Lesson 1

First Principle: Do Not Break the Law!

This principle is not intended to mean that you will never be charged with breaking the law. If you stand up to the Jew-Communist-Nigger hell-raising tearing up America, you will wind up not only charged, but sometimes in jail, in spite of all innocence.

It also does not mean you should be afraid to picket, speak or otherwise stand up legally to oppose treason and racial ruination, even if told these things are "illegal". I myself have been arrested and jailed many times for these things. Local areas, especially in the South, often have un-Constitutional and illegal restrictions, and you will usually be too poor or too hard-pressed to challenge such illegal restrictions.

Nor does this principle of never breaking the law mean that you should sit idly by while some Jew or nigger viciously insults our Republic, our religion, our flag, our women or our race. More and more these arrogant Communists and rats are actually doing these things, and I am not ashamed to admit that no decent American is so afraid of an assault charge that he will permit such intolerable insults and attacks on our holiest traditions, institutions, and especially our women. When such things happen, our men often are unable to control themselves, and it is worth any jail time we have to do to stand up for our country and our race against traitors. But I advise maximum self-control even in these cases. My point here is only that I cannot help respect a man who goes after the scum who haul down our flag, as they did in San Francisco last week, or grab our women, or boast how they laugh to see American pilots shot down over Viet Nam, as some of the Cuba traitors did in Congress.

To get down to brass tacks – let's suppose you have tried to pass out some literature or picket or otherwise exercise your rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In spite of the fact that niggers are tearing up the town, there is a good chance they will nevertheless arrest you for daring to oppose the general hell. Often, the cops' theory is that it is bad enough they have to have the uproar from the niggers, who are backed all the way to the White House. But it is too much that you should get out there too to oppose the jigs and Jews – and you are not backed by any White House. So they pinch you. What should you do?

The first thing to do if you are stopped by a policeman is be sure he is a policeman. Sometimes we have been stopped and buffaloed by Jews trying to give the impression they are cops in plain clothes. So if somebody comes up to you representing himself to be a detective, you have an absolute right to see his badde or papers, and if he fails to show them to you, you have the further right and even the duty to refuse to go along with him in any way, and to use physical force to resist, if necessary. This right, of course, should be used very judiciously, but you must also be on your guard against kidnappers pretending to be police officers. It has happened. Your only protection is the fact that the officer must show you a badge or certificate of his authority to interfere with your liberty in any way.

If the officer is in uniform, note and remember his badge number. That s vitally important. If there are irregularities later, as often happens, you can take proper action only if you know "who done it".

Next is the question of whether you are "under arrest" or not. If you are not placed under arrest, you have no duty whatsoever to go anywhere with an officer. If he asks you to "come along" or "let's go down town", etc., you must ask, "Am I under arrest?" If he replies that you are not, but that "you better go along", then you must use your judgment whether or not to comply. In most cases I recommend that you do cooperate, unless there is a very obvious frame-up and attitude of vicious hostility. In that case, insist that you be placed under arrest before you go along.

The moment you are placed under arrest, you have a right to be informed on what grounds. If not told, you must ask, clearly, courteously and firmly. Insist on being told what for.

Never get manoeuvered into a "sloppy" legal position if the officer appears vicious and mean. Make the officer place you under arrest and tell you what for, being careful to note his badge number.

Your attitude must never be fearful, cringing or defiant. It is just as bad to be arrogant and defiant as to cringe. Every dirty, criminal hood a cop sees is snotty and "hoody", pretending he is so brave he defies all cops, etc. If you act like a hood, you will be treated like a hood. If the police try to bully you, maintain a patient attitude as though you were actually the Governor of the State whom they didn't recognize, and you were waiting confidently for these stupid, oafish louts to be told the facts – and that you are far, far above their cheap terrorism. If they try the terror bit, do not get emotionally involved with them. Remain calm, aloof, confident and firm. It sometimes helps to point out that you know the law and how to file civil suits (when that is the truth – don't bluff) and that their fun with you now is going to cost them dearly, in cash, later. But don't throw that at them as a threat, simply as a calm statement of fact. The object is to make them feel rotten inside, which you can do. Usually they will slink away with their tails between their legs. If you curse them and try to fight back they will have a ball with you and get their fighting blood up. Usually, only Jew cops will actually beat you when you are absolutely helpless and not defying them. I have been spared this, so far, but we have found there is only one answer to Jew cops who try terror, and that is to laugh when they threaten. Never give these Jew bullies the satisfaction of showing fear.

Upon arrival at a police station, you will be "booked" – your arrest will be "logged".

In most cases, at that time, you have the right to have your bail set. And, except in capital and very unusual circumstances, you have an absolute right to bail.

In cities like Philadelphia and New York, they usually set our bail at ten or fifteen thousand dollars, even for disorderly conduct, although that is more than they ask for robbery and assault.

If they do set exorbitant bail to harass and hurt you unfairly (as many Jew judges almost always do), you can and must ask the court at the first hearing you get to reduce your bail, and be sure your request is made a matter of record. If they deny it, then you should direct an appeal to the next higher court, and it will usually be granted, even in New York (but not Philadelphia).

At the "booking" you must also insist, firmly and courteously, on being officially informed of the charges in writing.

There are two kinds of charges: misdemeanors and felonies.

Misdemeanors are relatively minor offenses such as disorderly conduct. They are never punishable by more than a year. Anything punishable by more than a year, and in a penitentiary, is a felony.

If you are charged with a misdemeanor, you will have to judge, by the circumstances, whether or not to "talk", to discuss the affair with police or others. You can usually tell if the arrest is minor and was just to get you "off the street", in which case your best bet is to be as friendly and decent to the police officers as possible, since they are usually only following orders.

If you are charged with a serious offense – a felony – under no circumstances should you so much as open your mouth to anybody about the case while in custody! Nobody! Not one word! Not in your cell! Not even to some lawyer who may arrive and say he's been appointed to help you. In Philadelphia, one of our men was approached by just such a Jew lawyer with offers of help, while he was in jail, and the offers were 100 percent phony and designed to trap our boy into pleading "guilty" to what he claimed were "lesser charges" – when our boy was guilty of nothing.

Don't talk to fellow prisoners about the case. I repeat, if charged with a felony, talk to no one about the case. no matter how friendly he may seem. Prisoners may be phony, and cells bugged.

To all demands that you talk, reply, "I will be glad to accept all questions in writing through my attorney". If they press you intolerably, repeat that same statement over and over until they are as tired of it as you are. They will never stop as long as they think you will "break". So make them see at the beginning that you will never change, and you will save all hands a lot of trouble.

Watch out for "two-way" "mirrors" in interrogation rooms, and never fool around with any papers on desks in detective's offices if you are left alone. Do not even take a "peek" at anything, since they sometimes leave phony "orders", etc. there to horrify you.

Beware of the "good-guy-bad-guy" technique.

When they have a "green" catch, unscrupulous detectives will sometimes assign two men to interrogate you. One of the men will stay sort of quiet, while the other is absolutely vile to you. The "bad guy" will bully, shout, perhaps curse you, deny you water or any comfort, etc, and generally do all he can to make you really HATE him. He knows very well you are not going to talk to him. His job is to get you emotional, – get you hating him with a red-hot passion. The other guy, the "good-guy", will look disgusted while this is going one, try to convince you he wants to make the bully stop, and will often get into a near fight with the "bad guy" trying to "protect" you.

After the "bad guy" has rampaged around enough to get you good and sore, and the "good guy" has you convinced he is your friend and is doing his best to stop this other cop, the "bad guy" will stomp out in a rage, cursing that he has "failed".

As soon as he is out of the room, the "good guy" confides to you how the whole police department despises the "bad guy", and he apologizes for the brow-beating, etc.

You can't help appreciating the "good guy" after the dose of the "bad guy". The good guy gives you a cigarette, water, sympathy. Before you know it, you are talking to the "good guy", – just as they planned it!

I repeat, if they charge you with a serious offense, don't talk, not to "bad guys", – and not to "good guys"!

Do not protest your innocence, which will be tempting. Just say nothing.

In any case, unless there is some political reason for remaining in jail, you should do everything possible to get put on bail – not just because jail is rotten, but because you have a far, far better chance of winning any criminal case if you don't look like a criminal. And when you are dragged into court in chains, you are half convicted by appearance. You should walk in there like a gentleman, always well dressed and always quiet and well-behaved. Never, never go into a court for a trial dressed in anything else but a suit, and a well-pressed, reserved suit at that. No sweaters or sweatshirts, Tee-shirts, Hawaiian shirts, dungarees, etc.

Most bondsmen are Jews with some niggers, especially in big cities. But do not despair of getting bail from these Chosen Ones. True to their natures, some Jews would bail out Adolf Hitler for a buck. Try them all – we have almost always found at least one – often black!

If possible, try to put up cash bail with the court, if permitted. That will save a lot of money, if bail is high, since you will get almost all of it back.

If held in jail, you have the right to at least one phone call.

There will usually be either a trial or a hearing the following day, depending on whether the charge is minor or serious. Serious cases require a sort of miniature trial within hours of your arrest. The very excellent theory is that no police officer has the right to deprive you of your liberty, even to hold you for trial, and that only a judge or magistrate can decide whether to admit you to jail, and judge whether there is enough grounds to hold you for trial.

Therefore, before going into details of a trial proper, I will cover what you should and must do at a "hearing" on a serious offense.

(1) If you are not yet sufficiently familiar with the law to defend yourself at the hearing, or if the charges are very serious, you should insist on a lawyer before anything else. Recent Supreme Court decisions have granted you the absolute right to a lawyer at every step of the proceedings in serious cases, and you must insist on that right or they may rule that you waived it, later. If you are too poor to pay a lawyer, they've got to give you one. But be careful. These "drunk tank" lawyers, usually assigned to such cases, are often utterly unsuccessful lawyers who hang around the courts for a few free "hand-out" cases from which they hope to pick up a fee. Once in a while you will find a really good one. But I have often found horrible ones, who won't fight, and couldn't fight, if they wanted to.

Remember, anything your lawyer says in court commits you; it's the same as though you said the things yourself.

If your lawyer is not really fighting and is selling you out, you must discharge him on the spot. If you do not, you can't complain later in jail. You are presumed to approve every word he says.

Do it diplomatically, if you can ask him privately to ask the judge to excuse him. If he won't, stand up and demand that you be allowed to defend yourself.

Further, especially in small towns, you may run into what I call "the court-house gang" – an informal sort of exclusive social and professional "club" consisting of the judges, the top police officials, the sheriff, the prosecutors and the defense attorneys – who put on a good show of fighting in public, but do most of their work in friendly "conference". In such a set-up, you may find yourself the "bargaining point" in various "deals", all of which dump you in the state can. In spite of all this, if the charges are extremely serious, involving five or more years in the penitentiary, you almost must have a lawyer.

An extremely effective system I have discovered when there are two or more of you on trial for the same offense, as usually happens, is for the defendant who knows the law the best to go without a lawyer, while the others insist on a lawyer. That way, you get the benefit of the lawyers, but you also protect yourself from sell-out by retaining the right to address the court and jury yourself and add your political knowledge into the balance.

(2) If the offense is serious, and especially if you have no lawyer, insist on a court reporter – a stenographer to take down every word. This is your only real protection against a vile, bullying judge. And it really works. Judges don't dare get too vile, when it's all a matter of written record.

(3) If there has been any brutality or irregularity in the arrest, booking, bailing or jailing, now's the time to squawk. If you don't, they will claim it didn't happen, or you lost the right, etc. If a Jew cop pulled a gun on you in a cell, as has happened to us in Philadelphia and New York, report all circumstances and his badge number the minute you get before a judge.

(4) If your bail is too high ask to have it reduced in open court.

(5) At the hearing they usually will "arraign" you. If you have no lawyer, you will have to go through this all by itself. It means they stand you up and tell you what you are supposed to have done wrong, and you are supposed to tell them how you stand on the affair.

If the offense is serious, always, always, always plead "Not Guilty!"

Do not listen to deals, arrangements, threats or offers of any kind. Plead "Not Guilty!"

You also have the right to "stand mute" (to say nothing), or to plead "nolo contendere".

If you "stand mute", the court will take it as a "not guilty" plea.

If you plead "nolo contendere", it means you answer, but won't fight.

Again, plead "Not Guilty!'

The only exceptions are minor offenses, where you are guilty of losing your head for a moment, for instance and bopping some nigger Communist hauling down the American flag, etc. Here it is better to plead guilty as soon as possible, and forfeit minor collateral or a fine if that is permitted.

Let me repeat, do not listen to "deals" and offers or threats from any officials while you are in jail. When you are out, you may be interested in some of the deals to "get out of town", even though not guilty, because you are too poor or pressed for time to stay and fight, and can afford to stay out of that town anyway. But in jail, especially in Red, Jew cities like Philadelphia, you will almost always be told that your buddies have all "ratted" on you, the Party has deserted you, your companions have all accepted the deal, etc. You will also be told that the alternative to their rotten "deals" is "twenty years", etc., etc., etc. They actually do this in New York, Philly, etc. And the one who does it, is usually the "Public Defender" they send to "help" you. I repeat, do not make deals in jails. You can only lose.

Remember that you will be somewhat "shook up", to say the least, in jail, especially if it is your first time. I am only being honest. You will probably be frightened if they are threatening you with "big time". So don't listen to any of their "news" about how your buddies have ratted and deserted you and you are the "sucker", etc. And don't make deals!

After you have been arrested, booked, allowed bail, or jailed, arraigned, and given a hearing, you will be ready for trial.

I cannot emphasize often enough that you should work hard if you are facing trial without a lawyer, and even with a lawyer (unless you know for sure that he is a good lawyer).

Go to the nearest law library and start studying. Here's how: Find a set of books called "Corpus Juris Secundum" and/or American Jurisprudence. Look up the crime with which you are charged. There will be a long and detailed article on it. Study it – and then follow up all cross references. Then get the official statutes, the laws under which you are specifically charged. Get an "annotated" edition of the laws, and you will find, under the heading of your charge, a lot of previous cases which have been tried and decided with all the fine points involved. Follow these all up in the various "Reports". (You'll have to ask the librarian for help on this until you learn how to find them.)

Check the charges against you to see if they actually charge a crime. For instance, if it is alleged that you were "disorderly", in that you "publicly read a copy of Mein Kampf" (to exaggerate for illustration), there is no crime alleged. You'd be surprised how often the charges are sloppy and do not allege a crime. A crime must be illegal by "common law" (long tradition) or by specific statute. If they allege a specific statute, they are required to be very, very accurate in every detail. Catch a serious omission, and you've got 'em. If you find there is anything at all wrong with the charges, make a "motion" to the court to have the charges dismissed on the grounds that they do not satisfactorily allege a crime, etc. Here's the rough form for such a motion:



Commonwealth,          )
            Plaintiff          )
                   vs.          )                         Case No. _________
    {your name}          )
       Defendant          )


COMES NOW THE DEFENDANT in the above entitled Cause, and moves the Honorable Court to dismiss the charges against him and, for his reasons, states that:

     1. (Here you write that the charge fails to specify a crime or whatever others reason you have.)

                                                  (your signature goes here ) _________________
                                (your typed name followed by "Pro Se")

You should also insure that the charges are specific. If they charge assault, for instance, they must inform you of when, where, who. how, etc., or you have the right to ask for a "Bill of Particulars". If they charge that you were simply "inciting to riot", for instance, without alleging any facts, such as that you said thus and so under such and such circumstances, you cannot defend yourself because there is no telling what they will claim in court. They can claim almost anything. To guard against this, you have the right to a "Bill of Particulars" and should file the same sort of paper described above, but title it, "Motion for Bill of Particulars". Then write as follows: COMES NOW THE DEFENDANT IN THE ABOVE ENTITLED CAUSE, and moves the Honorable Court for a Bill of Particulars stating:

(Sample questions)

a. What specific acts are alleged to have been committed?

b. Who committed them?

c. What is the weapon defendant is alleged to have used? (etc.)

Sign your name at the bottom and write "pro se" (for himself).

The special value of a Bill of Particulars is that once the Prosecutor has set down what he claims you did, he is strictly limited to proving those claims, and no others he can ring in on you! This is a tremendous help, especially with the phony, rigged-up charges they usually bring against nigger-fighters, etc. By their very rottenness, they tend to be loose, general and imprecise. You can put them on a spot by demanding they pin point exactly what they are charging.

Be sure to include at the end of your legal papers a "CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE". This is a written paragraph which states that you have delivered a copy of the legal papers to the Prosecuting Attorney. The "Certificate of Service" should be worded as follows:


I certify that I have delivered in person (or deposited in the U.S. Mails postage pre-paid), a true copy of the foregoing Motion to the District Attorney at his office in the Building, Arlington County, Va., this day of January, 1965.


When you have your legal papers neatly typed (double spaced), deliver a copy to the Clerk of the Court. The copy you deliver to the Clerk of the Court goes to the Judge who is hearing the case.

Next, deliver in person, or by mail, a copy to the prosecuting attorney. The prosecuting attorney is called by different titles in different parts of the country. He may be known as the District Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Commonwealth Attorney, Etc.

If you are ever charged with "inciting to riot", as the Jews call it when you try to tell people the simple facts of the Jew-communist conspiracy, be sure to go to the library and get a copy of "The Law and Public Safety", by Judge Harvey Blackstone. We have found this book a mine of information on defending yourself from such charges.

You should be allowed plenty of time to prepare your case. If they try to rush you on a charge, even only a misdemeanor, you should request a "Continuance" from the court when you are called before it, and explain respectfully that you need time to prepare. Make that a matter of record. Courts dare not rush you, on the record, for you will surely win a reversal on appeal.

While you are preparing your case, I most strongly recommend that you also marshal your facts in the form of affidavits (sworn statements) from your witnesses, so that you will know what they are going to say on the stand, and they can't "rat out" on you without committing perjury.

You must also subpoena some witnesses who aren't your friends. If you have no lawyer, you have the absolute right, under the Constitution, to have the court order the witnesses you need into court. Go to the clerk of the court and respectfully ask for "subpoena forms". Fill them out, and return them to the clerk, who will have them served on your witnesses. If there are some documents you need, make a motion, as described above, to the court (the judge), respectfully ask for a "Subpoena Duces Tecum" – which is a fancy way of saying an order to produce documents or other things in court. Describe what you need for evidence and why you need it, and ask the court to issue the Subpoena Duces Tecum for these things. If the request is reasonable, they will have to grant it.

Make everything a matter of record. Without an accurate record, you can't fight an appeal.

In places like Philadelphia, where most all the clerks are vile, vicious Jews, you will often have to throw your legal papers over the counter at them, as we have to do, when they refuse to even accept them. If they throw them back, then you must go see a judge, and again make it a matter of record that you insist on filing simple motions with the court. If they deny this fundamental right – no matter what else they do or you do – you will win on appeal in a hurry. Once they know you mean business, and know what you are doing, they slow down on this "won't accept" garbage. If all else fails, insist on seeing the judge personally to complain.

If they have seized you illegally and/or invaded your home illegally without a warrant, etc., no matter what they find as "evidence", make a "Motion to Suppress the Evidence" on the grounds that the evidence was illegally obtained. They will have to give such illegal "evidence" back to you and forget it as evidence. If that's their whole case, then make a motion to dismiss, and they will have to grant that.

When you are ready for trial, remember to do your best to make a good appearance – not flashy, but conservative and well dressed. I advise all my people to carry an attache case. It is the "badge" of the attorney. If you are neatly and conservatively dressed, act with assurance and carry an attache case, you will get the respect they give attorneys in court – as a matter of subconscious reaction by clerks, marshals and even the judge. If you dress like a hood, conversely, they will be ready to slip you a few months in the jug on general principles before they start, just from experience with other hoods dressed in that manner.

Your demeanor in court is hugely important. Be super-respectful to the judge – be he Jew, nigger or ape. (And I have seen some where it's hard to be sure which.) You should also be gently firm about your rights. I have actually had to defy threats of contempt to get simple rights in especially vile, Jew courts. You will be safe, if everything is a matter or record and you are sure of your rights. But if you fail to insist on them at trial, they will say on appeal that you "waived" your rights – that you didn't want them, believe it or not! So stick up for what you must, but be as respectful and mannerly as you can while doing it. Never respond to baiting by either the DA or the judge. I have actually had a judge call me names and do everything short of spitting on me to provoke me to "contempt" but I was able to hold out. If you get mad, you are a dead duck in a court room.

Now for the trial.

It will open with selection of a jury, if it is a felony or a serious misdemeanor.

If your charges permit a jury-trial, never take a "bench" trial, by a judge without a jury, no matter how much some lawyer or policeman, etc., tells you the judge is a real "pal", etc., etc. I have seen too many of our boys who insisted on listening to this siren song in spite of my warnings packed off to prison for no crime except believing this cheap talk. A jury is your only safe hope of justice, because even the most honest judge can be put under tremendous personal pressure. Even some of the most courageous judges quail before a whole community hating both them and their families. Except in exceptional circumstances, insist on all rights you may have to a jury trial.

Next, in selecting the jury, you have a certain number of jurors you can kick off for no special reason at all. Save these as long as you can. Before you get to these "challenges", you should respectfully ask to have Negroes and Jews excluded from the jury. There will be complete coverage of this in later lessons. Suffice, for the present, to point out that our kind of activities are strongly anti-Jewish and anti-nigger, and it would be as unjust to put niggers and Jews on our juries as to put relatives of the Plaintiff on the jury trying a "civil suit" for damages. Even if they rule against you on the "no-Jews-and-niggers", make it a matter of record that you asked, as grounds for an appeal if you are wrongfully convicted. If you have a lawyer, these gentlemen will usually be horrified of the judge and the whole action, since you jeopardize their whole practice for very little reward. Consequently, when the judge comes on with the usual, "I want no talk of niggers and Jews, etc., here", the lawyer falls on his face bowing and mumbling "Yes, sir!" But remember he doesn't do the prison time – you do. So insist on excluding niggers and Jews.

Once the jury is selected, the prosecutor will make his opening statement, in which he will tell the court and/or the jury what he expects to prove. He is not allowed to argue and reason, at this time, and if he does so, you should respectfully object. He just presents what he hopes he will prove – his "case" as it's called.

When he is finished with his opening statement, you make yours. You may not argue, either, or present any evidence – just what you believe you will show as your case.

You can sometimes, with the court's permission, reserve your "opening statement" until time for you to put on your evidence. I recommend you ask for this permission when the prosecutor has finished presenting his opening statement. Ask the court for "Permission to Reserve my Opening Statement". If not granted, go ahead and state your case, and be brief and to the point. Never bore a court or look "lost". If you can't think of what to say next, say to the judge, "May I beg the court's indulgence for a few moments?" and, when it is granted, look at some papers, etc., until you recover your composure.

After you have either stated your case, or reserved your opening statement, you should then get up and ask the court for "The Rule on Witnesses". This means that all witnesses on both sides will first be sworn, and then sent out of the court to wait in a witness room, where they cannot hear what other witnesses testify. This protects you, in some degree, from perjury and collusion. This motion has to be granted, and you should be sure all your witnesses come forward, are sworn and sent into the jury room.

The prosecutor will then call his first witness and start asking him questions to present his evidence. He is severely restricted in asking his own witnesses questions. He may not ask questions which ''lead" the witness. By and large, these are "yes" and "no" questions, in which he can put together a long string of claims and ask his witness if they are true – thus, in effect, testifying instead of the witness. If he asks leading questions, you must get up and object. If you do not do this at the time, you can't appeal later on these grounds!

There are several other kinds of questions he may not ask, and you should become very familiar with these types of questions. Here they are, briefly: (1) Questions requiring the witness to give an opinion or a conclusion, such as "Was the defendant drunk?" (the witness may testify that defendant was staggering, couldn't pronounce his words, and smelled of alcohol, but it is for the jury to decide whether these facts indicated he was "drunk"; (2) Questions not directly related to the case at hand. If the defendant has not testified, for instance, a witness may not testify to the defendant's previous criminal record, nor may he testify, in a disorderly conduct case, for instance, that the defendant didn't love his wife, etc.; (3) immaterial questions – questions which would not affect the case, regardless of answer; and (4) incompetent questions – that is, questions which may not be asked. For instance, the prosecutor may not ask a man if the defendant did so and so – if the defendant is her husband, since spouses may not testify against each other. Nor could a doctor testify what his patient told him, etc.

If the prosecutor gets some answers from his witnesses he doesn't like, and starts to bully his own witness, you can object, since that is forbidden.

As the prosecutor finishes examining each witness, he will turn him over to you for cross-examination.

This will be the subject of an entire lesson, as it is the most important weapon patriots have against perjurers.

But I will state here that you should never cross examine under the following conditions:

(1) When the evidence given didn't hurt you at all. If the witness merely testified that you possess a gun, and it is legal to possess a gun, there's no need to carry the matter further.

(2) When the evidence has almost smashed you, it is true, and you are sure you can't shake the witness. If you get up there, and ask the same things the prosecutor did, it will reinforce all the horror of that damning testimony with the jury and hurt you far, far worse, than saying "No questions".

(3) When the witness is obviously too much for you. (And this is not implying you are a slouch.) A weepy, old Jewish lady, for instance, who is sharp, will hurt badly, no matter what a vicious liar she may be. I have seen these Jewesses lie like hell, weeping piteously, as they describe how they were "persecuted", ad infinitum. The only way you could break them down and demonstrate what liars they are is to hammer at them unmercifully on details, but this would bring down upon you such concentrated wrath of court, jury and spectators that it isn't worth it. The "concentration camp victim" they always trot out to snivel and weep in our trials is pretty deadly. The only exception is when they are foolish enough to bring on one who is really hysterical. With these, I have often been successful in drawing them out with more and more of their sob story, until finally they get so carried away and tell such fantastic stories that it gets ridiculous! When there are snickers from the audience these kikesses get raging wild and quit the sob-sister act and begin to act like old-fashioned Jews. But your chances of being able to get these results, I have found, are pretty slim. The Jews are too good as actors.

I will cover the whole subject of cross-examination in great detail in a future lesson. Until then, suffice to say that the key to breaking liars is always detail. Try to get a liar to commit himself to more and more details about the story he has lied about, and sooner or later he will forget and swear to two, mutually impossible "facts".

After you are finished with a witness, if your cross-examination has hurt him, the prosecutor will proceed with "re-direct" examination, to repair the damage. If he does you then have the right to "re-cross"-examine the witness, and so on. Every time there is direct, you have the right to cross.

When both sides are finished, the next witness is called, and so on until the prosecutor is finished presenting his witnesses. When he ways "The prosecution rests its case", you should, as a matter of course, stand up and say "I move the court to dismiss the charges (or direct a verdict of acquittal) on the grounds that the prosecution has not presented a prima facie case, and we should not be required to come forward with a defense". This motion is based on the fact that the prosecution is required to present a solid case against you, before you are required to defend yourself. If they have not, an honest court will throw the whole thing out and you are free! We have won quite a few of such motions. But even if you don't win right there and then, you prepare excellent grounds for appeal later by this motion.

If the judge denies your motion (which is usual), then you should either come forward with your opening statement (if it was reserved, as suggested at the beginning), or call your first witness.

I recommend calling the weakest witnesses first, and building up to the strongest, since the memory of most people is unbelievably short, and they will tend to remember your last witnesses best.

Should YOU testify for yourself?

There are several vital factors involved in making that decision.

First, unless you are a "good witness"; that is, unless you are sincere and able to make a judge and jury really feel that sincerity, you will usually do little good testifying for yourself, especially with a judge only. They all know you want to get "loose" and figure you will say anything to do it. This discounts your testimony more than anybody else's except co-defendants. And if you are not too good at appearing in public, if you make a hesitant and weak witness, you will hurt yourself no matter how innocent.

Second, if you testify, you forfeit your right not to have your past record brought up. If you take the stand, you give the DA the right to "impeach" your testimony by showing what a dirty "crook" you were, – regardless of how much you have reformed or for how long, – as have most of our fighting men. They can make you tell everything you ever did, all your arrests, convictions, prison terms, etc. Thus, if you have a "bad record", stay off the stand.

Third, if you get up there to testify as your own witness, you also forfeit your right to take the Fifth Amendment on questions involving guilt on other criminal acts they may try to stick you with, – things long forgotten and past. Remember that you cannot invoke the Fifth Amendment if you voluntarily get up there on the witness stand. They cannot make you testify, nor even comment on the fact that you did not testify to prejudice the jury. But once you get up there of your own accord, you are fair game and have no protection at all.

My own recommendation to my own men is, if in any doubt, don't testify. If you are sure of yourself, and are on good, solid ground with a good record, you can help yourself. But the chances of helping are far less than the chance of catastrophe if you are not a "strong'' witness or you have a record which can be made to look bad.

Now the tables are turned, and the prosecutor will object if you ask leading, or irrelevant or improper questions. Try not to do it, as sustained objections make you look bad and unfair with the jury.

The best questions to ask, I believe, are "Tell, in your own words, what, if anything, happened to you on at 3 p.m.", etc. Do not ask questions which can be answered "Yes" or "No" in general.

You may want to "repair damage" after the DA cross-examines, and he will then re-cross, etc., as when he was putting on his witnesses.

You will often have documents which are vital to your case and which you will want to make part of the record of the case. This has to be done in a very precise, technical way.

First, take the document to the court's clerk sitting near the bench – usually the stenographer. Ask him or her to "please mark this document for identification". He or she will mark a number or letter on the document or item and say, into the record, that it is now marked "Exhibit for identification". This does not mean it is in evidence, only that it is identified in the record. Then show the item to the prosecutor for his examination.

Now you must take the document or object to your witness who knows what it is and can testify, from personal knowledge, what it is. If it is a photo, for instance, it must be the photographer, or a person completely familiar with the scene. Hand the witness the item and say "I now hand you 'Exhibit for identification', and ask you if you know what it is?" When he answers "Yes", ask him to tell the court and jury what it is, and everything else you can ask him to make it abundantly clear that the item or document is definitely connected with the case and good evidence. When that has been thoroughly established, and not before, you may then ask the court to introduce it into evidence. If the court agrees, give it back to the clerk who will mark it with a new number or letter as evidence.

When you rest your case, you will then have the right to make your "argument" or "close" to the court and/or the jury. If it is before a judge alone, stick to the law and the facts. You will not get the judge to snivelling with tear-jerking stories, or his heart pitty-patting with your flag waving, etc. In fact, it is my experience that the judge is usually writing his sentence while you are "closing". But if there is a jury, this is the time to come on with weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth, the Constitution, motherhood and anything else you feel will move the jury. After all, you want that jury to believe you and free you – and the best way to do that is to make them like you and love your cause. In our political trials, this is the only chance you'll have to reach the good, White Christians on that jury. And remember, it takes only one of them to "hang" the jury, and if you reach the heart of that one juror, he will hold out forever, just as you are now fighting £or what you believe, in spite of hell itself.

After you have closed, the judge will "charge" the jury – that is, he will tell them the law as it applies to the case. You have the right to insist that certain "instructions" be given to the jury. This is a very important, but also very technical matter and cannot be covered here. I will simply suggest that you go to the nearest law library and get the book showing "instructions" possible in your state on that particular case. Then insist on the ones which help you and you have a right to. You can also object to instructions proposed by the prosecutor.

When the jury has been charged, the jury will retire and reach a verdict. When they return and announce it – if it is "Not Guilt" – your troubles are over.

But if it is "Guilty", then you have the right to make a statement before sentencing. If the judge is obviously relishing the "hanging", don't bother, but if he seems decent at all, it may be worth while appealing to him and trying to make him see how wrong it is to let the Jews, niggers and Communists push White Christian patriots around, etc. – and what is happening to our poor country and race.

As soon as sentence is pronounced, you should immediately say, "Would your Honor please set an appeal bond?" If you fail to do this, it is hard to get you out on bond later and takes a long time.

With that, they will probably drag you back to the jail to await bail, and the struggle will be over, for a while.

Let me close this lesson on basic trial law with the stern reminder that whatever the jury decides are the facts, are decided forever. You can appeal the law and technicalities, but you cannot appeal the facts. Those are frozen forever at the trial, barring something wrong with the trial itself. It therefore behooves you to make a damned good job of the trial to see that the true facts are brought out in spite of liars and Jew "persecutors".

The best way to do this is to work. Work, study, prepare as you never did anything else in your life.

If you know your onions when you get up there in court, you will leave the Jew and nigger "persecutors" gasping for breath as we have often done.

Lesson 1.                SELF STUDY QUESTIONS

Type or print the answers to these questions neatly on a separate sheet of paper, then send them in for correction and grading.

1. What is the most important principle of effective radical, racist, political operation?

2. Why is this principle so important?

3. You are stopped on the street while handing out literature by a detective. What is the first thing you should be sure of?

4. Why ?

5. What must a policeman do before he has the right to force you to go with him?

6. What is the most important thing to know if you are falsely and wrongfully arrested by a police officer in uniform?

7. On the way to the police station in the patrol wagon you are punched without cause by a policeman. What should you do about it, and when?

8. What are your rights when you are "booked"?

9. What do you do if bail is set astronomically high?

10. What sort of attitude toward authorities should a political leader have while in custody?

11. You are charged with inciting to riot, penalty two years to ten years. Is this a misdemeanor or a felony?

12. You are charged with assault with a deadly weapon, penalty up to ten years. While in jail trying to raise bail, the Public Defender's Officer sends in a lawyer to help you. He tells you the District Attorney will let you "cop a plea" (plead guilty) to a lesser charge of simple assault, and that if you don't accept, you are likely to do a long stretch in prison. What should you do?

13. What is the most important rule when charged with a felony?

14. Are there any times when you should appear in court in clothes other than a suit?

15. What proceeding are you entitled to after you are arrested and before you are tried on a serious charge?

16. What is the best protection against a bullying, vicious judge?

17. What is the first thing you should insist on at the hearing if you are facing a serious charge?

18. Why is it so important to dismiss a lawyer who is incompetent or selling you out?

19. Name the occasions when you should plead "guilty" to serious charges.

20. Why? Explain.

21. What are the two basic sources when you are looking up the law?

22. Name a common defect of the political charges we usually face, and what should you do about it?

23. Without referring to the lessons, write up a complete motion to dismiss a charge of "disorderly conduct" against you, in the local police court of your area, in which it is alleged that you handed out anti-race-mixing literature where there was no law against such literature distribution.

24. Write up a motion for a Bill of Particulars for your own court, asking for details of charges against you that you "incited to riot".

25. What should you do if you are too rushed and cannot be ready for trial as scheduled?

26. How do you get reluctant witnesses into court to testify to important facts in your case?

27. How do you force the police or other parties to bring important documents or photographs, etc., that you need into court?

280 What should you ask in the selection of a jury? Why?

29. Make up a skeleton outline of the steps involved in a criminal trial.

30. When should you NOT cross-examine, and why?

31. What is the basic method of catching perjurers on cross examination?

32. What should you do when the prosecution says, "Prosecution rests its case"?

33. When should you ask leading questions of your own witnesses ?

34. What are the most common objections to questions on direct examination?

35. How should you phrase most of your questions to your own witnesses?

36. If you have any doubt of what a witness will say on the stand, what is the best way in insure that he won't switch his stories on you?

37. Give a step-by-step outline of what you must do to get a document, photograph or object admitted into evidence in your case?

38. If the jury brings in, a verdict of "guilty" against you, what motion should you make to the court on the spot?

39. What can you appeal about your case, and what can you NOT appeal from a jury verdict?

40. What is the one thing you must do, above all others, to insure victory in your trial?