Dear Supporters:
The question to ask is how naive does the International Leonard Peltier Defense Committee (ILPDC) believe Peltier supporters really are? Or, to ask another way, to what length will the ILPDC go to perpetuate the false Peltier narrative? [1]
This is only one of many factually inaccurate claims, which is too kind a description, but peddling Peltier lies from the myth playbook is precisely their intention.
On this page, https://www.whoisleonardpeltier.info/LEGAL/RESMURS.htm [2] from the Who is Leonard Peltier website, there is a statement that reads:
FBI Memorandum
Observation of the Need to “Shoot and/or
Interview” Norman Brown When Located.
That statement, which makes no practical or literary sense, links to a document. Opening the document there is an editorial note which makes even less sense, as it is also misleading.
On April 18, 1977 Leonard Peltier was convicted of two counts of first degree murder and sentenced to two consecutive life terms. Later, because of FOIA documents that were released the government would attempt to change its theory to “aiding and abetting” in order to maintain Peltier’s conviction.
(Using the verb “attempt” contradicts Peltier’s attorney Kevin H. Sharp’s repeated public claim that the government, according to Sharp, did change its theory.)
This linked document is actually a transcribed portion of the verdict in Peltier’s trial.
But what happened to “Shoot and/or Interview” Norman Brown? He’s not there! Even if the ILPDC did offer some other document, it is implausible that an FBI document exists promoting to “shoot or interview” anyone. Such a claim is senseless.
One would think that Peltier, the ILPDC and particularly Kevin H. Sharp would want to offer, at a minimum, more accurate theories to its supporters and the public.
As for the “Aiding and Abetting” issue, the ILPDC and Attorney Sharp are grossly inaccurate by offering factually unsupportable statements claiming that the government changed its theory of Peltier’s prosecution—after—Peltier was convicted.[3] In other words, during Peltier’s lengthy appellate process. Nonetheless, this issue was definitively settled by the courts.
This same page continues with additional distortions. There are ten (10) frames labeled “Other Suspects” with linked documents, each with additional editorial notes. “Other suspects” is pointless with no relevance to Peltier’s eventual conviction. The ILPDC hasn’t figured out that there are always “other suspects” in criminal cases of this magnitude. Jimmy Eagle, for one, received a lot of attention in the Reservation Murders investigation. Any other individuals were eliminated as suspects as Peltier’s guilt became more evident, which ultimately led to an indictment, trial and conviction, with numerous appeals that only reinforced his guilt. As a result, Peltier’s conviction and sentence have never been altered.
And unless Sharp and the ILPDC needed reminding, on more than one occasion Peltier admitted his involvement. In a sworn affidavit Peltier stated, “I did not wake up on that June 26 planning to injure or shoot federal agents, and did not gain anything from participating in the incident.” (Emphasis added) [4]
Further links indicate: “FBI Teletype Shows the .223 Shell Casing Was Not Compatible With the ‘Wichita AR-15.’ ” This statement is taken completely out of context and skews the actual timeline. This matter was unconditionally resolved with a three-day ballistics hearing in the District Court and before and after with the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, all of which were ruled against Peltier’s interests. “When all is said and done, however, a few simple but very important facts remain. The casing introduced into evidence had in fact been extracted from the Wichita AR-15. This point was not disputed; although the defense had its own ballistics expert, it offered no contrary evidence.” 8th Circuit, September 11, 1986. (Emphasis added)
“Inconsistencies in the FBI’s story are noted.” This entry links to nineteen (19) lines of Peltier trial transcript testimony along with a note, “During Peltier’s trial the prosecution’s witness and AIM member Michael Anderson testified of FBI coercion.” Hardly inconsistencies. Native witnesses Swore on the Pipe and acknowledged that their testimony was truthful. For a detailed and comprehensive review of the Critical Witnesses Against Peltier; Michael Anderson, Wilford Draper, Norman Brown and Angie Long Visitor, see footnote.[5]
Several additional entries regarding statements from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission may be of interest to Peltierites, but hold no sway in Peltier’s conviction. Peltier’s numerous appeals, and the court decisions on the merits, are controlling.
All this on just one page of Who is Leonard Peltier, and there is no mystery of exactly who and what Leonard Peltier is, an unrepentant, cold-blooded convicted murderer.
“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”
Ed Woods
[1] Peltier’s committees have morphed several times over at least the last two decades. Much of the Peltier material pushed by the original Leonard Peltier Defense Committee (LPDC) was carried forward by later committees and websites without fundamental vetting, review or revision. Thus, the perpetual inaccuracies.
[2] Last accessed 10/28/2022. Duly noted to see if the ILPDC can correct at least this one obvious flaw.
[3] http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2022/04/peltier-judge-kevin-h-sharp-part-3.html
[4] Peltier’s sworn Clemency Application, February 17, 2016. This ends with the following attribution; “I do solemnly swear that the foregoing information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.” Obviously, difficult for the ILPDC and Sharp to grasp; 'participating' and 'aiding and abetting' are synonymous.
[5] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#critical Critical Witnesses against Peltier.
