By Bob Michael

I am a retired Los Angeles police captain and had a detective division of 100 plus detectives working for me. Fifteen of those detectives were homicide unit specialists and at the time we investigated more than 100 homicides per year. When it comes to investigating murder cases, I’ve had some experience.

During my career I was deemed a subject matter expert in criminal law, evidence, and procedure, and in U.S. Constitutional law, and testified as such under California administrative law.
During my career, and since retirement, I studied the Russian Bolsheviks as they existed from 1898 through 1960. Using my 50 years of knowledge gained, I wrote a book which was published in 2010 entitled Executive Order 1 and subtitled And The Bolshevik Papers. In the book, I identify a nearly exact replication of Russian Bolsheviks coming to power by the Obama group gaining the power to take over America…for a Bolshevik regime.

I am not a subscriber to the beloved American militia, and others, rising to oppose the Obamaites in a grand re-claiming of America, and I regularly, in writing and in presentations, indicate so. I believe that the decision is not ours as to the fate of America, but solely the American Bolsheviks. However, that is not the point here.

I want to completely change the direction of the national Benghazi debate. What I am offering is clearly already known to both Democrats and Republicans but the public is clearly ignorant. That the Republicans restrict their inquiries and bashing to a cover-up in Benghazi (and the Democrats are happy to debate in that arena ad nauseum) is a clear indication as to their lack of seriousness and just plain old nasty politicking. They is only one pod occupied by two peas.

I must admit that I don’t have all the facts about Benghazi but I believe I have enough, and so will set up a hypothetical. A hypothetical is a story, to keep it simple, and if I prove my hypothetical and show the real circumstances are the same as the hypothetical, then I prove my point.

There are some legal points and some interesting jurisdictional considerations but I don’t like the legal climate and don’t play their games. My consideration is tactical and not legal. I don’t care about conviction whether criminal or Senate. I believe the fight for America is much bigger. I want to begin a debate in the patriot arena and force it to the political debate…to make the murders in Benghazi the issue, and not some nebulous cover-up flip flop no one wins (free America loses).

The legal mind loves to argue black is white or white is black, plea bargain, or re-define the Second Amendment. Let them go into a dark room and argue all they want. The arena I propose is the arena of public opinion made up of all legal and in good-standing patriotic citizens of free America.

I don’t want to make this a legal treatise but this is pretty simple and straight forward, so here goes.

Below are definitions of murder:
California Penal Code Section 187 (a), “Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.”
At common law, murder was defined as killing another human being with malice aforethought.
The Model Penal Code defines murder as, “Killing another human being in circumstances showing extreme recklessness.”

Malice aforethought:
Malice aforethought is defined as a predetermination to commit an act without legal justification or excuse, a malicious design to injure, an intent, at the time of a killing, willfully to take the life of a human being, or an intent willfully to act in callous and wanton disregard of the consequences to human life; but malice aforethought does not necessarily imply any ill will, spite or hatred towards the individual killed

Persons deemed to commit a crime of murder (principals):
One is a principal or directly guilty of a crime as the California Penal Code Section 31, in part, states, “All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it be felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, or, not being present, have advised and encouraged its commission…or who, by fraud, contrivance, or force…or who, by threats, menaces, command, or coercion, compel another to commit any crime, are principals in any crime so committed.”

In criminal law, it is necessary to distinguish between the accessory and the principal. The principal is the person who is responsible for a particular crime. Under most legal jurisdictions, the person or persons charged with aiding and abetting or accessory are not directly involved with the crime that is committed. They are usually not present when the crime occurred. If two or more people are directly responsible, they can be charged as joint principals. The test used in order to distinguish a principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to the causing of the crime, rather than merely giving generalized and/or limited help and encouragement.

There are three elements to most aiding and abetting charges against an individual. The first is that another person committed the crime. Second, the individual being charged had knowledge of the crime or the principals’ intent. Third, the individual provided some form of assistance to the principal.

An understanding of these concepts and their application to the events surrounding the Benghazi murders are fully within the clear understanding of a lay person relative to the legal concepts necessary here. But there is one more very important factor, and that is to recognize that it was not necessary for Obama and his minions to have conspired to kill the four American victims. Obama and others are guilty of murder because they had knowledge of the crime and the attackers’ intent. They watched the murderers attack and their intent was obvious – to murder Americans.

The Obama group gave aid to the Libyan terrorists (militia?) by stopping aid to our people while they were still alive (at least some died only later) and under siege, three times no less, thus enabling the murderers in Benghazi to complete the killings and to escape. This was assistance to the terrorists which enabled them to continue their attack for several hours, and to murder more.

Obama knows that the attackers committed murder. Two week later, on Sept. 25, Obama spoke before the United Nations. In his speech, dedicated to our murdered ambassador, he intentionally continued to lie, blaming the inflamed crowd / video narrative while discussing the attack carried out by people he identified as “killers.” The video lie is not the main issue but does have significance relative to the murder charge. His acknowledgement of “killers” rather than the crowd violence has significance.

During this same speech Obama stated, “There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents”. He clearly recognized that those murdered were not in a “combat condition” but rather innocent persons trying to defend themselves from a planned, premeditated, reckless and ruthless multiple murder, an ensuing cover-up of American involvement, and assistance for their fellow Libyan murderers to escape identification and capture.

So much more could be put in here of a corroborative nature but there is already abundant evidence here to indict for murder. But my purpose is to initiate the real debate of open, identifiable, and observable evidence of the Obama administration members, including right up to the White House, as principals in murdering U.S. citizens who were in the line of duty, acting to defend free America at the time of the murders.

The Benghazi killings of our people are not political events of who lied about what. They are about the White House, the State Department, and the Pentagon, all principals in the premeditated murder of four Americans who were defending our country and trying to protect themselves and others.

Damn Obama and his evil minions.

Please send this to all, which means emails to other patriots, to politicians, to the media so we can openly accuse with irrefutable evidence, the U.S. government of murdering its own people.

Talking point manipulation and who called the attackers terrorists and when, won’t fly to stop this administration.

Murder accusations will, if done right.