Creating Criminals: The Frederick Lewis Story

[XLFD]

Introduction

 

In our area we have recently seen the conviction of what most people would consider to be monsters.  There was Wayne Lyle, who came to court initially last week and could not plea coherently because he was crying too hard.  After the tears dried at the next hearing, he admitted to the CSC against a 9 year old girl and added another older victim. 

Perhaps more horrendous was the crime that Dalton Willard was accused of and admitted to in court two weeks ago.  In Grant Township (Mason County), he lured a 9 year old boy into a house where he proceeded to sexually assault him.   Immediately afterwards, the boy told his parents of the crime, and Willard was eventually picked out of a line-up. 

 

Cases such like these are just an example of what goes through our court system every week.  In both cases the victims were young, but the charges were very credible and immediate.  The punishments the perpetrators will get will be well deserved.  But then there are other case where you begin to wonder whether our local justice system is maybe too zealous in getting perpetrators of a crime, when perhaps the crime has never been committed, or is based on a flimsy foundation.

 

Twelve local jurors convicted Sean Phillips of secretly confining his 4 month old daughter, Baby Kate Phillips, without ever being able to determine what exactly has become of her.  Twelve new jurors should be getting the chance to weigh the evidence (including any new evidence that has since surfaced) of whether a murder charge is indicated. 

The lack of a body and weak circumstantial evidence will be a big hurdle to jump, but many observers of the first trial were summarily surprised by the guilty verdict handed out.  The elements the State had to show for 'secret confinement'  were set at a rather low threshold, and whether the State can show a "confession" letter of Phillips to the baby's mother indicates the harsher murder charge in the upcoming trial will be interesting to see.

 

More instructive of prosecutorial zeal on an alleged perpetrator happened in the recent Todd Lane Johnson charges of CSC against a minor.  Johnson coached soccer at Mason County Central (Scottville) Schools, and a former MCC student last year came out with charges that she had been molested by Johnson since she was 13 years old, off campus. 

 

Although the MCC Superintendent said he conducted an internal investigation (without any evidence of having did so) and the Mason County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) ducked FOIA requests about the case so as not to 'tamper with the jury pool',  public statements were made that did just that.  Sheriff Cole said "It (the sexual relationship) was ongoing for several years and started when the player was 13."  The now-21 year old woman later admitted to the court that everything was a fabrication, she made the whole story up for reasons known only to her. 

Instead of her life being forever damaged by Johnson, his life was forever damaged by her baseless allegations.  He was lucky enough to have had her recant at the last minute; if she hadn't we may have had an innocent, civic minded person in prison now.

 

An investigator needs to be wary when a victim comes out many years after the fact to point fingers for a crime whose occurrence can likely not be proven with any substantial evidence.  You are relying on the testimony of a victim who has supposedly been too scared to come forth, with memories, facts, and motives that may not be the too clear.  Something, whether it was via counseling or an event, has triggered them to come forth and tell a very personal story to strangers many years later. 

The investigator has to make a judgment as to the veracity of the allegations, and if there is not a lot of collaborative evidence but credible testimony by the victim, he must seek the person out who may have committed the crime and check his veracity.  Who wants to let a perpetrator of a heinous crime not receive their due punishment?   But are we willing to use the power of the State to bear in making an innocent man into a guilty party twelve years after the fact.  This may have very well happened in the case of Frederick Lewis.

 

The Background of the Frederick Lewis Case

 

In August 16, the public learned of Mr. Lewis when he rejected a plea deal, as reported in the MCP: 

Frederick Lewis was arrested on Feb. 12 following an investigation by the Michigan State Police. He was charged with two counts of criminal sexual conduct first degree involving a minor under the age of 13. The incidences allegedly took place when the alleged victim was between the ages of 7 and 11, she is now 18. The woman, who now lives in Baldwin, is a relative of Lewis’ and was living in the same Custer Township house during the alleged incidences.

Earlier this week Lewis turned down a plea agreement from Mason County Prosecutor Paul Spaniola. The agreement would have dropped the two counts of CSC first degree and charged Lewis with CSC second degree instead with a sentence of four to 15 years.

 

Before his scheduled trial in October, the Muskegon Chronicle reported: 

A 31-year-old man from Mason County accused of sexually abusing a girl under the age of 13 has accepted a plea agreement, sparing him from the potential of life in prison.  Frederick Lewis of Scottville was charged originally with two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, that would have resulted in life sentences, for alleged sexual abuse that occurred from 2001-2004.  Lewis appeared in court recently to accept a plea deal that changes his charges to criminal sexual conduct, second degree. 

 

<-- Frederick Lewis and his attorney

One would believe justice was served, and a foul criminal not unlike Wayne Lyle and Dalton Willard was finally off the streets.  The whole situation had pretty much flew under my radar; I hadn't known Mr. Lewis, and like the vast majority of consumers of the local media, his actions spoke for him.  But then others familiar with the case brought some things to my attention concerning this particular case, and now I am left wondering whether the juggernaut of justice in Mason County has made another victim out of a virtuous person, like they did in the Todd Lane Johnson situation.

Both cases involve the testimony of a person that the alleged perpetrator had a modicum of control over, coming out many years later to reveal they were used sexually by them when they were minors.  Investigators assumedly questioned Johnson-- who knows when the MCSO shields their records-- and Johnson assumedly maintained he was innocent.  As they went to trial, however, he had to worry about potentially serving a lot of years behind bars.  The temptation of a plea deal to minimize those years had to have been playing in his mind.  Lucky for him one was never accepted, because the State had thrown all of its trust behind a woman who had made up a story. 

Frederick Lewis, facing an insistent accuser and what amounted to a 'confession', decided finally in October to accept the lesser charge.  The question remains, however:  "Is he guilty?".  Two people know the answer to that question, but they both have different stories. 

 

Her Story

 

The victim in this story, I will call her 'Y', is definitely a victim of someone close to her at a very tender age.  As early as when she was five she was sexually used by her 11 year old cousin, documented back in the year 2000 in a hospital report: 

 

 

Following some abnormal behavior by her daughter less than a year after this revelation, her father had 'Y' evaluated.  Excerpts therefrom:

 

 

 

'Y' would be in and out of counseling during her formative years over this action by her older cousin, spending time with her father and stepfamily (Frederick included) for a few more years.   Over these years, is when the molestation is supposed to have happened with Frederick.  This would only be brought to light this year, after more changes had taken place in 'Y's life. 

In the summer of 2012, 'Y' moved from her father's household to her mother's.  Her mother has been diagnosed as bipolar, and had 'Y's cousin (the one who molested her when she was 5) living with them until she had found out about the past abuse of her and her brother.  'Y' had taken an overdose of pills in January 2013 because of all the stress involved, as these excerpts from a Community Mental Health report indicates:

 

 

The final service section of this CMH report was signed on February 7, 2013.  Less than a week after that, 'Y' accused (for the very first time) that Frederick Lewis had engaged in criminal sexual contact for years with her when she was very young.  The Michigan State Police was sent to investigate whether the allegations had any merit; Trooper Jeffrey Hammond interviewed 'Y' and then went to Mr. Lewis to investigate his involvement.  In the transcript of the interrogation he conducts with Frederick shortly after this, Trooper Hammond never mentions any knowledge of 'Y's past, or her known sexual abuse at roughly the same time by her cousin.   

 

Frederick Lewis' Tainted Confession

 

According to Lewis and his girlfriend, an admitted victim of her own sexual abuse from the past who believes to this day in Frederick's innocence, Tpr. Hammond came to their residence on the morning of February 12, 2013 waking him up after he had been up most of the night.  Hammond invited Lewis to go to the Pere Marquette Fire Department to be interviewed about the allegations which had been made by 'Y'.   Hammond declined to hold the interview at the residence, he insisted that they 'voluntarily' go to the PMFD, waiting for an answer as he rested his hands on his service revolver and taser. 

Believing it was an offer he could not refuse, Frederick assented and was driven by his girlfriend to the PMFD after Hammond left in his cruiser to go there.  When he got there, the girlfriend was denied entry to the interrogation.  Hammond went out of his way to tell Lewis he was not under arrest, and implied he wasn't being detained, but the transcript reveals him using some sort of unnamed law and legal purpose that prevented her from being in the room even at Lewis' request:

 

 

So a tired Lewis was placed in a room alone with a Trooper, and the questioning began.  Throughout the 'interview' Hammond never gives Lewis his Miranda Rights, nor does he intimate that Lewis has the freedom to leave without doing the interview, and not be arrested.  In fact he often gives Lewis two alternatives:   1) to admit the events happened and receive leniency or 2) to admit that nothing happened, in which case the law would bear full on him as the other side has 'scientifically proven' their case already. 

 

 

And not much later:

 

Fred rarely gets to complete a sentence, and so the backstory of 'Y's CSC at her cousin's never sees light.   He does note that the original time period 'Y' used was during a time he had a convenient alibi. This bit of exculpatory data didn't spark much interest in Trooper Hammond:

 

 

Even after Lewis relates some of the past allegations 'Y' has made which include her biological father and others (that are part of the record that the trooper shows no knowledge of), Hammond continues the hammer:

 

 

Young victims of molestation can often displace the aggressor and transmit false memories, even enough to pass a polygraph.  Hammond further insists on the given account by 'Y' as incontrovertibly fact.  The only thing to determine is if it was forced, or something else.  Even though his younger brother corroborates Fred's version it is used to further press the issue when he says she was in Fred's room cleaning it on occasion.

 

 

Fred continues to be harangued by the trooper, who stresses a point he has made implicit throughout most of the interview:  that either Frederick is a sick pervert who forced himself on this girl or someone who gave in to base instincts:

 

 

A couple minutes more into the interview, it is condensed by Hammond into two choices, where confession works out best for all: 

 

 

And if it wasn't completely clear:

 

 

And over the next hour, with the threat of hard jail time if he didn't confess because of all the scientific proof of his guilt, Frederick Lewis listened to what he needed to do, so that he could have the best result for his future.  With the promise of a lighter sentence and counseling if he capitulated, he agreed to the lesser of two evil choices he was given.

 

Epilogue:

 

Most of us do not know Fred Lewis or 'Y', myself included.  But his story is at least a cautionary tale to those who are not sure of their rights when dealing with police officers.  Lewis could have left at any time, however, this knowledge was not passed to him.  He could have asked to have a lawyer present, or even his girlfriend present (which was denied, as surely as was any mention of anything close to a Miranda Warning).  He could have went silent, and it would not have been used against him any more than if he decided to cite the "Gettysburg Address" instead of answering any questions. 

Beyond this, it was found out later that there was no 'juvenile polygraph' administered to 'Y', and her testimony was accepted at face value, under no duress.  Unlike the antagonistic and threatening interview Fred received. 

Much of what Hammond offered wasn't true, police officers do have the right to exaggerate and lie in the course of interrogations, but according to Hammond this was not an interrogation.  Nobody else has corroborated her story about Fred, nor have the officials thought that her debasement at the age of five to her young cousin, along with her psychological problems that led to an attempt on her life earlier this year, had any effect on Trooper Hammond's tactics in holding this interrogation.

According to police officer.com the law when it comes to police lying to suspects to get confessions:
•Courts agree due process requires that confessions be voluntary. That means they can't be coerced.
•Courts agree coercion can be psychological as well as physical.
•Most courts agree they'll decide whether the confession was voluntary or coerced based on a "totality of the circumstances."

Totality of the circumstances can include:
•Police conduct - what officers say and do and how they say and do it, e.g., the length of the interrogation and whether police offer refreshment or breaks.
•The environment - e.g., are police questioning the suspect in a 6' X 8' windowless room where they stand between him and the only exit?
•The suspect's age and mental status.
•Etc. - anything else that bears on the coercive nature, or not, of the interrogation.

 

The main evidence against Frederick Lewis is that he has a signed confession by himself admitting to what he thought would get him out of doing hard jail time, as proposed by Trooper Hammond.  Hammond's tactics did get a confession, but was it legit or forced out of an innocent man?  This is probably enough to convict in a court and area known to be hard on crime.  But is it the truth, and will we see justice for either party here?

 

Over two weeks ago, I sent a FOIA request to the Michigan State Police asking about their policies/training manuals on interrogation of suspects and for the training that Trooper Hammond had in this regard.  Contrary to that act, I have received nothing from them in return, only a notice that the FOIA Coordinator is on break until December 2nd.   

Frederick Lewis goes to court at 9:00 AM on Tuesday, December 3rd to find out how long he goes to prison for one count of CSC second degree based on the allegations of 'Y' and the plea deal he was forced to take after signing the confession he was forced to make.  He will have a scarlet 'sex offender' label with him for likely the rest of his life once he does get out.  I have a gut feeling that he may be innocent, and the system may be guilty.

[FLudington]

Sometimes one voice in the darkness, is all one can hope to hear. Sometimes it is enough.

[XLFD]

People need rehabilitation at times, criminal justice systems need rehabilitation at times.  Since Frederick Lewis has been arrested, the State has mandated that interrogations and confessions be video recorded.  He was not given that opportunity back in February, being only recorded via audio. 

[XLFD]

"The interrogator’s refusal to listen to a suspect’s denials creates feelings of hopelessness, which are compounded by the fake file and by lies about the evidence.  At this point, short-term thinking takes over. Confession opens something of an escape hatch, so it is only natural that some people choose it." says a noted psychologist who has conducted controlled experiments on false confessions.

Perhaps you should read this article, published just earlier today, or the New Yorker article it describes that goes more in depth.  Or the link at the very end of the article about a homeless woman who confesses to a murder she could not have committed.  It shows how innocent people can be forced to confess to crimes they are innocent of.  Fully a quarter of the prisoners that get exonerated by DNA evidence, are ones who made false confessions, usually because of the coercive nature of modern interrogation techniques being used by interrogators who have conducted flawed interrogations. 

In toto, Jeffrey Hammond's techniques were flawed because he introduced almost every part of the eventual confession, and gave Lewis no way out, but to confess.

[NYC]

Eye,
That is not true, it all depends on what they have to lose. In this country you are guilty until proven innocent. A trial like this can run upwards of $30,000.00 if you have a family to feed and your lawyer tells you - the jury will be 40 yr old white women who will only listen to the accuser. You basically have little choices left, you hope for the best deal possible so that you can continue to feed your family. (Btw - this is lisa O'BRIEN forgot my password)

[XLFD]

Welcome back Lisa O, we missed your East Coast presence here on the west coast of Michigan.

[Jane]

I think that is naive to believe that and I have a hard time believing you really believe that deep down.Although I don't have time to do all the research to prove your belief incorrect X gave you some options for that yourself to research. I think it is a well known generalization that when pressured by police a person will take one of the easiest options handed to them at the time.

When a person is scared sh1tless and feels trapped(or even if not) they will take the path of least resistance. What is the options given this man? TWO! He took the one of least resistance. With no miranda this so called "confession" should be thrown out.

Maybe he did it and maybe not. But lets look at the accuser, she's had a lot of things happen to her and I could easily see something having happened, a little fooling around a couple times, no harm done at the time. But later on, years later, she starts to feel guilty and maybe all this stuff of her childhood comes into the forefront of her mind, all of the sudden she decides that she was the victim of a pervert(s) and not an active participant.

I really have a problem in a case like this. There is too much that is not able to be proven. It happened to long ago. She says/He says. If we are going to prosecute these types of cases their should be a hell of a lot of research put into the whole thing.

Even if they did fool around when she was 12/13 and he was 19/20....(is that the age gap?) I don't think thirteen years later is the time to come back to it.

Now listen carefully, My daughter will be 13 very soon. She tells me about(and I see) what all these little tramps she goes to school with, 7th grade, are all about. These floozy ho's are ready to jump on any woody that bares itself to them. Most of them are sexually(physically) mature. They are ready to breed. Wearing 4 inch heels and clothes so skimpy and skirts so short you think your at the club with the Kardashians.

Luckily my daughter is not one of those skeezy dressers, doesn't play [rate me/would you date me] on facebook. But she has a healthy interest with boys. I wouldn't be surprised if she found a boyfriend that she or any of them would go pretty far pretty fast. (don't tell her Dad).

Sure I can dream she stays a virgin until she is 24, has a doctorate and a husband, but lets be realistic, when I was that age I was ready to jump any guy who would give me the attention I wanted. I seriously doubt girls have changed any in that regard since I was a hormone adled teen.

So, although I don't doubt something may have happened between the two in the above story I also believe it was probably not "rape" or even CSC of any degree.

[NYC]

That sane people would voluntarily plead guilty if there was no guilt.This year has taught me a lot of our justice system, and it's not pretty. My roommates step daughter accused him of rape this past summer and he spent all summer in jail, with no hope of getting out, unless he took a plea deal. To get out on bail, he would need $50,000 cash plus a house to sign over as collateral ( he rents so does his family- no collateral or 50g). The daughter changed her story multiple times - every time she got caught in a lie. As he sat in jail, he lost both his jobs, missed the birth of his son ( which I believe was a catalyst for this whole rape lie). For 3 months they kept changing court dates, the prosecutor refused to hand over any evidence, there was a taped phone call between father and daughter ( which according to the lawyer was not incrimitory in any way, in fact showed my room mate as innocent and trying to help her cope with any problems she had - he thought she had gotten pregnant by her boyfriend and was afraid to tell her mother and was claiming she was raped. At one point she started telling him that DNA would prove he raped her and that he was the father of the baby / which is when he finally realized she was suggesting her raped her. He calmly told her to relax that everything would be okay, that DNA would prove he wasn't the father, and that whatever trouble she was in, he and her mother would help her through /they are divorced separated.
The DA would not give my roommates lawyer a copy of the tape, he only allowed him to come in and listen to it - nonstop there was no pausing so he could take notes.
The lawyer basically told us that even though they have no evidence, that the jury of his peers would be 40 yr old white women ( my room mate is Hispanic) and all they would here was - " he raped me" and he would get 25 yrs. after 3 months sitting in jail he decided to take the plea bargain , if he was single he would still be in jail, but as he told me he has a baby ( now 6 months) that needs food, diapers a place to live.
After the plea deal they let him out - he still has to go for final sentencing where the judge okays it ( formality but the judge can still reject it) he had a court date in October, took the day off work and the DA didn't show up, rescheduled for November, took the day off and the DA didn't show up again, next court date is set for this Friday .
The whole system sucks, before he took the plea deal he was public enemy #1, couldn't be loose on the streets, now he took the deal, he's able to be home and no one is in any rush to finalize it so he can start his probation and get it over with.
Sorry long and windy - I know there are some who will believe his guilt, but I know he is innocent.

[Willy]

NYC

That's been a problem with rape cases for years. I'm afraid this happens more often than we think.  When a woman lies about being raped it cast doubt over every woman who makes the same claim.  DNA evidence has freed a lot of accused rapists.

Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: 

Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs

---Excerpts---
Full report at a href="http://web.archive.org/web/200102031601/http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/dnaevid.txt">http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/dnaevid.txt>;  

...DNA aids the search for truth by exonerating the innocent.  The criminal justice system is not infallible, and this report documents cases in which the search for truth took a tortuous path.  With the exception of one young man of limited mental capacity, who pleaded guilty, the individuals [28 of them] whose stories are told in the report were convicted after jury trials and were sentenced to long prison terms.  They successfully challenged their convictions, using DNA tests on existing evidence.  They had served, on average, 7 years in prison.

...

Indeed, there is a strong scientific basis for believing these matters represent just the tip of a very deep and disturbing iceberg of cases.  Powerful proof for this proposition lies with an extraordinary set of data collected by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) since it began forensic DNA testing in 1989.

Every year since 1989, in about 25 percent of the sexual assault cases referred to the FBI where results could be obtained (primarily by State and local law enforcement), the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing. Specifically, FBI officials report that out of roughly 10,000 sexual assault cases since 1989, about 2,000 tests have been inconclusive (usually insufficient high molecular weight DNA to do testing), about 2,000 tests have excluded the primary suspect, and about 6,000 have "matched" or included the primary suspect.1 The fact that these percentages have remained constant for 7 years, and that the National Institute of Justice's informal survey of private laboratories reveals a strikingly similar 26-percent exclusion rate, strongly suggests that postarrest and postconviction DNA exonerations are tied to some strong, underlying systemic problems that generate erroneous accusations and convictions.

[Willy]

One of the reason for Miranda is that many innocent people were coerced into confessing by border line torture by the police. On the other hand the police are trying  to do what is expected of them and that is to get perverts off the street, the problem is many innocent folks had been caught up in the wash.

[wildfire]

Hello eyeonludington well just to let you know 'Y"    in the story of frederick lewis , frederick is not guily, the one whos guilty in all this is the cusion  who has lived with "Y" n her real mother n other family members  n  every were that real mother of "Y" has lived shes aloud that cusion to be right their with "Y" n her brother n   to let you know when the cusion got done doing"Y' he then turned around n done it to 'Y"'s  brother who is 19  now  but at the time he was 6,  n  they stayed with someone that was like a grandma figure  to them  off n on while their they were begin watch by her  when father was having them kids durning visiting times,  So  I also know that the real mother keeps this cusion in hiding n pretacts him in anyway she can,  the real mother has 5 kids n lost all of them do to her drugs, drinking n partying n not begin the kind of mother she should of been  the real dad would get out of work  n find the real mother at johnnys drinking n partying n when asked were the kids were the real mother would say, at home with babysitter, little did she know dad went to check  n "Y" n her brother were home with youngest brother (when they were young n in diapers) w/o  a babysitter, w/o  anybody begin their.  Frederick lewis to all you people DO NOT UNDERSTAND  he was told by jeffery hammond what to say  its on the transcipt  n  jeffery told frederick word for word what to say or if he didnot HE WOULD GO TO JAIL... Now  you don't know "Y"  n    I  do   n  I know frederick,   "Y" has lied about crap all her life n  why?  to get attention,  to break up   her real  dad n stepmother shes has tryed to do this 2x's  n this is her atemp  to try it again,  But   "Y"'s  real dad has disowned her n  why you ask  well how would you like your daughter to get married (which "Y" is now)  n  she alouds the cusion WHO RAPED HER N HER BROTHER, to her own wedding, real dad said that was a slap in the face, after it is court order  for cusion to stay away from "Y" n her brother , But real mother never listen to that court order she aloud the cusion to live in all the places they did from liudington, scottville, wahalla, fountain, n  the people who do know this could'nt tell cause real mother threatened them with kicking them out ,  getting them in trouble with cops,  telling them they can't see their dad anymore,  between threats n brying their real mother wins again, just like the case with frederick lewis between the real mother n "Y'  this was well planned  just like real mother does all the time,  she hurts their emotions  n bring them down  n tells them hurt full things ,   So  frederick is not guilty  n  this I know as facts,  n  I know way to many young girls are lieing to get revense n  this systom is totally wrong!!! And farther more "Y"   n  all the other girls n mother  that are helping in trying an inncoense person need to go to jail also n their name needs to be brought out in the open so dudes will be aware of the people like this.

"

[XLFD]

There is a lot of backstory in this case, and the transcript of the interrogation's 'confession' and the stuff that has been in the record all along from way back pointing away from Frederick Lewis makes this a potentially compelling case for an appeal based on methodology. 

What has happened and is already known about 'Y's victimization beyond Fred Lewis is atrocious in itself, but I would say also that sending an innocent person to prison is even more atrocious.  If Mr. Lewis does get some vindication at some point, I hope those in our system that were so eager to slap him in irons have some public remorse.  Unfortunately, you rarely see that happen and it's non-existent in these parts to my knowledge.

[XLFD]

Frederick Lewis' sentencing has been moved to this afternoon at 1 PM.  I agree with EyE when he says that an innocent person should never plead guilty.  But it happens quite often, because of the way our justice system currently works.

A good local case in point is the initial Joseph McAdam criminal trial.  If you remember, Joseph McAdam in the summer of 2009 was a passenger in his mother's vehicle when they had a traffic stop near Stearn's Park.  The encounter, which was caught on LPD dash-cam video, showed that three police officers, without any provocation gang tackled and tried to get McAdam under arrest.  McAdam passively resisted (according to the arresting cops), and was tased five times.  He was then taken to the hospital and was tased there also repeatedly when he peacefully refused to have his knee treated.

Our prosecutor, Paul Spaniola, immediately was set to tender multiple counts of assault and also obstructing/resisting police officers against McAdam for being victimized by the gendarmes.  The video proof and depositions by the police officers since, paint a much different story, but at that time, McAdam was facing a system that beat him up, tasered him, tasered him again at a hospital, imprisoned him, tampered with his property/evidence, and then set charges on him that could have him sit for his whole adult life.  He was offered a plea deal that allowed a much lesser punishment, and took it.   

When the system is corrupt, people fear the system, and often assent to the lies of those who control the system to avoid the corrupted power working against them.