PELTIER: REALLY, MR. X IS BACK? PART II

Dear Supporters:

This is a follow up to the September 12, 2019 NPPA blog entitled, Really, Mr. X. is Back?

What follows continues a review of an early August radio interview with one of Peltier’s attorneys, Larry Hildes of Bellingham, Washington. Set forth below are direct quotes followed by factual responses challenging Hildes’ claims:

First Amendment

The Claim: FBI Agents conducted an illegal picket and violated federal law:

Clinton promised to and didn’t in the face of a demonstration, on-duty FBI Agents, several hundreds of them staged a picket, which is illegal under the Hatch Act, demanding Leonard not be released.

The Facts:

This is a classic example of someone exercising their First Amendment right of freedom of speech and expression while publicly denying it to others.

Categorizing December 15, 2000 as a “picket” is disingenuous and against common usage and definition of the term. The term implies protesting and usually denying access, as with a union strike or when Peltier supporters yell, scream and chant (with bullhorns) and carry all manner of signs. This was nothing of the sort.

This is what Hildes is referring to:

On a cold, crisp Friday morning in Washington D.C., a number of FBI Agents gathered at the Law Enforcement Officer’s Memorial where a prayer was offered and the names of FBI Agents killed in the line of duty were read. Later, several hundred (there wasn’t an exact count but estimated at around 500), FBI Agents gathered at Pennsylvania and 15^thStreet NW and at noon, two by two, in a dignified and solemn procession walked to the perimeter of the Ellipse, ultimately gathering at the West Gate of the White House. All were in business attire and there was no chanting or verbalizing of any kind. The procession was led by two agents carrying a single large white banner that read, NEVER FORGET  FBI Special Agents, Coler and Williams, Killed June 26, 1975, while two others held large photos of FBI Martyrs, Jack R. Coler and Ronald A. Williams. (Footnote 1)

A representative from the group was invited into the White House to deliver over 10,000 signed petitions and signatures asking then President Clinton to fully review the murder of Agents Coler and Williams and to not consider granting clemency to Leonard Peltier.

So much for the “picket” claim and although a large gathering, it was nowhere near the meaning of a “demonstration” either.

It was a legal gathering. The organizers had secured permits from the U.S. Park Police and the Metropolitan Police Department. The organizers gave guidance for those who participated to take Annual Leave for that time, but since it was conducted at noon, some may have used that time as their lunch break.

Hildes opines that this gathering to express the opinion that Peltier should not be granted clemency was “illegal” and violated the “Hatch Act.”

Perhaps Hildes should understand that the Hatch Act prohibits certain federal employees from being viewed as partisan and openly supporting any particular candidate or party and/or using their federal position to engage in a political agenda or activity.

The Constitutional authority to grant federal pardons or clemency rests solely with the President, and is discretionary. Its intent is to be separate from political considerations and based solely on the facts of each petition, it is a legal and not political remedy. 

Hildes is invited to review the list of “Mays and May Nots” available for review on the government Hatch Act website. (Fn. 2) Hildes would be hard pressed to find where the December 15^th procession to the White House violated any of those restrictions.

But, we can make it much simpler:

On September 28, 2019 an email was sent to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel describing exactly what is stated above regarding the 12/15/2000 actions of federal Agents bringing the petitions against Peltier’s bid for clemency to the White house.

On September 30, 2019 the following was received:

            Dear Mr. Woods,

            None of the activities described in your email would violate the Hatch Act.

            Kind regards,

            Ana Galindo-Marrone

            Chief, Hatch Act Unit

            U.S. Office of Special Counsel

So much for improperly accusing citizens of violating federal law by exercising their own rights to free speech and expression. (Fn.3) 

The Old Cowboy Boots story

The Claim: The Agents were looking for a man who stole cowboy boots:

(the FBI Agents)…supposedly looking for a man who had stolen a pair of boots and was involved in a minor burglary ring. Not, not Leonard.

The Facts:

This incident, turned fairy tale has been a cornerstone of Peltier folklore. There was no “burglary ring” or “supposedly.” Instead, there was a serious incident in which federal warrants had been issued for Jimmy Eagle and three others. Agents’ Coler and Williams were searching in the Oglala area of Pine Ridge following up on information that the fugitive Jimmy Eagle may have been in that area, which ultimately led to the events of June 26, 1975.

But perhaps the best way to demystify this claim is to provide an excerpt concerning the victims from an Editorial Essay that was posted on the NPPA website in 2000 and updated in 2005 (Fn. 4):  

On the evening of January 17, 2005 Mr. Jerry Schwarting was telephonically contacted and asked if he would be willing to discuss the incident which occurred on June 23, 1975. He agreed. Mr. Schwarting stated that he considered Hobart Horse a family friend and after a day of branding cattle with several other individuals agreed to provide Hobart Horse a ride to the residence of Teddy Pourier. Also at this residence were Herman Thunder Hawk and Jimmy Eagle. Accompanying them to Pourier's residence was a younger male, Robert Dunsmore. Mr. Schwarting is white; the other individuals were Native Americans.

While there, after some prompting and friendly dares from Hobart, Schwarting agreed to wrestle Hobart Horse for fun; he did, and beat Hobart three times. It was at that point the evening turned from an impromptu social gathering into a dangerous and criminal confrontation. Schwarting was beaten by the others, and held, along with the young teenager Dunsmore who was stripped of his clothes. They were both threatened, even with castration, and had guns repeatedly fired over their heads by the others. 

During the telephonic interview, Mr. Schwarting, on his home computer, reviewed the NPPA section (above) concerning this incident and agreed that it was an accurate summary of what had happened. Mr. Schwarting added that at one point they stole his vehicle, jacket and boots, and clarified that the boots were only two months old and cost $200. Two hundred dollars in 1975 was a good sum of money to for a pair of boots.

Mr. Schwarting stated that during this episode he was put in fear for his life, was cut several times by Hobart and still carries the scars to this day…

The fact remains that there was a violent confrontation, felony laws were violated, charges were filed, including robbery and assault with a deadly weapon, warrants issued, and on June 25th, one of the subjects, Teddy Pourier was arrested. Agents Coler and Williams were pursuing a fugitive investigation at that point and were attempting to locate and apprehend Jimmy Eagle on June 25, and at Jumping Bull on June 26. 

To claim that the "Incident at Oglala" was over a stolen pair of old cowboy boots, as Peltier and the LPDC have repeatedly suggested, would be like saying Leonard Peltier has never changed his version of what happened at Jumping Bull that fateful morning.

Life Sentences

The Claim: A Federal life sentence was seventeen years:

And, I will point out that if he had done the standard federal term for murder he would have done seventeen years on each count, he would have been out ten years ago. He’s not out because of his politics. 

This Federal life sentence premise goes along with a couple of better ones Peltier has offered, all of which are equally untrue:

In October 2018 Peltier claimed:

“I have been here too long. The beginning of my 43^rdyear plus over 20 years of good time credit, that makes 60+ years behind bars.” 

Work on the math a bit longer: The Bureau of Prisons guidelines just don’t work that way.

In February 2016 Peltier offered (the all-caps are his; bold are editorial comments):

“I HAVE EARNED ABOUT FOUR TO FIVE YEARS GOOD TIME THAT NO ONE SEEMS TO WANT TO RECOGNIZE. IT DOESN’T COUNT, I GUESS? (That’s correct, it doesn’t count) AND WHEN I WAS INDICTED THE AVERAGE TIME SERVED ON A LIFE SENTENCE BEFORE BEING GIVEN PAROLE WAS SEVEN YEARS. (Seven years? Maybe on another planet) SO THAT MEANS I’VE SERVED NEARLY SIX LIFE SENTENCES AND I SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED ON PAROLE A VERY LONG TIME AGO. (Not quite) THEN THERE’S MANDATORY RELEASE AFTER SERVING 30 YEARS. (No, the  “mandatory” Peltier is imagining is “eligibility for parole”) I’M 10 YEARS PAST THAT. THE GOVERNMENT ISN’T SUPPOSED TO CHANGE THE LAWS OF (Sic) TO KEEP YOU IN PRISON—EXCEPT IF YOU’RE LEONARD PELTIER, IT SEEMS. (No, they haven’t for Peltier. Any changes are for the entire Federal inmate population.)

Can’t get the story straight; is it seven years or seventeen as his attorney suggests?

Peltier seems to always forget the fact that he is serving two consecutive life sentences, one each for Agent Coler and Agent Williams. Peltier also conveniently omits that he owes an additional seven consecutive years for the armed escape from Lompoc Penitentiary. 

Here’s a simple offer, provide any proof that a life sentence in 1976 when Peltier was sentenced for murder was seven or seventeenyears.

What will be found is that a life sentence was typically assumed to be thirty years before an inmate would be eligible for parole, with no guarantees at that point either. On balance Peltier is on the hook for sixty-seven (67) years; thirty for each life sentence plus the additional seven. Since the parole board has nixed any chances of release, that leaves roughly 24 years and counting.

“He’s not out because of his politics.”

Let’s pretend to understand this premise and try to place it in some context, along with the fact that Peltier has claimed to be a political prisoner almost from day one.

Where was the political connection to what happened at Jumping Bull?

Peltier and those in the camp were AIM members. Peltier et al. would retort with Cointelpro, (omitting that the program had been shut down four years earlier). The FBI did not know that Peltier, a fugitive wanted for the attempted murder of a police officer, was on the Reservation.* There is nothing to indicate that the FBI was aware of the AIM encampment along White Clay Creek adjacent to the Jumping Bull property. Agents’ Coler and Williams were searching for fugitive Jimmy Eagle and followed a red and white vehicle from Highway 18. We do know how things rapidly developed because there was an eyewitness. Agent Williams, describing over the FBI radio that those in the vehicle they followed were about to fire on them. And we do know how it ended that day for Agents Coler and Williams. Later, Peltier was indicted and a warrant issued. He was added to the FBI Ten Most Wanted list, arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to consecutive life sentences. Nothing politically motivated there. A straight-up criminal case with many appellate decisions to fill in the details, only one of which favored Peltier for a period of time. 

But for the moment let’s play along with the political prisoner fantasy and assume Peltier’s arrest in Canada for the murder of two government agents was motivated by his affiliation with AIM and that the government agents were searching for Peltier all along. If one accepts that premise then the unprovoked attack on the Agents wasn’t spontaneous, but deliberate and planned and the government agents were lured onto the Jumping Bull property to be attacked, with Peltier administering the final coup de grace. Then it follows that Peltier isn’t a murderer after all, but as a political operative he assassinated two government agents. Peltier, the political prisoner is therefore an assassin. If one buys into the political prisoner fantasy then this is the result. You can’t have one without the other. 

Peltier Under Oath

The Claim: Hildes wants Peltier to testify in the Washington State paintings case:  (Fn. 5)

We are going to file a motion in the near future to ask the court to bring Leonard to the trial. I don’t know if we’ll win. We are going to try very hard. Because he has a right to be there. The jury has a right to hear from him personally, and you know, see him, and have him talk about why this was important and his expression, and you know, this case is an opportunity to bring more discussion about Leonard’s case, about who Leonard is, about why he needs to be out, he’s not in good health, he has a long litany of medical problems, and people who have been in the prison system for many years, and he’s been in prison since he was thirty.

There are really two points being made here:

1) To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, any publicity is good publicity, and Hildes is correct that if Peltier took the witness stand in Tacoma, Washington it would generate publicity and “more discussion.” Whether it would be good or bad publicity depends on a number of factors. Considering the location it’s possible that Peltier may add new followers to his dwindling supporter’s network who may go to his website, read the folklore propaganda, accept it at face value and gather around the Peltier campfire. The controversy may cause some to seek out titillating content and for some, heightened public curiosity. The percentage of those who are genuinely interested in the truth and make an effort to do the research and examine both sides, especially the appellate decisions where most, if not all of the spurious Peltier allegations against the government are completely vetted and discounted, may be a smaller percentage. However, those who do will certainly see through the myth.

2) How many attorneys would consider putting someone like Peltier on the witness stand in Federal Court, no matter what his client, Peltier, may want? (It’s likely Peltier would love to get out of USP Coleman for a while with a field trip to Washington State, along with the audience and spectacle of publicity it could generate. It would certainly salve his overbearing ego.) The obvious problem lies with all of Peltier’s baggage, beyond just the murders, conflicting public statements, a narcissistic autobiography drawn from the pages of Alice in Wonderland, the self-incriminating statements, the armed escape, etc., etc.; the list is very long.

There would likely be quite a number of federal prosecutors who would love nothing more than to question Peltier under oath on the witness stand. They would have an absolute field day. Imagine what foundation questions might be asked? (Certainly considering what latitude Judge Leighton may allow the Washington State Assistant Attorney General.) “Mr. Peltier, can you tell the jury where you are currently residing and why you are there?” Peltier could respond, “I’m a political prisoner who was given life sentences for supposedly killing two FBI Agents.” It would be quite a circus and an eye-opener for the jury. The media would salivate over headlines, notwithstanding the issue that the trial actually relates to Peltier-the-painter and his allegedly infringed First Amendment rights that likely would be lost in the ether of the moment. 

Hildes’ comment during the radio interview may have just been bluster or wishful thinking. No attorney in their right mind would put the likes of Leonard Peltier voluntarily before any jury.

* * *

What is clearly evident from Hildes’ radio interview is that he is willing to pontificate about Peltier and offer statements that are difficult or nearly impossible to support, and as a result we have to agree in the undeniable premise that facts do matter.**

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

Footnotes:

1) FBI Martyrs, Wall of Honor: https://www.fbi.gov/history/wall-of-honor

    This is a ‘must see’ Video honoring FBI Agents Jack R. Coler and Ronald A. Williams: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozhEumzwgKA

2) May’s and May Not’s:https://www.cdc.gov/about/ethics/pdf/lunch_and_learn/haflyer.pdf

3) 2005 Editorial Essay regarding Peltier’s legal team and the 12/15/00 event:

http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#paranoia

4) Old cowboy boots: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/faq.html#17

5) Peltier’s Washington State case: http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2019/09/peltier-really-mr-x-is-back.html

Update: On 9/16/19, by order of the court, the trial has been postponed until summer, 2020 due to an illness of the State’s attorney assigned to Peltier’s case.

* Peltier was acquitted of this charge. 

** There are still other points to discuss regarding the radio interview that may be topics in Part III.

PELTIER: REALLY. MR. X IS BACK?

Dear Supporters:

There are important revelations of the Peltier saga that simply cannot be ignored or dismissed.

In early August one of Peltier’s attorneys, Larry Hildes of Bellingham, Washington, did a radio interview.

What follows are a few, of many other, direct quotes followed by factual responses challenging Hildes’s claims:

The claims: Somebody & the FBI admitted:

“And somebody apparently shot the agents from point blank range from a location where Leonard was not, with a gun that the FBI admitted he did not have or use.”“And they were killed by someone who apparently came up behind them in their vehicle. Leonard was a long distance away on the top of a ridge, nowhere near them and did not hit them with any shots that he fired.”

The Facts: Mr. X

Hildes is obviously referring to the years’ long lie of Peltier’s only real alibi, the fabrication of the fictitious Mr. X. For nearly two decades Peltier claimed that someone they knew was bringing dynamite to the AIM camp, was followed by the Agents onto the Jumping Bull property, engaged and wounded the agents, shot them at point-blank range and drove off in the infamous red pickup.

This episode was described in Peter Matthiessen’s In the Spirit of Crazy Horse and in Robert Redford’s film Incident at Oglala. In the film, AIM protagonist and participant that day was Bob Robideau who for six minutes and fifty-two seconds goes into great detail describing what he saw of Mr. X’s actions, and in the very next filmed sequence Leonard Peltier proclaims “This story is true.”

Well, it wasn’t then or now. And how do we know this?

In 1995 another AIM protagonist and participant that day, Dino Butler came out publicly in a Native American publication and said “That is totally false. Totally untrue. That never happened.” (Footnote 1)

It isn’t curious at all that in Peltier’s autobiography, Prison Writings, he offers all manner of excuses and explanations but—and not by accident, never mentions Mr. X. Wonder why?

And then there’s another—still current Peltier attorney, Michael Kuzma, who in a November 3, 2012 lengthy radio interview put the Mr. X lie permanently to rest, “From what I understand now its been determined that the Mr. X story was concocted.” (Fn. 2)

 “Concocted” is just another way of saying; yes it was a lie, a lie woven into the fabric of Peltier folklore. 

Peltier’s ‘defense committee,’ along with its website has changed a number of times and moved away from verbalizing the Mr. X fairytale. On May 23, 2000 the then Leonard Peltier Defense Committee stated “Mr. X has long been a controversial topic by both supporters of Leonard Peltier and those who oppose his release.” Controversial? A gross understatement for certain. Even today, the ILPDC’s most current website—of course with flagrant misinformation, has only this to offer regarding the killing of the agents:

“When the skirmish ended, the two FBI agents were dead. The U.S. Government claims they had been wounded and then shot through their heads at close range.”*

That’s it, no “somebody” who “came up behind them.” 

The Facts: FBI admitted

The FBI and government never stated that Peltier did not have or use the ‘’gun” (the Wichita AR-15) to kill Agents’ Coler and Williams.

To the contrary, the government contended at trial and on appeal that Peltier used the Wichita AR-15 to first fire at the Agents and that the bolt mechanism of this weapon was matched to 114 shell casings, thirty-nine of which were introduced as evidence at Peltier’s trial as part of the Exhibit 34 series. One of these was the bullet casing found in the trunk of Agent Coler’s vehicle (Trial Exhibit 34B). Further, the government stated in a brief that;

“The trial witnesses unanimously testified that there was only one AR-15 in the compound prior to the murders, that this weapon was used exclusively by Leonard Peltier and was carried out by him after the murders.” 

Based on a later released (after the trial) FBI Laboratory Teletype dated October 2, 1975, Peltier appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit claiming that this document contradicted other evidence, including a later October 31, 1975 FBI Laboratory Report (that was introduced at trial) as a possible ‘Brady’ violation. 

The 8^thCircuit decision stated: 

“We affirmed the conviction on September 14, 1978…In affirming we too accepted the government’s theory that both agents had been killed with a high-velocity weapon fired at point-blank range at a time when the men were seriously wounded and unable to defend themselves. We then held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find Peltier responsible for the murders.”

Nonetheless, the 8^thCircuit remanded the appeal back to the District Court for an evidentiary (ballistics) hearing held in October 1984. The three-day hearing reviewed in detail the ballistics evidence concluding that the October 2, 1975 Teletype would not have affected the outcome of the trial. 

However, Peltier appealed that District Court decision to the 8^thCircuit again. The 8^thCircuit Court then further concluded:

“Yet, we are bound by the Bagley test requiring that we be convinced, from a review of the entire record, that had the data and records withheld been made available, the jury probably would have reached a different result. We have not been so convinced.”

The court also significantly added:

 “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.” (Fn. 3)

Clearly, the FBI and the Government never stated that Peltier “did not have or use” “a gun” (the Wichita AR-15).

The Claim: Supposedly—guns blazing—at the compound

“He has been in federal prison now for forty-four years for supposedly shooting at two FBI Agents who stormed the reservation with guns blazing supposedly looking for a man who had stolen a pair of boots and was involved in a minor burglary ring.” “I mean, as you say to come in looking for Jimmy Eagle, who wasn’t there and a pair of cowboy boots that he supposedly stole, with guns blazing, firing at the compound where mostly AIM folks were staying and trying to kill people.”

The Facts: Supposedly

Well, that’s not quite how it happened. There was no “supposedly” in Peltier’s conviction. Peltier was tried and convicted and his conviction and sentence upheld through over a dozen appeals. 

Among other similar appellate conclusions was that: 

“The record as a whole leaves no doubt that the jury accepted the government’s theory that Peltier had personally killed the two agents, after they were seriously wounded, by shooting them at point blank range with an AR-15 rifle.” 

[Rule 35 Motion, 8^th Circuit, 12/18/02]

The Facts: Guns blazing

It is well established that there was an eyewitness to exactly how the confrontation on the Jumping Bull property began. There is no disputing that Agent Ron Williams was overheard on the radio by personnel in the Rapid City Resident Agency and those within radio range as he was trying to describe exactly where they were and that those in the vehicle they followed from Highway 18 had stopped, gotten out and looked like they were about to fire on them. They heard Ron say that they needed help or they would be dead, they heard the gunfire, and Ron say, “I’ve been hit.” 

The Facts: firing at the compound…to kill people

First, to make a public statement that the Agents were there to kill people is disingenuous.  

Secondly, the AIM members were in a campsite (referred to as tent city) located along White Clay Creek in a wooded ravine a few hundred yards over rolling terrain from where the Agents were initially attacked and taken under fire.  It would be physically and geographically impossible for the Agents to have been “firing at the compound where mostly AIM folks were staying.”

* * *

In a letter dated January 15, 2016, among other issues, Hildes  stated:

“As you have done for far too many years, you have attempted to insert yourself into Mr. Peltier’s case, and first Amendment expression with patently untrue statements, incendiary characterizations, threats, and just plain lies.  In publishing your deliberately false statements to numerous third parties including government officials and the media, you have intentionally and maliciously severely harmed Mr. Peltier, and it is our intention to take legal action accordingly.”

It is clearly evident that Peltier has made himself into a public figure with all manner of public statements, media interviews, press releases, books, solicitations (for allegedly tax-deductible donations. Strangely, on the ‘donate’ page of Peltier’s website there is no mention of donations being tax-deducible) for his “legal defense” (a matter that has been long resolved) and scarcely documented charitable activities. As a public figure Peltier has acquired notoriety through controversy of his own making. His public pronouncements are subject to scrutiny to a greater extent than a private individual.

Offering opinions and analysis based on Peltier’s public assertions should be expected by public figures, especially when they contradict the legal record, prior statements, are obvious fabrications or perceptible admissions of guilt.

“Untrue statements and incendiary characterizations?” Highlighting the many false statements and fabrications may sound incendiary to Peltier but we cannot ignore the fact that Peltier is an unrepentant convicted double murderer. Unrepentant because his few attempts at reconciliation to his victim’s families have been shallow and self-indulging (Fn. 4), and a convicted double murderer as the appellate record repeatedly affirmed. 

(Fn. 5)

“Threats?” Peltier has never been threatened by anything published by the No Parole Peltier Association (NPPA). 

“Just plain lies?” Peltier would be unable to identify any lies within the hundreds of pages of editorial essays and blogs (that expose decades of myth and folklore and contain abundant footnotes and references to primary sources).

The NPPA has not “inserted” itself into the Peltier case but has acted from its inception on April 30, 2000 for two purposes; to challenge the fabrications emanating from decades of the Peltier façade and his denigration of his victims but most importantly to act as a victim’s rights advocate by honoring the memory and sacrifice of Jack Coler and Ron Williams who were severely wounded in an unprovoked attack and then brutally murdered in the line of duty.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

Footnotes:

1) Mr. X the lie: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/lie.html

2) This is a lengthy and detailed blog/essay about Peltier attorney, Michael Kuzma’s radio interview: http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2012/12/peltier-kuzma-closes-circle-much-more.html

3) Appeal from evidentiary hearing http://www.noparolepeltier.com/800.html

4) Prison Writings, pp. 13-15 (as well at other similar statements)

5) U.S. Court Decisions: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/court.html

*Yet in total contradiction of the facts and Peltier’s erroneous claims, the Peltier website absurdly has Redford’s Incident at Oglala available for viewing. 

September 12, 2019 Peltier turns seventy-five. Both Jack and Ron would have been seventy-two but they were robbed of their last forty-four years.

PELTIER: UPDATE

Dear Supporters:

Things have been fairly quiet on the Peltier front. No major recent announcements from the "Committee" except for one item that will be addressed in time.

For all, the best for a safe and blessed holiday season and good health and happiness for the New Year.

"In the Spirit of Coler and Williams"
Ed

SA RONALD A. WILLIAMS; July 30, 1947; Rest in Peace

Dear Supporters:

Today, Ron would have celebrated his seventy-first birthday.

All those in the FBI and law enforcement remember when their comrades were killed in the line of duty performing their sworn commitments to uphold the law and protect the citizenry.

Over time, as generations age and move on to other careers and eventually retire, sometimes these events are relegated so far in the past that they may be nearly forgotten except for local or national memorial services where they are collectively remembered.

The loss and memories often tend to only affect remaining family members, those who worked or shared a close friendship, and those who had the responsibility of ensuring the guilty were brought to justice.

To a large degree the perpetrators of line-of-duty-deaths are thankfully long gone and forgotten. In rare cases though, there remains a constant distortion and disquieting reminder of the event that prompts the need to ensure that the facts and truth are widely repeated.

Ron was a handsome, vibrant, personable and capable young agent, single at the time but certainly would have married and had a family. By now, well into the final stage of his life, he likely would have looked back on many exciting and challenging events from a career or two while spending as much time as possible with his grandchildren. That opportunity was violently stolen from him.

Ron—and his partner Jack Coler—will never be forgotten.

Keep watching over us brother.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

SA RONALD A. WILLIAMS: JULY 30, 1947 - JUNE 26, 1975, R.I.P. & MORE

Dear Supporters:

Within just a few short weeks the popular and professional young Agent would have reached his 28th birthday. In the meantime, he and his partner, Jack Coler, were carrying out their lawful duties searching for a fugitive on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota.

In separate vehicles they followed who they believed to be Jimmy Eagle onto a dirt road off Highway 18. The occupants of that vehicle, and those in a nearby American Indian Movement (AIM) camp along White Clay Creek, instigated an unprovoked attack. We know this with absolute certainty because the eyewitness, Special Agent Ron Williams, was on the radio describing exactly what was about to happen. And it did. AIM cowards led by Leonard Peltier, attacked, severely wounded and then brutally murdered both Agents. Peltier, of course, was later convicted of first-degree murder and aiding and abetting and is still serving two consecutive life sentences.  

As, many believe, I feel certain Ron is looking down and watching over us and knows that on January 18, 2017 President Obama denied Peltier’s clemency petition. This was a clear recognition that the pardon attorney, the Attorney General and the President concurred with Peltier’s conviction and many appeals that had established his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.  Peltier, over the past years has reinforced that guilt to beyond all doubt. (Thank you President Obama*)

Parole is off the table until 2024.**

Until January 20, 2021 clemency is also off the table, or four years hence if President Trump is reelected. Either way, the clock is ticking.

Peltier has repeatedly denigrated the memory and sacrifice of Jack and Ron with falsehoods, fabricated scenarios and public admissions of guilt.

On this day, and every day, Ron is in our thoughts and prayers and neither he nor Jack will ever be forgotten.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

P.S. The Federal Civil suit filed by Peltier, and Peltier deception:

1) On July 25, 2017, the federal civil suit brought against Ed Woods and Larry Langberg was dismissed, with prejudice, and includes payment of attorney’s fees and court costs. Although integral to the Washington State’s Anti-Slapp statute, the Judge provided his reasoning for not also including the $10,000 fines.

Within the entire Peltier saga there are only several significant dates:

June 26, 1975 (Peltier murdered Jack Coler and Ron Williams); June 2, 1977 (Peltier sentenced to two consecutive life sentences); January 18, 2017 (President Obama denies Peltier’s clemency petition), and July 25, 2017 (Peltier loses his battle to silence those who exercise their right to free speech by presenting the truth behind the Peltier myth.)

As of July 30th no mention of the federal civil suit or the dismissal could be found on Peltier’s updated whoisleonardpeltier.info website.

2) Peltier deception:

Peltier’s website has been refreshed, and frankly is well presented, however, still contains the same tired old misinformation and fabrications as previous ones. There is an interesting piece of deception though. In the section of Resources and under Upcoming Events it lists the June 26^th Oglala Commemoration, an annual event. It displays a quite impressive photo of hundreds, perhaps thousands of apparent supporters. The red banner is partially and deliberately obscured certainly giving the impression that this very large gathering is in support of Peltier. It’s deceiving and it isn’t. The photo is actually from recent demonstrations regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline. Wonder if Peltier obtained approval to use this photo on his website and whether there is any copyright infringement. A review of perhaps a thousand photos on the Internet of the Dakota demonstrations could not identify one Peltier sign. This is just another example of Peltier spin and disinformation. What Peltier should have done was to properly source the origin of the photo…but that would have been too honest. https://www.whoisleonardpeltier.info/home/events/

* http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/01/peltier-thank-you-president-obama.html

** http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#paroledenied

PELTIER: MEMORIAL SERVICE

Dear Supporters:

No, this is not about a memorial service for the unrepentant convicted double murderer Leonard Peltier.

Each year FBI offices hold a memorial service for Special Agents killed in the line of duty as a result of adversarial action, Special Agents and FBI employees who died as a result of performing law enforcement duties, and to recognize law enforcement line-of-duty deaths from around the country.*

 A memorial was held on May 22^nd at the FBI’s Cincinnati office. The non-denominational service was conducted by the long-time FBI Chaplin.

The Special Agent in Charge presented a list of the biographies of FBI personnel recently added to the list. Several of these deaths were the result of terminal illnesses caused by extended periods of exposure to the toxic environments in Shanksville, PA, the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in the aftermath of the September 11^th terrorists’ attacks.  

Every service includes a reading of the names of Agents killed in the line of duty—now at thirty-six—as a result of adversarial action.**

The list begins with SA Edwin C. Shanahan, shot and killed in October 1925 by a car thief and ends with SA Samuel Hicks, shot and killed in November 2008 during an arrest involving a major drug trafficking organization.

From Special Agents’ Shanahan to Hicks, all the cases have long been resolved and closed with the subjects’ either killed during the commission of the crime, or with those that did survive until now, serving long prison sentences.

However, two on the list—#21, Jack R. Coler, and #22, Ronald A Williams—long after their brutal murders, have had their memory and sacrifice denigrated for the past forty-one years. Theirs is the one case that is still very much with us as Leonard Peltier and his dwindling network of sycophantic followers have neither the intelligence nor courage to challenge the lies and fabrications Peltier has been peddling since June 26, 1975.

The Peltier network is dead in the water. The Peltier website has become stagnant, and Peltier is undoubtedly still mumbling to himself, in shock, since President Obama saw through the lies, fabrications, myth and folklore. The President undoubtedly understood the facts and Peltier’s unquestioned guilt.

Thank you President Obama.***

Uncharacteristically, Peltier, the self-created public figure, has remained silent, perhaps finally learning that with each public statement and “press release” he only succeeded in placing a prison sneaker firmly in his own mouth. Or, still bewildered by the January 18^th denial of clemency, remains speechless.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

* http://www.nleomf.org/memorial/

** https://www.fbi.gov/history/hall-of-honor

*** http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/01/peltier-thank-you-president-obama.html

PELTIER: NPPA 17TH ANNIVERSARY

Dear Supporters:

On April 30^th the No Parole Peltier Association reached its seventeenth anniversary.

Since its inception in 2000 the NPPA has covered a lot of ground, particularly in destroying the fabrications, myth and folklore surrounding Leonard Peltier. Those efforts were, and are, based on public court records, transcripts, books Peltier authored or co-authored, recorded press interviews, a film in which Peltier appears, statements by co-defendants and press releases and statements made by Peltier himself as he has reinforced his own guilt while promoting himself as a public figure.

The NPPA’s founding principle remains to honor the memory and sacrifice of FBI Agents Jack Coler and Ronald Williams.

Parole is a very distant hope since the 2009 Lewisburg parole hearing. The next scheduled hearing is 2024.*

Except for June 26, 1975, January 18, 2017 arguably marked the most significant date in the Peltier narrative; President Obama denied Peltier’s clemency petition. (Thank you, President Obama. **)

The obvious conclusion was that the Attorney General, Pardon Attorney and the President all agreed that Peltier should continue to serve the remainder of his lawful conviction and consecutive life sentences.

As a reminder to all that Peltier remains an unrepentant cowardly convicted murderer: ***

“And really, if necessary, I’d do it all over again because it was the right thing to do.”

(Leonard Peltier, February 2010)

“I don’t regret any of this for a minute.” (Leonard Peltier, August 2014)

 “In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

* http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#paroledenied

** http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/01/

*** http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/04/peltier-update-review.html

PELTIER: JUDGE HEANEY; REDUX

Dear Supporters:

What follows is an excerpt from a 2003 (fourteen years ago) NPPA Editorial Essay addressing public statements from Leonard Peltier and the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee (LPDC). It is reprinted in response to Peltier’s recent comments about Judge Heaney and the letters he has written.

* * *

Honorable Gerald W. Heaney, Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Circuit Court Judge Gerald Heaney is truly a member of America's Greatest Generation. At the outbreak of World War II, as a young lawyer, he could have avoided the heat of battle and probably used his legal talents in a safe stateside assignment. Instead, he sought a U.S. Army commission and became a young infantry officer participating in the D-Day invasion and several significant battles leading to the end of war in Europe. His courage can be neither denied nor ignored.

Judge Heaney is a jurist of impeccable reputation and experience. His character is irreproachable and unquestioned, and we know this because of a very specific example from the Peltier case.

By way of brief background

Judge Heaney was a member of the court during a 1984 appeal and wrote a subsequent 1986 opinion denying Peltier's appeal based on the application the federal Brady and Bagley legal tests. This decision was the result of Freedom of Information Act material provided to Peltier that became the basis for a three-day evidentiary hearing (on ballistics evidence) in the district court in October 1984.

Throughout this period Judge Heaney obviously held some very strong feelings concerning the historically unfair treatment of Native Americans in general, and the government's handling of the events leading up to the take over of Wounded Knee (February 1973) and the later subsequent killing of the two FBI Agents in June 1975.

His feelings about these issues and the history of Peltier and related cases moved him to write an impassioned letter in April 1999 to U.S. Senator Daniel K. Inouye during the term of then President George H.W. Bush - this presumably when Judge Heaney was either retired from the bench or in senior status. This letter, along with a subsequent one to Senator Inouye dated October 24, 2000 (in which he reaffirms his previous letter), during the final weeks of the Clinton administration, were written not as an ordinary citizen, but on United States Court of Appeals stationary, making them at once, personal and official correspondence.

Judge Heaney's first letter listed several mitigating reasons why he believed Peltier should be afforded some consideration of leniency: "At some point, a healing process must begin," he said.

Judge Heaney added, "My thoughts on these other aspects result from a very careful study of the records..." but throughout this letter Judge Heaney never suggested that Peltier was innocent. Quite the contrary, he had this to say on the issue of Peltier's guilt:

"Third, the record persuades me that more than one person was involved in the shooting of the FBI agents. Again, this fact is not a legal justification for Peltier's actions, but is a mitigating circumstance." (Emphasis added)

Judge Heaney himself would be needed to expound on this point, whether he consider(ed) (the Honorable Judge Heaney has since passed away) the initial wounding of the agents as a factor or that three people (Peltier, Robideau and Butler) went down to the wounded agents, and one, or all three, murdered the agents at close range.

No doubt, as Judge Heaney has done throughout his judicial career, he will set aside personal feelings and made his decision based on the proper application of the law as he did in 1984 and 1986.

And apparently he did.

Denial by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

In a unanimous decision, on December 12, 2002, the Court of Appeals, of which Judge Heaney was a member of the panel, denied Peltier's recent motion to reduce his sentence.

Peltier's attorney's arguments, as we have seen, were untimely at best and based on issues that had been previously argued and rejected by the courts, even to the extent that former AUSA Crooks quoted one of Judge Heaney's own decisions during the proceeding.

However, Peltier's attorney Eric Seitz of Honolulu angrily and publicly stated that this ruling was "a disgrace" and further proof that "nobody who seems to care about Leonard is in a position of responsibility or authority." (But, Mr. Seitz, someone most certainly is.)

Seitz added that he was not "...particularly optimistic that any of the judges now sitting have any compassion or willingness to do the right thing here." "They're inclined to let him rot in prison."

Seitz's last comment was directed at the U.S. Supreme Court, but by implication both comments are leveled squarely at the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and Judge Heaney.

Seitz would do himself and Peltier a service to remember that Judge Heaney was one jurist - "in a position of responsibility and authority" - who came down squarely on the side of Peltier, the Native American. Judge Heaney, as well as the other judges, saw the frivolousness of Seitz' arguments and ruled against Peltier based on the law.

Seitz can whine and complain and throw around typical Peltier camp rhetoric all he cares to, since he has foolishly ignored one man who has plenty of passion on this subject, Judge Heaney.

But thankfully, although abundantly passionate on the plight of Native Americans, Judge Heaney (was) a jurist of the highest caliber and knows that Seitz's legal arguments were flawed.

Yet Seitz, and those among the reenergized Peltier campaign, would want the Court of Appeals "to do the right thing here" and yield to passion in the face of frivolous legal maneuvers.

•                Reenergized or not, the tune and tone of the "Until Justice is Won" campaign is still the same. Make as much noise as possible but stay away from the revealing legal history of the case.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

Addendum:

During a later 60-Minutes interview Judge Heaney was asked if Peltier received a fair trial. His response, “He received a fair trial. Not a perfect trial, but a fair trial.”
For a thorough review of Judge Heaney's background, please see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Heaney