $5 million for AWACS schedules and bribes to Nestoroff. That statement was untrue, and Matthews had stated the very opposite to Smith. That unsigned document was provided to Rozan’s defense attorneys by AUSA Thompson, who then used it to undermine Matthews’ credibility. 

DOJ Power to Suborn Perjured 

Testimony and Forged Documents 

Although Seycora had initiated the prosecution of Rozan and Berger before Thompson got into the picture, he was nowhere to be seen during the trial. He avoided showing his face in a prosecution initiated by his office that the DOJ was now trying to undermine. The highly sensitive trial was conducted by a young assistant, AUSA Chris McLean, probably because Justice Department officials in Washington wanted the prosecution halted. 

Customs Agent Smith’s Evasive Answer 

During recess, after the unsigned document was presented by Rozan‘s defense attorney, Smith and AUSA McLean came to Matthews in his holding cell (during the trial), during which time Smith stated the document “was a misstatement.” He later told Matthews’ brother, Lester, in Texas, that Matthews “did not make that statement.” 

Customs Agent Smith’s Peculiar Response 

In December 1998, I sent a letter to Smith in Montana, who was then retired from government service. I requested that he tell me whether he actually prepared and signed that document and whether it reflected what Matthews had actually said to him. Smith answered through a Great Falls, Montana law firm: 

Mr. Smith denies any wrongdoing regarding the Rozan and Berger prosecution. He had no control over what a defense attorney did with Jencks Act material. 

The problem with that non-responsive reply was that Smith did not confirm or deny that he prepared and signed the false document. If he had prepared it, there would be no reason to deny it. If he had not prepared it, it would be understandable, despite its cowardice, not to be responsive. By the wording of that response, a person could deduce that Smith was saying he was not responsible for what was said in that memorandum that was used to sabotage the Montana prosecutor’s case. A person could argue that Smith aided and abetted the presentation of a false or forged document to a federal court, and aided and abetted obstruction of justice. These are federal crimes. 

Matthews feels that the unsigned Smith document was falsified and presented to the grand jury in the Nestoroff -Cardwell prosecution by AUSA Thompson, and then used to exonerate former AUSA Rozan in the Montana trial. Matthews believes that the Seycora-Smith visit to his prison cell was intended to provide the basis for the falsified Smith memorandum to placate Thompson, which backfired on the Montana prosecutor. 

Same DOJ Tactics Used to 

Silence other Whistleblowers 

In my many years of investigative experience and contacts with dozens of government personnel and government whistleblowers, I find that the tactics used against them by Justice Department personnel and by federal judges are similar. False charges, prosecutor lying, judges who subvert defendants’ rights, and jurors who are too dumb to learn the facts of life, and potential jurors with any experience or intelligence are dismissed during the jury “selection” process. 

Media Exposure of DOJ 

Human Rights Violations 

The Pittsburgh Post Gazette published a series of ten highly detailed articles in November and December 1998 that followed two years of investigations, giving dozens of examples of people whose lives were destroyed by the corrupt actions of Justice Department prosecutors. The articles went into great detail showing how Congress and federal judges have given prosecutors more power, and more immunity, to where virtually any form of prosecutorial fraud is perpetrated with immunity to the perpetrator, while the defendant victims suffer agonizing personal and financial disasters. These articles are described in the chapter devoted to Justice Department misconduct. 

Major Threat to the 

People of the United States 

What has been done to the Matthews family has been done to thousands of others who were innocent. Little does the public realize the major threat and the harm being inflicted upon families throughout America by the personnel in the U.S. Department of Justice. 

As this book is written, Matthews has been in prison for seven years. His family is destroyed. His wife and seven-year-old son fled to Latin America to escape Justice Department retaliation. Major drug traffickers who had shipped tons of cocaine into the United States were released from prison for providing perjured testimony against Matthews. 

Motion for a New Trial 

In 1998, Matthews‘ Boulder, Colorado, attorney, Clifford Barnard, filed a motion for a new trial based upon discovery of an 18-page document prepared by U.S. Customs in San Antonio on February 15, 1989. This document directly concerned Matthews and could have been used in his defense to demonstrate a cover-up, but DOJ prosecutors had not made it available for Matthews’ defense, as required by law. That document surfaced during another trial several years after the Matthews trial. By omitting key facts, the document came to a false conclusion. 

Based upon that document, Barnard filed a motion for a new trial, raising several arguments, including: 

• Customs agents and supervisors who testified at Matthews‘ trial for the prosecutor had covered up for the authority that they had given Matthews to fly the holiday drug loads. 

• The falsified document came to a false conclusion by omitting from it the authority given to Matthews to fly the drug loads and the immunity for earlier drug loads not authorized by government agents, reflecting a pattern of lying. Under federal law, omitting key information from a document that changes the conclusion constitutes fraud. 

• That Customs agents and supervisors lied during Matthews‘ trial to support the conclusion reached in that document. 

• The falsified document’s conclusion showed a proclivity to lying, including during trial. 

• The memorandum was itself evidence of a Customs cover-up of the authority that Customs and the Department of Justice had given to Matthews. Withholding from Matthews‘ Defense Evidence Included in 1553-page House Report on Customs Mismanagement and Corruption 

As I accumulate evidence for the preparation of my various books, I feel he has several other strong issues to justify vacating the sentence. Another document withheld from Matthews was the evidence included in the 1553-page House report that revealed an epidemic pattern of mismanagement and various forms of corruption in the southwest region of U.S. Customs, as detailed elsewhere within these pages in the section specifically dealing with U.S. Customs. 

Seeking to File an Amicus Curiae 

Brief on Matthews‘ Behalf 

On February 12, 1999, I submitted a motion to the court requesting approval to file an amicus curiae brief and affidavit that addressed other issues not addressed by the trial court or the appellate court, and not known to Matthews’ present attorney. In the motion, I stated that I was a former federal investigator, the head of a coalition of several dozen present and former government agents and whistleblowers, and had accumulated considerable evidence that would show Matthews to be innocent of the charges. I stated that I wanted to include an affidavit that would prove Matthews’ innocence. Further, I stated that I would be presenting information on federal crimes perpetrated by federal personnel and that the report would meet the mandatory requirements of Title 18 USC § 4, which required anyone knowing of a federal crime to report it to a federal judge (or other federal officer). 

Judge Ursula Ungaro-Benages responded on April 15, 1999: “Ordered and adjudged that Rodney Stich’s motion/request to file Amicus Brief and Affidavit is denied.” That denial not only prevented information from being inserted into Matthews‘ motion, but also blocked my reporting of federal crimes under the federal crimes reporting statute, continuing the years of judicial cover-ups that are documented in my various books.[I cannot help but wonder just how long some of these judges throughout this book have been American's,swear some do not seem they are that far removed from the boat,given the names.It sure seems to be a growing tread with both elected and appointed officials.DC]

Continued DOJ Retaliation 

In one of Matthews‘s letters he said: 

I sat through my 1993 trial in bewilderment, wondering how the government could authorize something on one hand and prosecute it with the other hand. I couldn’t believe I could be convicted. It was especially troubling subsequent to the “Clean Slate” meeting in 1990 and in light of all the successful missions I had flown for the government since then. 

The first few years in prison, every time I heard the phone ring, “I would wait with anxious anticipation” for someone to come to my cell to release me and tell me that it was all a big foul-up that had been cleared up. It took me years in prison to finally figure out that the government knew exactly what they were doing because they have been doing this for more than 30 years to hundreds of pilots. 

A Mother’s Tearful Request for Help 

Answering my phone on February 23, 1999, a crying mother asked, “What can I do to help my son?” She had called once before asking if it would help if she went to Washington seeking help. I felt that members of Congress would ignore her as being simply another mother seeking help for a son properly convicted and sentenced to the long prison term that they had legislated. I told her that as soon as the manuscript that I was working on was published, estimating manuscript completion in a few months, with the book in hand, she then had something concrete to use to seek help for her son. 

Seeking Help from Israeli Involved 

in the Iraqi Pilot Defection 

I asked Matthews if, after he was arrested, he contacted Abe, who assisted in the Iraqi pilot defection, in the possibility some help could be coming from that direction. Matthews said, “My ex-wife, Judith, got in touch with Colonel E.G. who had moved up in rank. He told Judith that my prosecution was political and anything the prosecution learned would only be used against me.” I didn’t accept that assessment, but it is obvious that help must come from another source. Possibly this book will help him and many others in somewhat similar positions. 

Matthews Replaced by Another Contract Agent, Who Encountered the Same 

DOJ and Judicial Sabotage 

After Matthews was arrested, another contract pilot filled in, working for Customs in the same southwest region and in Texas. He suffered a similar fate when he was about to bring about the arrest of major Colombian drug lords and after he discovered other high-level corruption among U.S. personnel. Details are shown in the next chapter. 

Government Protected Drug 

Smuggler and Terrorist Again Arrested 

Before we leave this convoluted saga, let’s see how Jimmy Ellard was doing. After the Department of Justice’s persistence resulted in Pablo Escobar's top aide, Jimmy Ellard, being released from prison, Ellard resumed smuggling drugs for himself, and the government, through DEA agents in the New York area. 

This drug trafficking led to the arrest of Ellard and his son William in September 1998 by Florida agents. They were charged with hauling 187 pounds of marijuana. Upon being arrested, Ellard told the Florida agents he was working for DEA agents. This arrest, reported in the media, forced U.S. Attorney Terry Thompson to charge Ellard with a drug-smuggling offense. 

Using the Defense “Government Authority” 

Ellard‘s long-time attorney, William Norris of Coral Gables, Florida, raised the defense of “government authority.” A trial date was set to try Ellard on the drug smuggling charge. Shortly before the trial was to start, Ellard’s attorney produced a 21-minute tape of a telephone conversation between Ellard and DEA Special Agent Eldo Rocco, showing DEA involvement in drug smuggling and DEA knowledge of Ellard’s drug activities. 

DOJ Dropping Charges Against 

Major Drug Trafficker 

Possibly wishing to avoid adverse publicity—including for himself— Department of Justice prosecutor Terrence Thompson dropped charges against Ellard and his son for the drug smuggling charge. 

If the charges had not been dropped, Ellard and his son faced over 25 years in prison, and the drug smuggling activities of government agents and agencies would become known to the small segment of the public reading the Miami Herald newspaper. (Despite the gravity of this arrest, no known newspaper or news service outside of the Miami area carried the story, another example of the media’s withholding of the government’s role in drug trafficking.) 

Where Is the Outrage By the Families? 

The thousands of people in prison on minor drug offenses, and their families, should be more than outraged that they have not been given the same “understanding” as the DOJ prosecutor gave to Ellard and his son. Judge Zloch Was Not So Benevolent Although the Department of Justice dropped charges against Ellard and his son,

Judge Zloch Was Not So Benevolent 

Although the Department of Justice dropped charges against Ellard and his son District Judge William J. Zloch, on April 30, 1999, sentenced Ellard to five years in prison for violating his probation. (The son went free, all charges dropped.) Ellard was still under Judge Zloch’s supervision on the basis of Ellard’s 1990 parole arising out of a cocaine smuggling operation at Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport. Upon hearing of Ellard’s arrest for drug smuggling and subsequent dropping of charges by the Department of Justice, the judge ordered Ellard arrested on the basis of violating parole. 

The judge said, “I don’t care if the President of the United States came down from Washington and recruited Mr. Ellard, I want to see any piece of paper signed by this court authorizing him to work under cover for the DEA.” (In 1997, federal prosecutors in New York asked Judge Zloch to transfer Ellard’s probation to New York. Zloch refused the request in a confidential sealed ruling.) 

The judge’s involvement caused a federal investigation to be conducted, which would not have happened otherwise. The judge demanded to know who defied his order that barred the government from using Ellard for smuggling drugs. Ellard told Customs agent Paul Hilson that he was working with the DEA agents on a drug smuggling operation with three major Mexican drug cartels and Mexican politicians, but that at the last minute they were required to run a smaller test run. 

Major Drug Trafficker and Murderer 

Working for Government 

Ellard started hauling drugs for himself, and also for the DEA. Ellard worked closely with DEA Special Agents Sam Trotman of Camden, New Jersey and Aldo Rocco of New York. These government agents knew, directed, and/or authorized Ellard to smuggle large quantities of drugs into the United States in the 1990s, until the day of Ellard’s arrest. The first reaction of the government and the DEA agents was to deny Ellard was working for them. 

DEA Agent Complaining Of DOJ 

Prosecutor’s Responsibility for 

Drugs Entering the United States 

Ellard tape-recorded some of his conversations with DEA agents showing government agents authorizing him to fly drugs into the United States from Mexico and other locations. On the tape, DEA agent Rocco complained to Ellard that U.S. Attorney Thompson was allowing tons of cocaine to enter the United States. (He also made this possible by blocking Matthews‘ undercover operation against the Pablo Escobar organization.) In one section of the tape Rocco said: 

It’s criminal. It really is. I mean, Thompson‘s no different than a cartel attorney. The bottom line is he’s making it easier for stuff, not only coming to this country, but to get distributed. 

DEA Agent Knew Ellard was 

Smuggling Drugs for Himself 

DEA Agent Rocco said to Ellard, “I’m not going to lie to you, if I was in your position, I wouldn’t do it,” referring to his knowing Ellard was smuggling drugs into the United States. Knowing of a felony and not reporting it is a crime, and in this case, the federal agent’s crime is far worse than those of many incarcerated people. 

During the 20-minute-long taped telephone conversation, Ellard and the DEA agent discussed the various ways to bring cocaine from Mexico. Ellard described air routes from Mexico through other countries that would disguise Mexico as being the source of the drugs. Jamaica was stated as one of the “friendly” countries to use. In another part of the tape the DEA agent was urging Ellard to consummate a 26,000-pound cocaine deal with Mexican drug traffickers. 

DEA Disguising Employing Major 

Drug Kingpin and Murderer 

DEA agents sought to disguise employing Ellard, a major drug trafficker and aviation terrorist, and disguise violating Judge Zloch‘s order, by registering Ellard’s brother as a confidential informant and using the brother as a conduit to Jimmy Ellard. The recorded telephone conversation showed that this was a ruse and that Ellard was in fact working directly for the DEA agents. 

Using “Stand-In” Common to 

Evade Lawful Prohibition 

It is common for U.S. agents to evade the spirit and the clear intent of U.S. law by using stand-in non-U.S. citizens to conduct undercover operations in foreign countries—when such actions on the part of U.S. agents would be prohibited. It is similar to the long-standing disavow practice by the CIA and other government agencies to deny responsibility for their covert and usually illegal operations. 

Avoiding an International 

Incident with Mexico 

It was explained on the tape by Rocco that the Mexican origin of the drugs had to be hidden to avoid any further strain between Mexico and the United States after a major 1998 operation by the United States against Mexican banks and bankers. It was also brought out that any undercover operation involving Mexico had to be made known to Mexican military, police and politicians, and this would make any such operation worthless. 

Prosecutor’s Contradictory Positions 

Matthews‘s lawyer, Clifford Barnard of Bolder, Colorado, filed a motion for a new trial under the provisions of Title 18 U.S.C. § 2251, on the bases of newly discovered evidence. As part of that proceeding, Barnard filed a motion on May 10, 2001, seeking an order that the Justice Department prosecutor be required to produce a letter that the prosecutor had withheld during the trial against Matthews. That letter was sent by Thompson, the prosecutor against Matthews in the 1993 trial, to the prosecutor in New York prior to the Matthews trial. In that New York trial against drug traffickers, the New York prosecutor was using Jimmy Ellard—responsible for over 100 deaths—as a witness for the prosecution! 

The importance of that letter was that Thompson was advising the New York prosecutor that Ellard was an unreliable witness and that he should not be used. Then, after taking the position that Ellard’s testimony could not be trusted, Thompson used Ellard as the main witness against Matthews, stating to the jury that Ellard was a reliable witness—the exact opposite of what Thompson had earlier stated in that letter. 

Justice Department Stonewalling, 

Assisted by Judge Ungaro-Benages 

The court issued an order on May 14, 2001, requiring the prosecutor to produce that letter prior to May 25, 2001. AUSA Thompson ignored the court order, causing Matthews‘ lawyer to file a notice to the court on May 30th, advising that the document had not been presented. 

Possibly sensing the importance of that document and what it might reveal about Justice Department prosecutorial misconduct, Judge Ungaro-Benages did an about-face, depriving Matthews of this document. She signed a June 1, 2001, order canceling all discovery. Matthew’s lawyer then filed a notice of appeal on June 13, 2001. 

Matthews felt that the reasons for the judge’s refusal to require the production of that document was that its production could cause his conviction and that of several of the defendants in the New York trial to be overturned, including the charge related to the Avianca bombing. 

Destined to Die in Prison 

Every attempt to vacate his conviction and prison sentence was denied by federal judges. In 2002, Matthews could look forward to remaining in prison for the remainder of his life, dying in prison. He was one of many victims of the arrogant and corrupt system that is accepted by the American public.

This is where I am finishing,there remains one small chapter here at the link ,scroll page 299. I also am  including links of other books and webpages of the author

source of this book
http://www.druggingamerica.com/EDrugging_America_part.pdf

http://www.rodneystich.com/
http://the-eye.eu/public/concen.org/NEXUS%20Magazine%20Archive%20%281987-2007%29/PDF/Volume%2005%20-%201998/NEXUS%205_06%C6%92%234A91/506.Spooks%26Whistleblowers2.pdf

http://www.unfriendlyskies.com/
http://www.coalitionoftheobvious.com/ESubverting_America_one_part.pdf