RE: LRC 94-634
REED v. YOUNG, et al.
On July 5, 1991, one month shy  of 5 years ago, my wife Janis and
I mustered up the courage to register ourselves as plaintiffs  in
a  civil  law  suit  that  we knew was seeded with political land
mines.  That original lawsuit, LRC 91-414, filed in federal court
in Little Rock, Arkansas,  and  later  to evolve into case number
LRC 94-634, has transformed into an all-consuming  endeavor,  for
not  only  Janis  and me, our team of lawyers, but many concerned
American citizens as well.
We knew all along, as well did Little Rock Federal District Judge
George Howard,  Jr.,  that  this  case  was  not  only  about the
violation of our civil rights, but carried with it the burden  of
re-educating the Court, the jury, and the American people about a
painful period known in the annals of history as Iran-Contra.
Slowly  but  surely,  we and our legal team have been penetrating
layer upon layer  of  government  disinformation  created for the
sole purpose of preventing the truth to  surface  concerning  the
Reagan  Administration's efforts to assist the Nicaraguan Contras
in Arkansas.  The Executive  branch's by-passing of congressional
restraints designed to prohibit or restrict military aid  to  the
Contras  through  the  law  known  as the Boland Amendment was in
great part carried out on  Arkansas  soil with the full knowledge
and complicity of our now-sitting President, Bill Clinton.
Some of the CIA's activities which took place at  Bill  Clinton's
Mena,  Arkansas  were  patriotically driven and justified.  Other
activities, however,  those  which  included  the  importation of
cocaine and money laundering,  can  never  be  justified  in  the
domain  of  the  public.   For  this  reason,  there  has  been a
concerted and bi-partisan effort to keep the subject matter known
as MENA from becoming legitimized through the court process.
Judge Howard's court has at  times  condoned our efforts to amass
non-partisan evidence to not only prove our  case,  but  to  also
re-write  history  and do what Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh
either feared or  failed  to  do  after  conducting a $40 million
investigation:  to tell the truth about the CIA's  activities  in
Mena, Arkansas in the mid-1980s.
To  begin, let me recap our motivations for suing Raymond (Buddy)
Young, then a captain with  the Arkansas State Police and serving
as Bill Clinton's gubernatorial chief of security.  Young is  now
the  director  of  Region  6  of the Federal Emergency Management
Authority (FEMA) and based  at  Denton, Texas.  From his position
at  FEMA  he  still  finds  time  to  protect  Bill  Clinton   by
threatening  former Clinton bodyguards whenever they come forward
with evidence  which  may  embarrass  the  President  or  hint of
We felt then, as we feel now, that Mr. Young was a dangerous  and
unethical man who should never have been allowed to wear a badge.
Yet,  there  he  was  in  1987,  officing  out  of the Governor's
mansion, drawing from the resources of the state of Arkansas, and
behaving as any modern day crime family "enforcer" as he provided
"security" for Arkansas' first family, Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea
Providing security:  what does this encompass?  That is what this
case was destined  to  expose.   Does  it  include destroying the
lives of people who innocently become a  political  liability  to
powerful politicians, namely his boss, Bill Clinton?
Well,  the  senior  federal  judge  in  Wichita, Kansas, Frank G.
Theis, ruled in 1990  that  these "security services" included at
least the orchestration of  phony  criminal  indictments  against
myself  and  Janis.   The  question is, why?  We wanted to answer
that question  in  Judge  Howard's  court.   We  already knew the
answer.  I had worked at  the  Mena  airport  and  could  connect
prominent  Arkansan  power  brokers  and politicians to some very
nefarious activity.  Simply said:   Janice and I were liabilities
and had to be dealt with.
As Judge Theis clearly saw, Young was not  a  solo  actor  as  he
conducted  the  despicable  deed  of  trying  to  wrongfully  and
illegally  cause  innocent  people  to be incarcerated or killed.
Theis concluded that Young had at least one accomplice, Tommy Lee
Baker, of Little  Rock,  Arkansas,  another former Arkansas State
cop and sometimes private detective.  Mr. Baker now sells alcohol
to some of Little Rock's lower socio-economic groups through  his
liquor store on East 9th Street.
Judge  Theis,  the  senior  federal  judge  for  the 10th circuit
district, had witnessed  Young  and  Baker  shuffling through his
court room on more than one occasion between  1988  and  1990  as
they   emerged  as  the  star  witnesses  in  a  U.S.  Government
prosecution designed to imprison  Janis  and  myself for 20 years
each -- for a crime we knew absolutely nothing about.
Yet, Young and Baker,  through  their  own  perjurous  lips,  and
manufactured  material  evidence,  had  convinced  a  Kansas U.S.
Attorney that Janis and  I  were  drug smuggling airplane thieves
who were so "armed and dangerous" that we and our young  children
could have been shot on sight by any overly wary or trigger-happy
law enforcement officer.  Young, by his own admission, fabricated
and authored a criminal profile that presented us as a modern day
Bonnie and Clyde.
But  miraculously,  by  November,  1990, through two and one half
years of effort, a lot of money,  and a little bit of luck, Janis
and I and our criminal defense  lawyers  were  able  to  set  the
record  straight in Judge Theis' courtroom.  The judge exonerated
us of  *all*  alleged  criminal  wrong-doing  by  finding me "not
guilty"   and   at   the   same   time   lashed   out   at    the
government-embraced  accusers.  In the judge's own written words,
sworn statements made by both Baker  and Young were "made with at
least reckless disregard for the truth."
On my day of judgement, November 9, 1990, when I was acquitted, I
quietly vowed to bring Buddy Young and Tommy Baker to justice  --
to  expose  them  for  the dregs that they are -- simply bad cops
hiding  behind  tarnished  badges  and  taking  instructions from
corrupt power-brokers  and  politicians  who  likewise  should be
prosecuted and forced from office to an awaiting prison cell.
But that is not going to happen in Judge Howard's courtroom,  and
not  through  the five years of sweat and effort that Janis and I
have devoted  to  this  uphill  and  horrendously expensive legal
Judge Howard, for reasons unexplained but clearly understood, has
decided to protect these scoundrels,  and  in  so  doing  protect
those  who  assigned  Young and Baker their "targets".  In recent
months Judge Howard has gutted our lawsuit and in the process has
exposed the strings to which  he  is attached -- strings that are
obviously being pulled from Washington, and  more  significantly,
the White House.
So  who  is  Judge Howard protecting?  I can't fathom it would be
the enemies of civil liberties  like  Young  and Baker.  Why is a
federal  judge,  who  up  until  recently  appeared  to   be   so
sympathetic with civil rights issues, ordering me to *not* put on
the  evidence  we  have  amassed  that  can clearly prove WHO was
instructing Young and Baker to violate our civil rights?
The judge, by his  own  order,  has  specifically forbidden me to
introduce the following evidence, evidence my lawyers desperately
need to prove motive on behalf  of  Young  and  Baker  and  other
unnamed co-conspirators.
  Pending  before  the Court is defendants' December 4th motion
  in limine to exclude  the  following matters:  .......  These
  general areas will be referred to as the "Mena"  evidence  or
  .......Even  if  the  Court  were  to find that the complaint
  adequately   states    sufficient    facts    to   make   the
  allegations....... relevant to the alleged overt  actions  of
  these   defendants,  the  probative  value  is  substantially
  outweighed by the dangers  of  unfair prejudice, confusion of
  issues,  the  potential  for  misleading  of  the  jury   and
  considerations  of  undue  delay  and  waste  of  time.   The
  following description will control:
  Any  reference  to the plaintiffs' participation in programs,
  operations or missions  sponsored  by  the  Federal Bureau of
  Investigation or the Central Intelligence Agency or any other
  agency of the United States government, covert or  otherwise,
  as  well as any organization sponsored by or aligned with the
  United  States  government  specifically  including,  but not
  limited to, any programs, operations or missions conducted in
  southwest  Arkansas  regarding  the  training  of  Nicaraguan
  nationals, the funding and support for any factions  involved
  in  the Nicaraguan conflict and any contact or communications
  with operatives or officials  of  the above-named agencies or
  organizations.  Any reference to President or  Governor  Bill
  Clinton   and/or  Hillary  Clinton  and  the  Mena  or  Nella
  Airports.   Any  references  to  Barry  Seale  [sic]  and any
  alleged drug smuggling operation or other references  to  the
  Mena  and  Nella  Airports,  or to a business relationship of
  Barry Seale [sic] and  Dan  Lasater,  Lasater and Company and
  the Arkansas Development and  Finance  Authority  (ADFA)  and
  ADFA's former Director, Bob Nash.
  .......IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 8th day of March, 1996.
                           George Howard, Jr. [signed]
                           United States District Judge
Judge  Howard,  through  his  own  order,  has exposed himself.
Unwittingly, he and  his  integrity  have now been compromised.
By dissecting his order, one can clearly see two things.
1.  Judge Howard is eliminating evidence that he  has  not  yet
even seen.  Most of our 110 witnesses were not deposed prior to
trial.   The  judge, and even worse, the defendants, don't know
what our witnesses would  say  on  the  stand... and that's the
problem,  isn't  it?   Heaven  forbid  the  unadulterated   and
unedited  and unrehearsed and uncensored truth spill out within
the walls of a federal court house.
2.  Judge Howard is  protecting  people and government agencies
not even named in the lawsuit.  This is abundantly  clear  when
one  notes  the  names  of  Bill  Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Dan
Lasater, Bob Nash, and the Arkansas state agency known as ADFA.
Bill, Hillary, Dan,  Bob  and  ADFA  are  not defendants in the
suit.  One can only conclude from this judge's bizarre behavior
that  there  has  been   wrongful,   unethical,   and   illegal
communication   between   the   judge   and  the  White  House.
Otherwise,  these  names  wouldn't   appear  in  the  Order  --
especially  that  of  Bob  Nash.   Bob  Nash  has  never   been
officially   accused  of  any  wrong  doing,  although  I  have
knowledge of same, and this would come out in court.  And where
is Bob Nash? He's in the White House -- Director of Personnel.
As a former  U.S.  Air  Force  intelligence  professional, I am
making the  following  observation:   this  Democrat  appointed
judge is running interference for Bill Clinton in this election
year.   Mena  will not be *allowed* to become a political issue
in the 1996 race  for  the  Presidency.   Judge Howard has been
appointed to be our road block to justice.  At the same time he
is cleverly putting Janis, me and  my  lawyers  in  a  suicidal
posture.   We  can  go  to  trial,  we  just  cannot put on our
And speaking of  suicide,  imagine  the  forces  that are causing
judge Howard to fall on his sword.  When this is over, surely  he
will  have no judicial integrity or respect.  But I guess that is
a price one pays when one is securely employed for life.
And what was the judge's  response  when  my  law team filed a 20
page motion on April 23, 1996 giving him the alternatives to:
  1. Reconsider his March 8th gag order, or
  2. Hear oral arguments on our evidentiary dispute, or
  3. Allow us to appeal this evidentiary dispute  to  the  8th
     Circuit Court of Appeals prior to trial
His succinct response was
Plaintiffs'   April   23rd   motion   for   reconsideration   and
clarification  or, alternatively, for leave to file interlocutory
appeal (#55) is denied for the reasons contained in the March 8th
order and defendants' May 6th response.
.......IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 10th day of May, 1996.
                                  George Howard, Jr. [signed]
                                  United States District Judge
Devastation does  not  come  close  to  describing  our feelings.
After years of dragging  this  case  through  the  federal  civil
justice   system,  Judge  Howard  has  manipulated  us  into  the
following legal posture:  we can go to court but we cannot put on
critical evidence,  therefore  we  will  lose.   That  loss, even
though we could appeal  it  (and  the  appeal  would  consume  at
minimum  another  year  of  our  lives and tens of thousands more
dollars), will be interpreted  by  the  Clinton spin doctors as a
victory.  There will be no mention of the  fact  our  hands  were
tied, and our mouths were gagged, and the so-called "trial" was a
travesty of justice.  They will attempt to convince the media, at
a  critical point in the election process, that Mena is a figment
of my imagination, even though  the Mena evidence was not allowed
to be presented in court.
Proudly being a former member of the U.S. armed services,  I  was
trained  to  win  wars,  not  lose  them.   I refuse to repeat my
Vietnam experience and not be *allowed* to win.
When we rather  naively  filed  the  original complaint, our sons
were ages 4, 6, and 8.  They are now 9,  11,  and  13,  and  have
little  or  no  memory of their parents not being consumed in the
efforts to properly  litigate  this  case.   For  the sake of our
children, and the sanity of our family unit, we are making a very
difficult and painful decision.
Ruefully, after 59 months of a stressful, tumultuous and at times
triumphant struggle, we are being forced  to  conclude  that  the
subject  of Mena will never be presented within the confines of a
federal court room, and  that  Janis  and  I will not see justice
served.  Instead, we now cynically view the federal  court  house
in Little Rock as a monument to federal corruption, and a slap in
the face to all Americans who believe in the separation of powers
provided under the Constitution.
With  tears  in  our eyes, lumps in our throats, and knots in our
stomachs, we are instructing our attorneys to non-suit this case.
To the  hundreds  of  people  who  directly  participated  in our
struggle, we would like to remind  them  of  the  many  victories
achieved  throughout  the  course of our ordeal.  In many ways we
did win -- at least in the court of public opinion.  Our numerous
depositions,  which  were   funded   in   great  part  by  public
contributions, have clearly established the fact that  the  CIA's
activities at Mena, Arkansas *did* take place, and that prominent
politicians  from  both  parties  either  were  complicit  in the
illegal activities that swirled  around this covert operation, or
even worse, were directly involved or benefited.
I would like to think that my personal  hero,  Harry  S.  Truman,
would  be  proud  of  our  accomplishments,  even  in the face of
overwhelming odds.  At times of  strife  he was encouraged by the
average citizen to "Give 'em hell,  Harry!"   I  too  have  heard
voices  who backed me shout, "Give 'em hell, Terry!"  I hope I've
lived up to the task.
And to Raymond (Buddy) Young,  Tommy Lee Baker, and those working
with the Arkansas political establishment who  have  successfully
undermined  my efforts to take this material to trial, I will now
quote from  another  hero  of  mine,  Douglas  McArthur:  "I will
          Terry K. Reed [signed]         3 Jun 96
          ----------------------         --------