February 27, 2003
Update on the Ronald Dixon case
Fox News' Hannity & Colmes just now completed an update on their coverage of a month ago on the plight of Ronald Dixon, again interviewing Mr. Dixon, the Brooklyn man who honorably defended his family - his wife and 2 year-old child - from a vicious scumbag home invader (who, by the way, has a 15-page Brooklyn rap sheet and 5 felony convictions under his belt). I'm not surprised to hear that the Brooklyn DA is dead set on persecuting/prosecuting Mr. Dixon.
The DA wants to put Mr. Dixon away, in prison, for a year, on a spurious "unregistered firearm" charge. I consider this actionable criminal behavior on the part of the DA: an attempt at prosecution with malice. The DA should himself face charges.
Mr. Dixon is doing the honorable thing, refusing to plea bargain with the DA. Even Alan Colmes, an anti-gun liberal, is passionately on Mr. Dixon's side in this matter. It's interesting to note that while Mr. Dixon appeared with his defense attorney Andrew Friedman, at no point did Friedman try to keep Mr. Dixon from saying anything he wanted to say. This is a very clear-cut case of justifiable self-defense, and the DA is not exercising his discretion in dismissing the spurious registration charges.
Greta Van Susteren asked an interesting rhetorical question of Colmes in the transition to her show: is the Brooklyn DA elected or appointed?
I'll remind readers here that there's a cheap, effective way to contact the Brooklyn DA. Use it. Use it again.
Posted by Russell Whitaker at February 27, 2003 06:17 PM | TrackBackBill: I'd like to find the answer to that question myself. We may need to start one. A month ago, Sean Hannity commented on-air that he'd contributed money to Mr. Dixon's defense. It would be good to know if he's actually done so.
Posted by: Russell Whitaker on February 28, 2003 09:03 AMHere's an update: the NRA expresses an opinion on the matter.
Posted by: Russell Whitaker on March 31, 2003 05:49 PMDear Webmaster,
How are you? I hope all is well. In an attempt to put the past behind me and not be penalized professionally, I am requested at your discretion, that you omit this page (http://www.survivalarts.com/archives/000351.html) from your website. I am in the process of seeking employment and it’s becoming increasingly difficult in having to explain when employers do their searches online. Please understand and know that I am very thankful for all your support.
Please reply and let me know if you were able to take the page down.
Thank a lot in advance.
Sincerely,
In respect to all your support, maybe Mr. Dixon would not like to have these pages floating over the internet in the event he is trying to seek employment. Even though he was not convicted of a crime, this information could be more criminal to him and ultimately hindering his propect of obtaining employment and supporting his family.
Thanks you.
Posted by: Nakia Watson on July 2, 2007 08:34 AMDear Ron,
I am doing very well, thank you. I see two comment postings originating from the same IP address, submitted within 8 minutes of each other. Before I reflexively delete a blog entry which has stood for more than 4 years, I'll need to determine that you (Ron) are who you say you are. I will follow this up with private email to that effect sometime today.
Thanks,
Russell
