By: Donald V. Watkins © Copyrighted and Published on December 1, 2019. The 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner, Aung San Suu Kyi, is a human rights activist in Myanmar (formerly known as Burma). She survived detention, house arrest, and attacks on her life after she joined her country's political resistance in 1988 to fight military rule in Myanmar. The Nobel Prize made her the world's most prominent dissident at the time. "The only real prison is fear," Suu Kyi famously wrote, "and the only real freedom is freedom from fear." No truer words have been spoken. Suu Kyi never feared prison. We all know about dissidents who have been persecuted and jailed. The most famous dissident of all time was Jesus Christ. He was accused of parading without a permit, practicing medicine without a license, making wine without a permit, obstructing the stoning death of an adulterer, trespassing on synagogue property, destruction of gaming property, walking on water without permission, and treason against the recognized Jewish religious hierarchy. Jesus was tried, flogged, and crucified for these crimes. Yet, Jesus never feared imprisonment. Nelson Mandela was targeted by South Africa's all-white government in the early 1960s and charged with treason and other felonious crimes. In 1964, Mandela was sentenced to life imprisonment at the notorious Robben Island prison. Mandela's only real crime was his life-long crusade to secure human and civil rights for black South Africans. After he was freed from prison in 1990, Mandela was awarded the Nobel Peace prize in 1993 (as well as the US Presidential Medal of Freedom and various other awards). He quickly went on to become the first black President of South Africa in 1994. Mandela never feared imprisonment. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., led America's civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. Like Aung San Suu Kyi and Nelson Mandela, Dr. King was also the winner of a Nobel Peace prize for his non-violent protest during the civil rights movement. Dr. King was hated and vilified by the FBI in his leadership role. The FBI proclaimed King as the "most dangerous Negro in America" because of his ability to mobilize the masses of black Americans. Dr. King was assassinated in 1968. Dr. King was arrested on trumped up criminal charges countless times during the civil rights movement, often at the behest of federal agents. Yet, Dr. King never feared imprisonment. Too many national leaders today fear persecution and imprisonment by the forces that oppose human and civil rights for the unprotected classes in our society. This fear controls everything they say and do. It makes them docile, complacent, and self-centered about the important things that matter in life. There will always be those among us who occupy what the Bible calls the "Pharaoh" position in our lives. They will always sit high, but look low. They will always persecute and punish dissidents in the name of administering law and order. These "Pharaohs" have successfully instilled a fear of imprisonment in modern-day dissidents. This is particularly true in the black community where imprisonment has become the "Pharaoh's" politically palatable substitute for the government's acknowledged and documented 1970 national plan to intern black dissidents in concentration camps around the U.S. Implementation of the government's modified internment plan works as follows: The federal government's criminal justice system targets black dissidents; it accuses them of trumped up crimes; it railroads them in federal courts; and it imprisons them, all while telling the white community these dissidents are ordinary criminals. This internment program has been very effective. It is one of the reasons blacks constitute 37.5% of all inmates in federal prisons, while accounting for only 13% of the U.S. population. Sadly, at the time of his death in 1968, 75% of white Americans disliked Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The FBI had successfully demonized Dr. King to white America by portraying him as a "thug", a "filthy animal” and an “evil, abnormal beast". Today, Dr. King is the only non-U.S. President who has a National Memorial dedicated to his life's work on the National Mall in Washington. Ironically, Dr. King never had the opportunity to smell the roses while he was alive. The "Pharaohs" of his time made sure of that. Freedom is a state of mind. The only real prison is fear and too many Americans are serving a life sentence in that prison.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on October 15, 2013 (via Facebook); Updated and Republished on February 27, 2024; Updated on September 19, 2024 An Editorial Opinion Long before Sean "Diddy" Comb’s indictment was unsealed in a New York federal court on Tuesday, a lot of readers had asked me to describe the strategy for winning high-profile criminal cases where losing is NOT an acceptable option. Here was my strategy for winning such cases when I actively practiced law:   These difficult cases require a different attitude and a non-traditional roadmap to victory. Representing a public scoundrel or celebrity outcast forces the legal advocate to sail against the prevailing winds to reach safe passage and freedom for the accused. The legal knowledge, skills and abilities for this journey are not found in law books and are not taught in law schools. They come solely from a lawyer’s baptism under fire in the courtroom.   The journey to freedom begins by comprehending the full dynamics of the forces being leveraged against the accused. These forces combine to form a complex blend of political, social, and media spin.  This blend, together with the ambitious personal agendas of prosecutors and judges, prejudicially stacks the deck against the outcast defendant.   Prosecutors and judges alike seem to feel obligated to eagerly and frequently dispense a steady stream of lessons to this class of defendants.     Most criminal defense lawyers are merely technicians, not strategists. You cannot win a high-profile criminal case without a strategist on your defense team. There is no exception to this rule.   A strategist, who may or may not be a lawyer, focuses solely on identifying those human factors necessary to influence twelve ordinary citizens sitting as trial jurors to allow an accused stranger to walk out of the courtroom as a free man or woman, no matter what the prevailing public opinion is, nor how poisonous the atmosphere in the courtroom may be.   Jurors are human beings. They make their ultimate decision based on what seems to be fair and makes common sense to them.  Human emotion and behavior always have a more lasting impact on jurors than courtroom evidence or jury instructions.   A Practical Guide for Winning High-Profile Criminal Cases Where Losing is NOT an Acceptable Option   Favorably impacting human emotion and behavior begins in the court of public opinion. The criminal process and media coverage typically demonize the high-profile defendant. This must be quickly neutralized through a series of steps.     Netflix presented an abbreviated version of my strategy for winning a high-profile criminal case where losing is not an acceptable option in a May 11, 2020 documentary series titled, " Trial by Media ,"  Episode No. 4 " King Richard ."  Here is the full strategy.   First, the accused must be made available and accessible to the media for frank talks about the case. In Diddy's case, his communications with the media must be in writing and must be plentiful. Diddy's pretrial detention limits his ability to communicate with the outside world. Despite this limitation, Diddy can write and mail letters to various media organizations five days per week. He should do so. Testifying in the court of public opinion is much easier than testifying in the court of law. While the accused may not win complete vindication in the media, he/she can negate much of the ill-will generated in the sea of hate.   This is the only forum available to the accused where he/she can openly humanize himself/ herself. This forum is also the first place where his/her advocate can effectively undermine the government’s theory of the case, attack the government witnesses, and criticize prosecutors, law enforcement officials, and others working in concert with them. Prosecutors and judges are very limited in what they can say and do in the court of public opinion.   There are no evidentiary or procedural rules in the court of public opinion. This works to the benefit of the accused. In this court, the outcast has the most advantages. He/she must use them or risk losing them.   Second, victory for the outcast defendant only comes when the defense puts the government under the glaring light of a public microscope. The government will always look worse under the microscope than any outcast defendant.   Americans know that their government will mislead them, lie to them, abuse its power, act in the political interests of high-ranking political officials, and mistreat ordinary citizens. Officials often bend the rules and frequently cheat to win in high-profile cases. Exposing this nasty government underbelly will propel the accused along the long road to victory.   Third, defense counsel must exploit the obvious targets of opportunity in the government’s case. For example, prosecutors must cut disgusting deals with unsavory characters. These people eventually become cooperating government witnesses. In Diddy's case, some of them are unindicted co-defendants. The question is never whether these witnesses are lying, but how many lies they have told and to whom they have told them.   Openly count the lies in front of the trial jury. I always started the count with the question, “Have you ever lied to anybody about anything?” The answer is always, “Yes." It is easy to get this type of witness to admit to a pattern and practice of lying to a variety of people about material aspects of the case on hundreds of occasions (which I would always depicted and count on a flip chart in front of the jury). Once the witness establishes his/her solid credentials as an accomplished liar, nothing else they have to say matters.   Fourth, contrary to what they say publicly, prosecutors always shape their case strategy and evidence to get the man or woman at the top of an organization. The skilled advocate must demonstrate how they target people, not crimes. This demonstration requires more courage than brainpower.   Fifth, audio and video evidence will always be more beneficial to the accused than the government. These recordings are always selective and never complete. Simply focus on what is not recorded and why. Incomplete recordings are akin to books with missing pages or chapters. They have little real value to the reader within this context. Sixth, FBI interview techniques are a goldmine for a criminal defendant. Jurors are usually shocked when they learn that the FBI does not tape record its interviews with witnesses. Instead, the FBI relies upon agents to make notes (called “302” statements) that are not shared with the witness at the conclusion of the interview, meaning the witness cannot ensure their accuracy.   Over time, the agent’s 302 notes tend to mutate in the government’s favor, especially in cases where there are multiple interviews with the same witness.   Seventh, the cozy relationship between prosecutors and trial judges is compounded by their political ties to high-ranking public officials, which ultimately provides enough fertile ground for questioning the integrity of any case when properly developed first in the media.   Eighth, the best defense is always a relentless offense . The accused must start this offense as soon as he/she is the target of a criminal investigation. The accused must go public first, fast and hard. He/she must convey his or her side of the story in the court of public opinion. He/she must make the government the enemy by exposing everything he or she knows about the investigation and questioning its legitimacy.   Prosecutors have little experience in playing defense in the court of public opinion. Remember, this is a campaign for the accused’s freedom. This campaign is a long and hard process, not a one-time press conference where the defendant’s lawyer simply denies the charges after an indictment is announced.   Ninth, the outcast defendant must use the media to define his or her humanity -- it is important that the public to knows the accused on a personal level. Who is the private person? Everybody knows the public persona; after all, PR experts carefully crafted this public image over many years.   Define the accused’s personal value system, people skills, circle of family and true friends (who may not be rich and well-known), and acts of kindness (not tax-deductible charity) to ordinary people. Downplay charitable acts and foundation giving for privileged groups like the arts community, opera, symphony, zoo, botanical gardens, and museums. Highlight examples of kindness where money was not the lynchpin for support and generosity.   Finally, the accused should spend no time worrying about his/her social or professional redemption. It will not occur, even when he/she is acquitted. The sole focus must be on freedom. It is the only outcome that matters.   Epilogue   Of course, the successful implementation of my Guide for winning high-profile criminal cases where losing is not an acceptable option depends upon the accused having a trial judge who is NOT on the take or is not otherwise compromised.  Today, the scales of justice are rarely balanced.  What is more, a growing number of state and federal judges have zero integrity or respect for the law.  Many of them are nothing more than “ political whores ” who will gladly railroad an accused person in a “ rigged ” trial for the pure thrill of carrying out a courtroom lynching.   That said, many judges will still give an outcast defendant a fair shot at winning his/her case.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on October 15, 2013 (via Facebook); Updated on February 27, 2024 An Editorial Opinion Long before Donald Trump’s first criminal indictment in March 2023, a lot of readers asked me to describe the strategy for winning high-profile criminal cases where losing is NOT an acceptable option.  Here was my strategy for winning such cases when I actively practiced law:   These difficult cases require a different attitude and a non-traditional roadmap to victory. Representing a public scoundrel or celebrity outcast forces the legal advocate to sail against the prevailing winds to reach safe passage and freedom for the accused. The legal knowledge, skills and abilities for this journey are not found in law books and are not taught in law schools. They come solely from a lawyer’s baptism under fire in the courtroom.   The journey to freedom begins by comprehending the full dynamics of the forces being leveraged against the accused. These forces combine to form a complex blend of political, social, and media spin.  This blend, together with the ambitious personal agendas of prosecutors and judges, prejudicially stacks the deck against the outcast defendant.   Prosecutors and judges alike seem to feel obligated to eagerly and frequently dispense a steady stream of lessons to this class of defendants.     Most criminal defense lawyers are merely technicians, not strategists. You cannot win a high-profile criminal case without a strategist on your defense team. There is no exception to this rule.   A strategist, who may or may not be a lawyer, focuses solely on identifying those human factors necessary to influence twelve ordinary citizens sitting as trial jurors to allow an accused stranger to walk out of the courtroom as a free man or woman, no matter what the prevailing public opinion is, nor how poisonous the atmosphere in the courtroom may be.   Jurors are human beings. They make their ultimate decision based on what seems to be fair and makes common sense to them.  Human emotion and behavior always have a more lasting impact on jurors than courtroom evidence or jury instructions.   A Practical Guide for Winning High-Profile Criminal Cases Where Losing is NOT an Acceptable Option   Favorably impacting human emotion and behavior begins in the court of public opinion. The criminal process and media coverage typically demonize the high-profile defendant. This must be quickly neutralized through a series of steps.     Netflix presented an abbreviated version of my strategy for winning a high-profile criminal case where losing is not an acceptable option in a May 11, 2020 documentary series titled, " Trial by Media ,"  Episode No. 4 " King Richard ."  Here is the full strategy.   First, the accused must be made available and accessible to the media for frank talks about the case. Testifying in the court of public opinion is much easier than testifying in the court of law. While the accused may not win complete vindication in the media, he/she can negate much of the ill-will generated in the sea of hate.   This is the only forum available to the accused where he/she can openly humanize himself/ herself. This forum is also the first place where his/her advocate can effectively undermine the government’s theory of the case, attack the government witnesses, and criticize prosecutors, law enforcement officials, and others working in concert with them. Prosecutors and judges are very limited in what they can say and do in the court of public opinion.   There are no evidentiary or procedural rules in the court of public opinion. This works to the benefit of the accused. In this court, the outcast has the most advantages. He/she must use them or risk losing them.   Second, victory for the outcast defendant only comes when the defense puts the government under the glaring light of a public microscope. The government will always look worse under the microscope than any outcast defendant.   Americans know that their government will mislead them, lie to them, abuse its power, act in the political interests of high-ranking political officials, and mistreat ordinary citizens. Officials often bend the rules and frequently cheat to win in high-profile cases. Exposing this nasty government underbelly will propel the accused along the long road to victory.   Third, defense counsel must exploit the obvious targets of opportunity in the government’s case. For example, prosecutors must cut disgusting deals with unsavory characters. These people eventually become cooperating government witnesses. The question is never whether these witnesses are lying, but how many lies they have told and to whom they have told them.   Openly count the lies in front of the trial jury. I always started the count with the question, “Have you ever lied to anybody about anything?” The answer is always, “Yes." It is easy to get this type of witness to admit to a pattern and practice of lying to a variety of people about material aspects of the case on hundreds of occasions (which I would always depicted on a flip chart in front of the jury). Once the witness establishes his/her solid credentials as an accomplished liar, nothing else they have to say matters.   Fourth, contrary to what they say publicly, prosecutors always shape their case strategy and evidence to get the man or woman at the top of an organization. The skilled advocate must demonstrate how they target people, not crimes. This demonstration requires more courage than brainpower.   Fifth, audio and video evidence will always be more beneficial to the accused than the government. These recordings are always selective and never complete. Simply focus on what is not recorded and why. Incomplete recordings are akin to books with missing pages or chapters. They have little real value to the reader within this context. Sixth, FBI interview techniques are a goldmine for a criminal defendant. Jurors are usually shocked when they learn that the FBI does not tape record its interviews with witnesses. Instead, the FBI relies upon agents to make notes (called “302” statements) that are not shared with the witness at the conclusion of the interview, meaning the witness cannot ensure their accuracy.   Over time, the agent’s 302 notes tend to mutate in the government’s favor, especially in cases where there are multiple interviews with the same witness.   Seventh, the cozy relationship between prosecutors and trial judges is compounded by their political ties to high-ranking public officials, which ultimately provides enough fertile ground for questioning the integrity of any case when properly developed first in the media.   Eighth, the best defense is always a relentless offense . The accused must start this offense as soon as he/she is the target of a criminal investigation. The accused must go public first, fast and hard. He/she must convey his or her side of the story in the court of public opinion. He/she must make the government the enemy by exposing everything he or she knows about the investigation and questioning its legitimacy.   Prosecutors have little experience in playing defense in the court of public opinion. Remember, this is a campaign for the accused’s freedom. This campaign is a long and hard process, not a one-time press conference where the defendant’s lawyer simply denies the charges after an indictment is announced.   Ninth, the outcast defendant must use the media to define his or her humanity - it is important that the public to knows the accused on a personal level. Who is the private person? Everybody knows the public persona; after all, PR experts carefully crafted this public image over many years.   Define the accused’s personal value system, people skills, circle of family and true friends (who may not be rich and well-known), and acts of kindness (not tax-deductible charity) to ordinary people. Downplay charitable acts and foundation giving for privileged groups like the arts community, opera, symphony, zoo, botanical gardens, and museums. Highlight examples of kindness where money was not the lynchpin for support and generosity.   Finally, the accused should spend no time worrying about his/her social or professional redemption. It will not occur, even when he/she is acquitted. The sole focus must be on freedom. It is the only outcome that matters.   Epilogue   Of course, the successful implementation of my Guide for winning high-profile criminal cases where losing is not an acceptable option depends upon the accused having a trial judge who is NOT on the take or is not otherwise compromised.  Today, the scales of justice are rarely balanced.  What is more, a growing number of state and federal judges have zero integrity or respect for the law.  Many of them are nothing more than “ political whores ” who will gladly railroad an accused person in a “ rigged ” courtroom trial.   That said, many judges will still give an outcast defendant a fair shot at winning his/her case.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 18, 2024 An Editorial Opinion   Tonight, Sean “Diddy” Combs is spending his third night in a New York federal detention center. Diddy is charged in a three-count federal indictment with racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, and transporting sex workers across state lines to engage in prostitution.     Yesterday, the U.S. government released a " Detention Letter " that lays out a summary of the criminal case against Sean Combs. The charges against him are very serious. The criminal investigation in Diddy’s case is ongoing.   Combs, who is 54 years old, may spend the rest of his life in federal prison if he is convicted on the charges against him. Right now, Diddy is losing every legal battle in the case.   Combs is represented by New York Attorney Marc Agnifilo, who has represented a lot of companies and people.  However, Agnifilo only lists two acquittals in criminal cases and one non-prosecution agreement on his résumé .  Agnifilo’s win-loss record in jury trials cannot be ascertained from his published résumé. Diddy was denied bail by the magistrate judge assigned to his case, as well as his trial judge.  He will remain in detention pending a trial. Diddy is housed in a segregated part of the detention center called the “Special Housing Unit” or the “Hole.”  This is a horrible place to be detained.   Many of Diddy’s high-profile friends, employees, and business associates have received so-called "Kastigar Letters" of immunity from prosecution in exchange for their grand jury testimony against him.  Diddy's vast network of friends, employees, and associates are fleeing his friendship circle at Olympic speeds.     All the recipients of Kastigar Letters have lawyered up. Some of them are unindicted co-conspirators. Whatever loyalty they had to Diddy before his indictment is now gone.   Diddy’s chances of experiencing freedom again are bleak.  The mountain of evidence gathered during the raids on his Miami and Los Angeles mansions was massive.  The cooperating government witnesses against Diddy are plentiful.  The electronic evidence is damning.   Diddy has legal representation that, in my opinion, is woefully inadequate for the level of courtroom fighting that is required to win his case.  Diddy’s life is on the line, but I doubt whether Diddy knows his lawyer’s win-loss record in jury trials.     Most criminal defendants NEVER ask this simple question.  Instead, they rely on professional reputations that are crafted and enhanced by highly-paid slick PR firms and meaningless word-of-mouth referrals from others in their inner circle.   In the end, I expect Diddy’s lawyer to negotiate a plea deal for 10 to 15 years in federal prison after Diddy has been paid tens of millions in legal fees.  A desperate and dejected Diddy will likely take this deal rather than gamble on a life sentence.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 17, 2024 An Editorial Opinion There has never been a war in history where 80% of the country has been destroyed, 100% of the population displaced, and 50% of the deaths are children. By any definition of war, this is genocide.   I also agree with  Prof. Noam Chomsky’s statement of the Israel-Hamas War :   “The Israeli decision to rain death and destruction on Gaza, to use lethal weapons of the modern battlefield on a largely defenseless civilian population, is the final phase in a decades-long campaign to ethnically- cleanse Palestinians.    Israel uses sophisticated attack jets and naval vessels to bomb densely- crowded refugee camps, schools, apartment blocks, mosques, and slums to attack a population that has no air force, no air defense, no navy, no heavy weapons, no artillery units, no mechanized armor, no command in control, no army... and calls it a war. It is not a war, it is murder.”   Of course, Prof. Chomsky is a highly respected Jewish scholar.    The problem in the Israel is not the Jewish people.  For the most part, they are wonderful human beings who are demanding an end to the War.  The problem in Israel is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  He is a ruthless, corrupt, “thug” who is despised by many Jews inside and outside of Israel. However, a host of top politicians in Washington fear him. Netanyahu has used a massive amount of Jewish campaign money to place a chokehold on the political positions of Vice President Kamala Harris and Donald Trump with respect to the Israel-Hamas War.  There is not a dime’s worth of difference between these two politicians on this subject.  Harris and Trump are appeasing an internationally condemned thug who does not deserve anyone's respect.   Harris and Trump fully support Netanyahu’s relentless campaign of genocide against the Palestinian population in Gaza.  Both of them are on Netanyahu’s political leash and Netanyahu walks them like he walks his dogs.   The U.S. government has confirmed and documented the genocide that America funds and supports with military equipment.  For the right amount of Jewish campaign money, Harris and Trump are committed to supplying the weapons of war that Netanyahu needs to slaughter tens of thousands of Palestinian children.   For critics who say Israel’s campaign of genocide is necessary, I remind them of Israel’s conduct in “ Operation Wraft of God ” (1972 to 1979).  This Israeli campaign of retaliation against the terrorists who massacred Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich confirms that Israel knows how to neutralize terrorists without inflicting massive collateral damage upon innocent civilians.  “Operation Wraft of God” had only one innocent civilian casualty in its 7 years of operation, and it was 100% effective.   To be clear, Israel has an absolute right to exist in the territory once known as “Palestine.”  It also has a right to defend itself from terrorist attacks.  However, Israel doe NOT have a right to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.    At the end of the day, it is important for me to be on the right side of history regarding the Israel-Hamas war.    Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was on the right side of history with respect to the Vietnam war long before it was popular in the U.S. to oppose the war.  Dr. King caught pure hell from Americans in 1967 for opposing the war.  The passage of time showed that Dr. King was right on the Vietnam war issue.   As Israel's campaign of genocide continues in Gaza, I am reminded that the flow of Jewish campaign dollars to top American politicians is more important than human lives, particularly when the lives are Palestinian children of color.    I knew that Donald Trump would tolerate genocide because he does not care about anybody other than himself.  If Trump has a conscience or soul, nobody has found it. I also knew that Joe Biden would tolerate genocide because he is nothing more than an old, senile, cadaver-like, shell of a man whose time on the Washington political scene has come and gone.    I now know that Kamala Harris will tolerate genocide in Gaza because she is hustling for campaign money. As such, Harris does not want to offend her Jewish campaign donors by working to stop Netanyahu's campaign of genocide. As for me, genocide is not a political issue. It is a human rights issue. I have never compromised my values on human rights issues. And, I have never been "for sale."

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 15, 2024 An Editorial Opinion The external and internal polling data available to my group of independent voter influencers suggest that the 2024 race for president may be the closest election for the White House in U.S. history. To date, there is no clear leader in the national polls. This is particularly true in the seven swing states. Endorsements by celebrities like Taylor Swift, Martha Stewart, and George Clooney have done little to move the needle in Kamala Harris's favor. Likewise, Donald Trump's numbers and percentages in the polls appear to be stagnant.   Our group of independent voter influencers has developed a unique political infrastructure to deliver a decisive block of undecided independent voters in the seven swing states (i.e., Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina, and Wisconsin) to the presidential candidate of our choice.    Our state-of-the-art “block voting” delivery system is next generation political infrastructure.  We are confident that it will serve as a model voter delivery system in the November election, as well as close presidential elections in the future where losing is not an acceptable option.   There are more than 90 electoral votes across these seven swing states we have targeted.  These states will determine whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will become the 47th President of the United States.   Due to the closeness of the race, our group of independents has decided to conduct one more round of internal polling in the seven swing states before announcing our preferred candidate for president.  As such, we are deferring our planned presidential endorsement announcement until the end of September.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 12, 2024 Don Cornelius died from a gunshot wound to the head on February 1, 2012, at the age of 75.  His death was the first time I had lost a close friend to suicide.  It hurt me deeply.   Don called me the night before he died.  I was taking a shower in my Atlanta condo and missed his call.  After I exited the shower, I saw that Don had called me. I meant to call Don back immediately, but I got distracted by a litany of other incoming calls as I was getting dressed for an event I had to attend that night.   When I got home from the event later that night, I forgot to call Don before falling asleep.  When I awoke the next morning, it was all over the news.  Don Cornelius had killed himself.   I was shocked and angry at myself for not calling Don back the night before.  I had talked Don out of his emotional despair and depression on three prior occasions and knew I could have done it again.  I could always tell from the tone of Don’s voice and the subjects we discussed whenever he was depressed.   I failed in my friendship with Don when I did not call him back after I exited the shower.  By 4 a.m. PST the next morning, Don sank into a deep state of depression over his deteriorating health issues and ended his life.   How We Met   Don and I met in 2002 while I was trying to buy the Anaheim Angels Major League Baseball team from the Disney Company.  At the time, Don was raising $300 million to launch SoulTrainCybervision.com and the Soul Train Channel .    UBS Paine Webber (Beverly Hills Office) represented Don in his $300 million capital raise. UBS Paine Webber (New York Office) had committed to raising $150 million of the $200 million I needed to buy the Angels. I agreed to participate in Don’s capital raise because he was taking the bold steps necessary to launch his Soul Train channel on Cable TV at a time when Blacks deemed themselves lucky if they had a show on TV.   Don had already developed an impressive array of diversified programming content for his proposed Soul Train channel, which would run 24 hours per days, seven days per week.   Don needed one of the major cable carriers to platform his Soul Train channel. Don approached Charter Communications, Comcast, Liberty Media, and Adelphia Communications with his Soul Train channel.  All of them eventually turned him down.  They were willing to put a Black TV show in their programming lineup, but they unwilling to give a Black content creator like Don access to his own 24-hour cable channel.   Don also gave me a draft of his autobiography titled, “ Soul Train Memoirs ,” an original story and screenplay by Don Cornelius.  We intended to co-produce a movie from Don’s screenplay. From 2007 to 2009, Don helped me to advance in the competition to acquire the St. Louis Rams National Football League team (now known as the L.A. Rams). He was one of my business advisors and biggest cheerleaders.   Why We Bonded   The friendship between Don and me was birthed out a deep and abiding respect for each other’s achievements in business.  Don shared his knowledge of the professional sports world with me and I shared my institutional knowledge of the cable TV industry with him.  Even though Don was 12 years older than me, we developed a close business and personal friendship.  Don was a Chicago native who grew up in the city during Black Chicagoan’s push for diversity, equity, and inclusion in employment opportunities and business enterprises.  He was a TV news reporter who focused on Black economic empowerment issues before he launched Soul Train in 1970.      Soul Train evolved into the longest-running program in TV history. Don created it, owned the intellectual property associated with the show, executive produced the show, and successfully syndicated it around the world.   I attended Southern Illinois University from 1966 to 1970.  I also lived and worked in Chicago during the summer months while I was in college.   The Chicago connection between Don and me was deep.  We both knew all the Black powerbrokers in Chicago during the late 1960s.   After our initial meeting in Los Angeles, I chilled out with Don every time I was in L.A. between 2002 and 2012.  I turned down all of Don’s offers to go with him to the annual Soul Train Awards event and other celebrity outings.  I preferred to hang out privately.   When we hung out, it was just the two of us.  We talked about our families, our business operations, and our pursuit of three high-profile commercial projects that broke the color barrier.   I counseled Don through a couple of high-profile legal matters and several health issues in his life.   One was a domestic abuse situation involving his second wife.  Don claimed she was cheating on him.  I convinced him to end the marriage and let her go, which he did.    I also hooked Don up with my brother Levi to give him a famous and well-respected advocate within the medical community. This hookup gave Don readily available, 24-hour access to the best doctors in the world to work on his health issues.   Don’s legal and health issues took a heavy emotional toll on his personal and business life.   My Pain from Don's Suicide Has Never Ended   My pain from Don’s suicide has never ended.  I have never forgiven myself for the lapse in my friendship with Don.  I should have called him back before I fell asleep on the night he callled me.   To this day, I miss Don and the special friendship bond we shared.  He was a great American, a visionary, a multimedia business icon, and a wonderful human being. As a final tribute to this great man, I will bring Don's " Soul Train Memoirs " to life as a feature film . I still have my copy of the screenplay that Don sent me. It's his story in his own words.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 13, 2024 Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice released its " National Crime Victimization Survey .”  The survey found that violent crime in America was up 37% from 2020 to 2023, rape was up 42%, robbery was up 63%, and stranger violence was up 61% .   No public official has claimed that these crime statistics are inaccurate.  No public official is willing to accept the blame for the rise in violent crime. As expected, no public official has advanced a basket of practical and effective solutions for curbing violent crime.   In the 25 years since the school shooting at Columbine High School, more than 338,000 students in the U.S. have experienced gun violence at school.  Yet, we are still waiting for a practical solution to school massacres.  Today, banning books in public school libraries appears to be a more important priority than protecting the lives of our school children.   The law enforcement function in America has become more politicized and weaponized today than ever before.  This paradigm exists whether the U.S. president, governor, U.S. attorney general, state attorney general, local district attorney, and mayor in power is a Republican or Democrat.  Anyone who claims otherwise is bullshitting the public.   Meanwhile, Americans are suffering from rising violent crime that is undeniable. The rise in violent crime seems to be uncontrollable.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 11, 2024 An Editorial Opinion Last night’s presidential debate was something special to watch.  For the first time since Donald Trump came down the escalator in Trump Tower in August 2015 and announced he was running for president, an opponent stood on the debate stage who had the skills, substance, style, and courage to thoroughly kick his ass during a presidential debate.   Kamala Harris used her prosecutorial skills to kick the ass of a ruthless bully -- a man who has gratutitously degraded, humiliated, and destroyed the dignity of countless opponents for the presidency.  Harris administered a good, old-fashion, non-stop, ass-kicking to Trump, from the beginning to the end.  Anybody who thinks otherwise is living in an alternative, re-imaged, reality.   This was the kind of ass-kicking a prosecutor administers to a criminal when she stands up for the victims of his serial crimes.  Harris completely discombobulated this bully, who has made a career out of trashing people -- solely because he could.   Say what you will about Kamala Harris’s positions on the policy issues covered during the debate, but she showed the courage that a coward like Ted Cruz lacked when Donald Trump called his wife “ugly” and trashed Cruz'a father during the 2016 presidential debates. Harris showed the courage that Marco Rubio lacked when Trump pissed in Rubio’s face, belitttled his stature as a Cuban American, and mocked Rubio during the 2016 debate night.  Harris showed the courage that Lindsey Graham lacked when Trump described how Graham would drop to his knees and perform political fellatio on Trump when begging for campaign contributions. Finally, Harris showed Nikki Haley, a fellow American of color, how to fight a bully by standing up for the people you profess to love, including your husband and his military service.   The nation was thirsty for a presidential candidate who would check Donald Trump and his non-stop bullying. Last night, Kamala Harris quenched that thirst.  No wonder Donald Trump exited the stage after the debate without shaking Kamala Harris’s hand. He's a sore, bitter, loser! Congratulations to Kamala Harris for a job well done!

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 8, 2024 As we expected, the race for president has tightened.  According to a New York Times/Siena poll released today, former President Donald Trump leads Vice President Kamala Harris 48 to 47. The margin of error is +/- 2.8 points.   Campaign ads and partisan social media influencers have not been able to move the needle very much with undecided independent voters for Trump or Harris.   We expected as much.   Our group of independent voter influencers has developed a unique political infrastructure to deliver a decisive block of undecided independent voters in the seven swing states (i.e., Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina, and Wisconsin) to the presidential candidate of our choice.  The inaugural test of our innovative independent voter delivery system will occur in connection with the 2024 presidential race.  We are not funded by either candidate or party. We are independents.   Neither party can blunt the impact of our voter delivery system because they have never encountered it before. It is completely legal and next generation. We are confident that it will move the needle and serve as a model voter delivery system for future elections where losing is not an acceptable option.   There are more than 90 electoral votes across these seven swing states we have targeted.  These states will determine whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump occupy the White House in January 2025.   We will announce our endorsement of a presidential candidate on September 15, 2024 .

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 6, 2024   An Editorial Opinion Today, former President Donald Trump criticized his attorneys at a post-hearing press conference following the appeal of writer E. Jean Carroll’s defamation judgment against him.     “ I’m disappointed in my legal team, I’ll be honest with you ,” Trump told reporters at the Trump Tower press briefing.   He should be.  Since the raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property in 2022, I have written several articles about Trump’s weak and inexperienced legal teams.  Trump could have done better in picking his lawyers if he had been blindfolded first and then selected them from the phonebook.   On August 22. 2023 , I called Trump’s lawyers “ clueless .”  I also described how they were " lost in the weeds " of Trump’s high-profile cases.    On August 27, 2023 , I described how Trump’s lawyers blew huge opportunities to win his Georgia RICO case.   On August 28, 2023 , I described how Trump’s lawyers were getting hammered in court .   On September 6, 2023 , the situation was so bad and humiliating that I felt compelled to offer Trump some free advice how to pick lawyers.   On October 18, 2023 , I declared Trump’s lawyers to be “ losers .”   The victories Donald Trump has won in his Miami classified documents case and his U.S. Supreme Court immunity case have little to do with world-class lawyering.  In those cases, the judges were on Trump's side based upon his status as the leader of the MAGA political movement .    If Trump wins the presidency, he will nominate Miami-based U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon to the first vacant seat on the Supreme Court.  She has exhibited the highest form of political loyalty to Trump.   What is more, the six MAGA justices on the Supreme Court have demonstarted that they are duty-bound to protect Trump.  They will always find a way to help Trump in the federal court system.   I am not surprised that Trump is disappointed with his lawyers.  All of them have professional reputations that were crafted by PR firms.  None of them is known for amassing an impressive win-loss record in the courtroom.   None of them possesses the talent level or experience that would have qualified them to make my former litigation teams.   Interestingly, Hunter Biden discovered the same thing about Attorney Abbe Lowell , whom I fired in 2005 from the Richard Scrushy criminal defense team.  Lowell has a win-loss track-record that qualifies him as a “loser,” as well.

By: Donald V. Watkins Copyrighted and Published on September 5, 2024 An Editorial Opinion Yesterday, a 14-year-old student at Apalachee High School in Barrow County, Georgia shot and killed two teachers ( Richard "Ricky" Aspinwall and Christina Irmie ) and two students ( Mason Schemerhorn and Christian Angulo ). The shooter, Colt Gray , also wounded nine other victims at the school.  Gray used an AR platform-style weapon in this mass shooting. Shockingly, Apalachee High School, with an enrollment of 1,900 students , did NOT have metal detectors for security purposes on its campus. Gray surrendered when he was confronted by a school resource officer. He now faces murder charges, for which he will be tried as an adult. Georgia is a National Leader in Book-Banning   Georgia is No.12 out of the 50 states that implement book bans in public schools.  Georgia jumped into the thorny thicket of book-banning after state lawmakers passed Georgia's SB 226 in 2022, which gives school principals 10 days to address requests to remove a book and determine its obscenity   The Barrow County School Board publishes this statement on its website regarding books: “ Books can be dangerous. The best ones should be labeled, 'This could change your life' .”   There is nothing in the “ School Safety ” portal of the Barrow County School Board’s website that educates parents, teachers, and students about: (a) the dangers of active shooters in school, (b) protocols for deterring and/or dealing with active shooters on campus, (c) lockdown plans during mass shootings on campus, and (d) in-school “early warning” public safety programs to minimize the occurrence of school shootings.   For those who claim that making this life-saving information availaable to the public would somehow aid would-be shooters, I disagree. Preventive measures like the ones referenced above actually enhance the ability of K-12 students to survive a mass shooting incident.   Guns Kill Students; Books Do Not!   Each day 12 children die from gun violence in America.  Another 32 are shot and injured.   Since the shooting at Columbine High School  in 1999, more than 338,000 students in the U.S. have experienced gun violence at school. [ Click here to read the list of deadly school shooting since Columbine .]   Yesterday, Barrow County School Board members saw for themselves that guns are far more dangerous than banned books .   To my knowledge, no book has ever killed a K-12 student in America.  Guns and assault rifles have slaughtered plenty of them.   No school in America has had to close its doors because “dangerous” books were in the library.  Parents of K-12 students have never had to plan funerals and memorial services for deceased students because “dangerous” books killed them.  No student’s life has been placed in jeopardy because of a “dangerous” book on campus.   The time, money, and resources that Barrow County School Board members and administrative staff personnel allocated to banning books could have been best spent studying and implementing the additional ways to enhance the safety of their K-12 students during an active shooter situation on campus.   The grieving relatives of the four deceased victims who were shot and killed yesterday at Apalachee High School do not want or need the customary “ thoughts and prayers ” of public officials who have repeatedly failed to keep their loved ones safe.  Moving forward, Georgia public officials should shift the time, money, and resources they allocate to book-banning into enhancing the public safety of their K-12 students.