Wednesday, December 09, 2009


UPDATE  Sixty-Six potential jurors are being questioned and twenty had been dismissed as of this writing. At least nine of those who were let go said they could not be fair and impartial because of White's hateful views. When asked how they felt about use of the "n-word" several very negative reactions and one said that she didn't want to hear it. At one point Judge James Turk said, "We are losing too many jurors." According to first reports, the jury is also being asked how they feel about white supremacy, Adolf Hitler, and swastikas. One juror who has not yet been dismissed claimed to have a swastika tattoo. It appears that jury selection will take awhile and according to reports being made that the trial could be a lengthy one. It appears that there are precious few in Roanoke who have not read or heard about this case. Hopefully, they will be able to seat members that can be fair and impartial. I suspect that the citizens of Roanoke may not be as forgiving as those in the Hal Turner trial - that is, if the prosecution has a case which I think they might, this time.'s not over til it's over. Laurence Hammack has covered Bill White almost as much as I have over the years and is a great source for updates.


For more than a year now, the war of words between William A. White and the government has been one of arcane legal arguments.

Did a racist's online rants amount to "true threats," as defined by federal law? Or did the words of White, a neo-Nazi leader, stop short of "inciting or producing imminent lawless action," and thus fall under the protection of the First Amendment?

When White's trial begins today in U.S. District Court in Roanoke, the debate over esoteric legalities will no doubt continue. But for the first time since White was charged with making online threats, the court will hear from his victims.

A nationally syndicated newspaper columnist from Maryland, a human rights lawyer from Canada, a university administrator from Delaware, a former small-town mayor from New Jersey and others have been subpoenaed to testify.

The witnesses are expected to describe the fear they felt after getting telephone calls, e-mails and online abuse from White. The self-described commander of a Roanoke-based white supremacy group, White often lashed out at those who offended his sense of bigotry.

Defense lawyers maintain White is all talk and no threat.

The trial, which could last two weeks, will test the free speech rights of White -- who has been called "possibly the loudest and most obnoxious neo-Nazi leader in America" by the Southern Poverty Law Center -- against the impact of his words.

Although a similar charge against White was dismissed earlier this year in Chicago, Judge James Turk has ruled the Roanoke case can go forward, giving prosecutors a chance to bolster their legal arguments with raw, human emotion.

In court papers, Justice Department lawyer John Richmond emphasized the importance of viewing White's comments in the context of how they affected his targets.

"Evidence that victims panicked, felt anxious, sought law enforcement protection, or took extra steps to ensure their safety is very significant and militates in favor of a fact-finder concluding that a particular statement was a threat," Richmond wrote.

The best way to consider that evidence, the government contends, is through the jury trial that begins today.

Columnist targeted

After eating out the night of Jan. 6, 2007, Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian were forced from their vehicle and taken by carjackers to a house in Knoxville, Tenn.

There, some of the five suspects repeatedly raped the couple, according to news media outlets. Newsom, 23, was taken to some railroad tracks, shot him in the back of the head, and his body was set on fire. Christian, 21, died a slower death, by suffocation, after her beaten and sexually mutilated body was wrapped in trash bags.

Christian and Newsom were white; their attackers were black.

The case soon caught the attention of Leonard Pitts, a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for The Miami Herald whose work is carried by newspapers across the country, including The Roanoke Times.

In a June 2007 column, Pitts derided claims from some critics that the national media -- always eager to report on cases in which whites are accused of victimizing blacks -- ignored this black-on-white crime out of political correctness.

Pitts, who is black, cited the Central Park jogger case as just one example of why he was "unkindly disposed toward the crackpots, incendiaries and flat-out racists who have chosen this tragedy upon which to take an obscene and ludicrous stand. I have four words for them and any other white Americans who feel themselves similarly victimized.

"Cry me a river."

It didn't take long for White to notice the column.

As he is prone to do, White quickly inserted himself into a controversy in which he had no prior involvement. At 11 p.m. the night of June 3, White called Pitts' home and told his wife, who answered the phone, that he was the commander of the American National Socialist Workers Party, the government alleges in an indictment.

Fifteen minutes later, the indictment continues, White e-mailed Pitts. After reciting the lyrics of a song filled with racial slurs, White wrote: "You and your fellow black filth are quickly losing ground, and I look forward to the rapidly approaching day when whites once again rise up and slaughter and enslave your ugly race to the last man, woman and child.

"Itz coming."

Later, the government alleges, White published Pitts' home address and telephone number on his now-defunct Web site,, and encouraged readers to call the columnist.

When officials at the newspaper asked White to delete Pitts' contact information from the Web site, he allegedly replied: "We have no intention of removing Mr. Pitts' personal information.

"Frankly, if some loony took the information and killed him, I wouldn't shed a tear. That also goes for your whole newsroom."

The right to be rude?

Even White's lawyers acknowledge that he comes across as a rude and loudmouthed racist.

But his actions don't amount to threats, defense attorney David Damico said last week in asking Turk to dismiss the charges. "There's nothing here that says, 'I'm going to come to your home to do this,' " Damico said of the charge involving Pitts.

However crude White's approach was, the defense contends, his intent was to engage in "political discourse," thus his words should be shielded by the U.S. Constitution.

Most of White's alleged threats were related to items in the news. A diversity program at the University of Delaware led him to target an administrator at the school, the government alleges. And a mayor in New Jersey drew White's ire after his yard was vandalized by racists.

Defense lawyers say White's comments should be viewed in the context of today's no-holds-barred attitude among commentators on cable television and on the Internet. That especially applies to Pitts and Richard Warman, a human rights lawyer White is accused of threatening, they say.

"These are people who are lightning rods," defense co-counsel Ray Ferris said in court arguments. "They're out there mixing it up."

In July, a Chicago judge used a different standard in dismissing the first charge filed against White, which accused him of posting the name and address of the foreman of a jury that convicted a fellow white supremacist. Prosecutors argued that White meant the man harm, knowing his readers included racists who might be incited to violence.

Citing a U.S. Supreme Court case that dealt with comments at a cross burning, the judge ruled that because White's actions did not provoke "imminent lawless action," they fell under the First Amendment's protection.

Although Turk denied a motion last week by Damico and Ferris to dismiss the seven charges against White, the judge indicated that he might reconsider after the government rests its case.

It is unclear whether White, who seems to have a hard time keeping his thoughts to himself, will share them with the jury. In one of his last public comments before his arrest in October 2008, the 32-year-old was full of his usual bravado.

White said at the time that the government had been investigating him for months, but had filed no charges because prosecutors knew they had no case against him.

"They just know they're going to lose on this," he told The Roanoke Times.


  1. I surly do hope the governemnt ignores the law and railroads White into a prison cell for at least 10 years.

    They did it to Hale whom was completely innocent, They can do it to bill whom didn't do a damn thing but have a loud mouth.

  2. Bill White portraying himself as a "racist" is like James Woods portraying himself as a "klansman." Actors. Entertainers. Showmen. Nothing more.

    Those who try to claim otherwise are just props in the side-show. Bah, humbug.

  3. Please NIkki take that new photo of your vile face down. It's hard to go to this site when I have to look at such a disgustingly ugly old woman.

  4. Too White: Please Shut the fuck up. It makes this site much more enjoyable when I can log on and not see your totally ignorant bullshit. Thanks in advance, loser.

  5. I am perfectly happy with the government and what it has done to Bill White and Hal Turner. I would be happier if they follow the law and put those assholes in prison, where hopefully they will wind up being another man's bitch for at least ten years. I hope they get Von and Schoep next.

  6. yeh?

    i hope some fckn 500lb nigga gets you, drongo!

    Bill White's gaol house 'letter', published on VNN forum....ZOG, basically, set him up because he exposed Mark Hoffman, the cock-sucking kike jury 'fore-man' in the Matt Hale 'trial', as an FBI "plant"/"fix"...clear grounds for Hale's conviction to be over-turned by SCotUS!

  7. All of you cheering these prosecutions are fucking idiots.

  8. The shocker is coming when the trial is over. Few novels contain a twist like the one that's on the way.

  9. Oh yeah, Drake needs to be locked up as well. How could I forget that cocksucker?

    Who cares if they are actually convicted? I just like to see scum like White and Turner in jail. Man I hope they've both been repeatedly ass raped. I'm loving this shit!!!!!

  10. "...the jury is also being asked how they feel about white supremacy, Adolf Hitler, and swastikas."

    And that is basically the subliminal message have no rights if you possess certain views or like or display certain images.

    This man cannot get a fair trial.

  11. Many of you idiots have no idea of the chilling effect all of this is going to have on free speech; this is essentially a free speech issue, a right which I believe we no longer possess in this nation.

    I agree with anon, above that he isn't going to get a free trial.

  12. Nope, no fair trial for ol' billy-boy.

  13. I guess if Bill White was being paid 100,000 dollars a year by the FEDS like someone else we know, Bill wouldn't have anything to worry about.

  14. Ah poor little babies are crying about Billy not being able to have a fair trial because he is a Nazi sack of shit. The little bitch should have thought of that before he started goose stepping. Fuck him, they should take the bastard out and shoot him, save the tax payers some money.

  15. The difference I see in this case is Bill White used the telephone and US postal mail to threaten people.

    Also Bill White's father is footing the bill for the lawyers in this one, versus Hal Turner getting pro-bono lawyers.

    Taking a guess, I don't think White does any more jail time regardless of the verdict. We will see as whacky things happen in court these days.

    The one thing I will give White credit for, he's not a crying bitch like Hal Turner is.

    Oh, and remember when those emails from Turner were leaked? YOu do remember his password for was also leaked right?

  16. The bitch Nikki is stil very ugly: get a clue!

    And F-U!

  17. Mr. Schwartz, I missed that one. What is the connection between Hal and Tranny Surprise? That sounds like a site that Mr. VonBluvens would like :)

  18. """this is essentially a free speech issue, a right which I believe we no longer possess in this nation."""

    It is a right that which I believe almost every single liberal I have ever talked to wants to end. These radical leftists are some seriously fucked up individuals. That's OK though, because when this country gets to a no turning back point with freedom of speech I'm going to start writing bills to get all Anti American speech included in Hate Speech laws and we will lock up all of those who wished to eliminate free speech.

    """The difference I see in this case is Bill White used the telephone and US postal mail to threaten people."""

    Big difference considering that FREEDOM OF SPEECH is FREEDOM OF SPEECH any way you look at it. Write or speak. Mail it, use a courier, or even if you decide to ride it in on a donkey, it's still FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

    Honestly, we never should go over that edge that we are presently playing on and start barring peoples right to speak their mind, even if it is the most idiotic thing you have ever heard. Or if it is the most hateful thing you have heard. People have the right to their opinion, no matter how stupid you think it is. And other people have the right to not listen to it if they don't like it.

  19. UF--How come you keep mentioning Vonblvuens?

    You are beginning to sound like boa.


All comments must remain civil. No threats, racist epithets, or personal attacks will be tolerated. Rational debate, discourse, and even disagreement are all acceptable as long as they remain on point and within the realm of civility.