Confederate Memorial Association

Press Release

____________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release For further information, contact:

December 20, 2004 William Wood - (202) 483-5700

 

LAWYERíS NAME APPEARS AS PORN PURCHASER

ON HACKED INTERNET BANK ACCOUNT

 

WASHINGTON. D.C.. --- In another of a series of amazing developments in a 16-year-old lawsuit that closed the century-old Confederate museum in Washington, D.C., the name of the lead lawyer who has prosecuted the case against the Confederate Memorial Association that owned the historic museum has appeared as an internet porn purchaser, according to the president of the Association who was also sued.

John Edward Hurley said he discovered numerous entries on his individual bank account statement for internet porn purchases that, when traced by a Texas purchase-tracking organization, showed numerous entries totaling nearly $1,000 that listed the purchaserís name as Herbert Harmon. Herbert Harmon is a lawyer who has been suing the Confederate Memorial Association for much of the past two decades.

One of the issues that had been raised in the case was that one of Harmonís plaintiffs in this case, the Jefferson Davis Camp No. 305 of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, had produced a racial board game called "Home Rulette" that was clearly pornographic, Hurley said.

Hurley said he had reported the illegal accessing of his personal bank account to the police and was contacting Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Secret Service about the matter. He said that both the Justice Department and the Secret Service had been following the lawsuit since he had previously reported the participation of federal employees in the activities of the Jefferson Davis Camp, which has close ties with Kirk Lyons, the lawyer who represented the Ku Klux Klan and the Aryan Nation.

Hurley characterized the banking incursion as particularly troubling since the D.C. Superior Court had awarded $15,000 in legal sanctions to these plaintiffs who have mysteriously failed to pick up the money from the Associationís corporate account, despite the court order. According to Hurley, this could be because evidence from other sources is showing that the entire litigation was fraudulent and was sponsored by political activists using government funds.

Sources indicate that the D.C. Superior Court has made the court file on this case unavailable for review.

###