Featured Post

AUGUST 9, 1979: OHIO & CALIFORNIA

Dear Supporters: In a brief departure from the mission of the No Parole Peltier Association , the following is offered: Brothers an...

Friday, June 21, 2013

JUNE 26. 1975; NPR, PELTIER UPDATE


Dear Supporters:

1) June 26, 1975; 2) “They ain’t proved nothing about me…” Part 1

1) June 26, 2013 marks thirty-eight years since the attack and brutal in-the-line-of-duty murders of Special Agents Jack Coler and Ron Williams. Our thoughts and prayers are with their families. Their sacrifice and memory will never be forgotten.

2) On December 19, 2012, Peltier had a rare opportunity to speak publicly, sort of, at a makeshift press conference hosted by federally funded National Public Radio’s, Amy Goodman, after a Peltier benefit concert held in New York City. (The LPDOC has admitted it was a financially lackluster event…and even at that…they never divulge where any of the money really goes.

Goodman had to prompt and prod Peltier to provide answers to softball questions, but without the filter provided him by the LPDOC and their ghostwriters, or being prepared with at least intelligent talking-points, Peltier, unscripted, proved yet again how either clueless he his about the details of his own case (selective memory loss), or how far he has slipped into actually believing that people are incapable of vetting some of his outrageous claims. In other words, telling whomever will listen that all the folklore is actually true. Hardly.

When pressed by Goodman, “What is your response to the FBI that campaigns against your release? The best, on the fly, Peltier could come up with was,
“Oh, they’re full, they’re full of crap,” (which ended after a string of incredibly false statements with), “They, they ain’t proved nothing about me, they ain’t proved I did anything, let alone killed somebody,” and, adding in for good measure, “So I don’t know what the hell I’m in here for.”

Let’s help Leonard, Peltierites and the LPDOC understand exactly why he’s doing back-to-back life sentences plus an additional seven consecutive years for an armed escape.

Peltier:

““...they took the court of appeals, Judge Heaney asked the prosecutors “Just what was Mr. Peltier convicted of, because we cannot find no evidence of first degree murder in the record?” The prosecutor Lynn Crooks stated that “the government doesn’t know who killed the agents” nor does he know “what participation Leonard Peltier may have had in it.” So, in nineteen-ninety two I filed an appeal again asking what am I, what, what was I in prison for, if the government doesn’t know what I’m here for. So, they changed it to aiding and abetting. Which is illegal, illegal because I was never indicted for it; I was never prosecuted for it, and taken a whole different defense at your trial. So, I don’t know what the hell I’m in here for.””

Peltier’s  wholly inaccurate account of the questioning before the court aside, Peltier’s counterfeit allegations have been covered countless times before, but let’s give it one more solid dose of fresh air and sunshine:

On this very point the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (of which Judge Heaney was a member and author of the unanimous decision) said:

"Peltier's arguments fail because their underlying premises are fatally flawed. (A) The Government tried the case on the alternative theories; it asserted that Peltier personally killed the agents at point blank range, but that if he had not done so, then he was equally guilty of their murder as an aider and abettor."

So, exactly what part of “fatally flawed,” “equally guilty,” or  “aider and abettor” does Peltier not understand?

Are we missing something here or does Peltier really take his supporters for fools? They can read, and understand, but if they choose not to accept it, that’s their problem.

The entire decision can be read here:
http://www.noparolepeltier.com/997.html

And in case there’s any doubt about how early the “aiding and abetting” issue was an integral part of  Peltier’s prosecution, take a look at Identification Order, I.O #4681, dated 12/3/75, (Peltier’s Wanted poster), which clearly states at the bottom “Federal Warrants were issued…November 25, 1975, at Rapid City, South Dakota, charging Peltier with murder-first degree, killing two Federal Officers while in the performance of their duties and aiding and abetting (Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1111, 1114 and 2…)

The wanted poster can be viewed here:
(An autographed copy will be sent to USP Coleman.)

So, ignoring all the history of his own case, the legal arguments and record throughout the appellate process, hearings and decisions, Peltier still wants us to believe this fairly tale.

Another nugget of Peltier mythology from the NPR interview was “And then at the trial they had admitted racists, at the trial they had admitted racists on the jury.” Really? Can Peltier tell us who they were and what they said? Of course not. That was just an unscripted random blurt and not an uncommon tactic from the Peltier camp.

(More to follow from the NPR interview.)

This is reminiscent of a brilliant legal comment made four years ago (July 28, 2009 at a small gathering after Peltier’s parole hearing at USP Lewisburg).

Peltier’s then attorney (and he’s had a number of them), Eric Seitz stated, "The FBI did not have anything new to say."
Well, not quite, because the hearing examiner heard sufficient detail concerning Peltier's conviction and denied appeals in addition to sworn testimony from the 2004 Arlo Looking Cloud murder trial where a former AIM member testified that Peltier admitted killing one of the FBI agents while the agent begged for his life.

And, the NPPA presentation was all new material based solely on Peltier's own statements; public admissions that reinforce his actual guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.
Seitz also said that he presented "some additional evidence on Leonard's behalf to the board." Evidence? Hardly. And since Peltier will not release the transcript of the hearing, that claim remains baseless.
Seitz added that,  "…they (the FBI and government) don't have any creativity, they don't come up with anything new. They don't have any greater ability to explain their justification for their position. It's a very wooden position, kill an FBI agent and live the rest of your life in prison. I don't think that's going to impress very many people who aren't already of the same opinion."
First, and we can overlook that Seitz may have misspoken-it was two agents murdered, not one, but that aside, the government doesn't have to come up with anything "new" and to even suggest as much shows a fundamental lack of insight and legal acumen. All anyone has to do is spend a little time to see just how wrong Seitz and Peltier really are. This case has been under the proverbial microscope for nearly four decades and every aspect has been reviewed, many times, and Peltier's attorney's, with their oftentimes frivolous legal arguments, have lost, not because of some grand conspiracy that Peltier whines about, but because the facts are not supportive of any of Peltier's claims of innocence.

And yes, Mr. Seitz, brutally murdering two wounded FBI agents does warrant spending the rest of one's life in prison.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods