Sunday, March 20, 2016


Dear Supporters:

On March 15, 2016 in a “Media Advisory For Immediate Release” Peltier announced, “Lawyers for Leonard Peltier Request Clemency.”[i]  (As expected, an email message began with “Please make a donation,” furthering the notion that Peltier’s finances 
remain a dirty little secret.[ii] )

(Peltier isn’t alone in writing to the President and the Pardon Attorney.[iii])

Peltier claims that “For the past six months, a team has worked on the final version of the application (which is far more involved than just filling out a form).”

Certainly, it must have been difficult for the “team” to wade through forty years of myth, folklore, lies, and fabrications to spin the actual record of Peltier’s conviction while attempting to transform him into a “victim,” or worse yet, the invention of a “political prisoner.”

We have commented on the “political prisoner” nonsense in the past. If that were even remotely close to the truth the events of June 26, 1975 would take on an entirely different meaning. Instead of an obviously criminal overreaction by Peltier believing that the agents were coming to arrest him for being a fugitive from the Milwaukee warrant, then what happened that day would have instead been the assassination of two federal agents. Cold-blooded murder it was, an assassination, it certainly was not.[iv]

Peltier references a “press release” by Amnesty International (and frankly nobody cares about A.I.), but that doesn’t stop them from perpetuating the folklore. They claim “…a key eyewitness was coerced into stating that Peltier killed the agents after months of FBI harassment and threats. She later retracted her statement, and was subsequently prevented from being called as a defense witness at his trial.” Really, is that so? She, (Myrtle Poor Bear), was prevented from being called as a defense witness? Is A.I. or Peltier capable of telling the truth about why she wasn’t called as a witness? Of course not, because the truth is damning.

Beyond the irony and myth, tucked away in the court record, was Peltier’s own attorney’s opinion of Myrtle Poor Bear:

“Indeed, defense counsel, anticipating that she would be called as a witness for the government, described her in his opening statement as a “witness whose mental imbalance is so gross as to render her testimony unbelievable.” [v]

Strike one for A.I., with regurgitated folklore.

A.I. fails again with  “…the prosecution withholding of evidence that might have assisted his defense.” (Note the critical verb, “might.”) A.I. has never said Peltier was innocent, they know better, but only repeat quotes from the Peltier camp as they conveniently ignore that the evidence in question had undergone intense scrutiny with a three-day hearing and another appeal to the Eighth Circuit that resulted in no changes to Petlier’s conviction and sentence. Remember too, that the appellate court clearly stated, “…the direct and circumstantial evidence of Peltier’s guilt was strong…” [vi]

But let’s leave off by placing any clemency consideration in its proper perspective.[vii]  How does one respond to a convicted double murderer and aider and abettor in murder who would say this about his crimes; a statement lacking even a hint of rehabilitation or remorse:

I never thought my commitment would mean sacrificing like this, but I was willing to do so nonetheless. And really, if necessary, I’d do it all over again, because it was the right thing to do.” [viii]

“Dear President Obama, yes, Leonard Peltier actually said,” “It was the right thing to do.”

This was a telling and wretched public admission of guilt that completely destroys the original lie of self-defense and the other fabricated alibis, especially the decades-long lie that Mr. X killed the agents.[ix]

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods

[i] (Last accessed 3/17/16: This release contains all the same out-of-context quotes and baseless comments that have been previously addressed by the NPPA and is not a subject of discussion here. A similar notice was also released in an email.)
Some background regarding Peltier fundraising and alleged charitable activities.
[vi] U.S. v. Peltier, September 14, 1978, Decided. Ibid. I.B.4. ¶2 “Secondly, the direct and circumstantial evidence of Peltier’s guilt was strong and, in our opinion, the admission of these additional exhibits did not prejudice the defendants chances for acquittal.”
[vii] Although not feasible, the NPPA would relish the opportunity to review and factually critique and challenge Peltier’s clemency application. Without a doubt, it rests in the shallow end of a stagnant and putrid pool of decades-long fabrications.