JAMES REYNOLDS, PART II, The Letters & Public Statements

Dear Supporters:

What follows is a No Parole Peltier Association letter sent to Mr. James Reynolds on 11/6/17 asking a few straightforward and critical questions in response to the letter he sent to President Obama and an interview given to the New York Daily News supporting clemency for Leonard Peltier. Mr. Reynolds made a conscious decision and placed his support for Peltier in the public domain. Doing so makes his public statements subject to scrutiny.

No response was received from Mr. Reynolds.

However, on 11/27/17 Mr. Reynolds was reached by telephone, and in a brief, but telling conversation, confirmed that he had received the NPPA letter. A response to Mr. Reynolds and the explanation of the letter below will follow in a subsequent blog: James Reynolds, Part III.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed

Mr. James H. Reynolds

300 Palm Dr. #4

Naples, Florida 34112

 Re: Leonard Peltier, clemency

Dear Mr. Reynolds:

It matters little if this letter is a bit late; it’s never too late to ask why you supported clemency for the convicted murderer Leonard Peltier with your letter to President Obama—or to ask you to explain the disconcerting public statements you made to the New York Daily News concerning Peltier.*

Your letter stated that preceding you in office was U.S. Attorney Evan Hultman, who had prosecuted Peltier and that you “…directed Hultman’s handling of the appeal of Leonard Peltier after my appoint (sic).” This would apparently indicate that you were intimate, or at the very least familiar, with the details of the unprovoked attack and brutal murders of FBI Agents Jack Coler and Ronald Williams, Peltier’s trial, conviction and subsequent multiple appeals. As you were no doubt aware at the time of their deaths, Agent Williams was single and Agent Coler left behind a widow and two young sons, ages three and one and a half.

Your brief letter (which had been previously questioned**) stated that you “would join in any Request for Clemency of Leonard Peltier by (President Obama) as being in the best interest of justice in considering the totality of all matters involved.”

However, your public statements to the media raised a number of crucial issues and questions that beg for an honest response.

You stated, “Forty years is enough,” which prompts the first question.

How many years are enough to serve for two brutal murders? Thus far into Peltier’s consecutive life sentences (not to forget also the seven consecutive years he owes for the armed escape from Lompoc Penitentiary), he has served 20 ½ years each for Jack Coler and Ron Williams. In your judgment is that enough for brutal slayings? Exactly how much is enough for blowing away the faces of two—already severely wounded—human beings? Before you answer, consider if those deaths had involved members of your own family. Would that make any difference since you obviously didn’t know or have a personal relationship with the dead agents?

(Peltier appropriately received consecutive life sentences and in our opinion serving all of that is enough. Then we can give him a pass on the other seven years.)

You added that you weren’t convinced of Peltier’s guilt: “I don’t know. Who knows?” and then stunningly stated regarding Peltier’s case, “we might have shaved a few corner(s) here and there.”

This raises some serious questions. Since you allegedly “directed Evan Hultman (and presumably Assistant U.S. Attorney Lynn Crooks), what did you know regarding Peltier’s case that either they or the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (particularly Judge Gerald Heaney***) didn’t know that would have affected Peltier’s conviction, sentencing or appeals?

Are you knowingly and publicly admitting to any wrongdoing that occurred under your direction as the United States Attorney while simultaneously casting serious aspersions on the reputations of former U.S. Attorney Evan Hultman and quintessential career federal prosecutor, Lynn Crooks? Basically, the NPPA is calling you out on this.

In one of the many appeals, the Eighth Circuit stated, “Peltier was equally well-represented at trial and on appeal.”

Over decades of appeals Peltier had many competent, experienced and aggressive attorneys who collectively examined every aspect of his conviction in excruciating detail—from the serious (October 2,1975 FBI Laboratory Teletype that led to a three-day evidentiary hearing) to the frivolous (“Peltier’s arguments fail because they are fatally flawed”).

Peltier’s case has been under the proverbial microscope since day one.

While you consider a response, we want to bring you up to date on some of Peltier’s public statements and tacit admissions of guilt:

Peltier, not obliquely, since you were part of the government, referred to it as “blind, stupid, or without human feelings.” Was Peltier correct in that assessment as it relates to you? Peltier said, “white racist America is the criminal.” Was Peltier correct? When you served in government, were you, or are you, a white racist? Peltier claimed he was a “scapegoat” and “was the last Indian left to railroad for the deaths of their two agents.” So, Mr. Reynolds, are you culpable in scapegoating Leonard Peltier?

We suspect that you would rightly deny all that, but then there’s your interview with the NY Daily News. Perhaps you misspoke or they misquoted you?

As a further update, since you publicly called for Peltier’s clemency, where you aware that he has remorselessly said:

“And really, if necessary, I’d do it al 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)

Ironically, included in the very clemency petition that you publicly supported, his attorney allowed this: “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.”

No regrets, he’d do it again, it was the right thing to do, wasn’t planning—at any rate—to injure or shoot federal agents and, he acknowledged participating. (And there is much more…)

Mr. Reynolds, would you care to clarify your position that Peltier’s consecutive life sentences should have been commuted? Keep in mind though that the U.S. Pardon Attorney, the U.S. Attorney General and ultimately, President Obama agreed that Peltier should continue to serve his consecutive life sentences for the brutal murders of Jack Coler and Ron Williams.****

Sincerely,

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Edward Woods

Email: justice@noparolepeltier.com

* http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ex-u-s-attorney-backs-leonard-peltier-bid-clemency-article-1.2933475

  (last accessed 10/30/17)

** http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/01/peltier-reynolds-false-claims.html

*** http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/10/peltier-heaney-factor.html**** http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/01/

PELTIER: UPDATE & REVIEW

Dear Supporters:

To date there has there has been no personal drivel from inmate #89627-132.

1) Peltier likely remains in the fetal position, sucking his thumb in the corner of his USP Coleman cell still bewildered over January 18, 2017. Here’s a revealing thought; the President understood that the unrepentant murderous Peltier had his day(s) in court and should continue to serve the remainder of his lawful conviction and consecutive life sentences. (Thank you, President Obama.)

Since April 30, 2000, the stated purpose of the No Parole Peltier Association was, and continues to be, to honor the memory and sacrifice of FBI Agents Jack Coler and Ron Williams who were brutally murdered in the line of duty; to ensure that justice is served and their convicted killer serves his consecutive life sentences and to challenge decades of Peltier myth, folklore, falsehoods and lies with the facts and truth.

Dedicated and committed to justice, the facts and truth do not a vendetta make.

2) Nonetheless, Peltier and his sycophantic apologists continue to throw around buzzwords like willful, malicious, oppressive, staggering hyperbole, reckless and the like, along with tired folklore because they mistakenly believe that if they repeat it enough times it will magically turn out to be true. But…

Any criticism of Peltier is based on undeniable facts derived from documented sources: trial transcripts, numerous court decisions, statements from the Peltier “Defense Committee” (and all its manifestations over the years), co-defendant statements (most notably Bob Robideau and Dino Butler), Peltier media interviews and a film in which he appeared, books contributed to or co-authored by Peltier, and Peltier’s self-incriminating public statements.

Upon that foundation, logical inferences have been drawn.

For example: Is it appropriate to conclude that Leonard Peltier is a coward?

Based on the facts and history of June 26, 1975 we have an eyewitness who over the FBI radio told a number of Agents they were about to come under fire. That witness was Ron Williams as he and Jack Coler were attacked and severely wounded. Jack Coler and Ron Williams faced a clear and present danger from Leonard Peltier and the other AIM members. Leonard Peltier admitted a number of times, and during a filmed television interview, that he fired at the agents. That was a cowardly act by Peltier and the other AIM protagonists. Ron Williams waved his shirt as a sign of surrender then gave aid to his critically wounded partner. Jack Coler, probably in shock and unconscious was shot twice in the face, killing him instantly. Ron Williams was alive, evidenced by a defensive wound to his hand, which then went through his head. Leonard Peltier was tried and convicted for murder and aiding and abetting. Killing two wounded and defenseless human beings is a cowardly act. At a later unrelated trial, sworn testimony quoted Leonard Peltier describing the killing of the agents and claiming that “The M----- F----- was begging for his life, but I shot him anyway.”^ A cowardly act and statement by Leonard Peltier. Recounting the crime scene, Leonard Peltier made the following statement; “I seen Joe when he pulled it out of the trunk and I looked at him when he put it on, and he gave me a smile.” ^^  In addition to aiding and abetting those involved, Peltier himself stole the dead agents’ weapons, (Jack Coler’s service revolver was found in a paper bag with Leonard Peltier’s thumbprint on it)—a cowardly act that would shock the conscience of any reasonable person. Agents’ Coler and Williams were shot at point blank range in the face, yet their bodies were discovered rolled-over, facing the ground. A cowardly act by Leonard Peltier and those he aided and abetted. (However, it is not known which of the cowards of Jumping Bull, “counted coup” on the dead agents and turned them over to face the ground.)

By all accounts and reasonable conclusions, Leonard Peltier is a coward.

Peltier has made himself a public figure which raises the bar considerably higher when it comes to allegations of criticisms that allegedly are willfully untrue, malicious, oppressive or reckless. As to this public figure, people are entitled to offer their opinions based on their own First Amendment rights of free expression and the recorded, documented public sector facts to counter the four decades of misinformation that has been the bedrock of the Peltier myth and folklore. Inaccurate, often contradictory, outrageous and unsupportable written and public statements by Peltier are entitled to a meaningful public response and it is up to Peltier to show that those responses are provably false.

3) Peltier has falsely claimed that the NPPA was government funded. There is nothing that can substantiate this assertion. When the No Parole Peltier Association and its companion website was launched in 2000 it included seventeen (17) Frequently Asked Questions. One of those FAQs was:

How Much Taxpayer Time and Money Go Into the NPPA and its website?

None. This site was created on the personal time of the author and others and engaged the services of a professional website designer.

Further, on March 13, 2013 the NPPA’s financial records were published to the website as Editorial Essay #58 documenting that personal time and money went into the creation and maintenance of the NPPA association and website. (This was done as a challenge to Peltier to finally come clean regarding his alleged “tax deductible” fundraising and charitable activities. Of course there was no response.)*

Coincidentally, this past March 29^th, the $155 payment for web hosting for 2017 was paid by the NPPA founder, again, from personal funds.

Any claim that government funds in any manner supported the NPPA is a libelous allegation without merit.

4) Peltier has claimed he has suffered monetary loss as a result of actions by the NPPA. In order for that to be true, the presumption would be that Peltier is running a business from prison.

As early as 2004, even a member of Peltier’s inner sanctum publicly admitted that Peltier was violating, at the very least, prison regulations:

In a heated exchange between Bob Free and Cathy McCarthy, airing their dirty laundry in the public domain, Free stated, “It is very troubling that she is suggesting that Leonard himself is directing a Non Profit organization while still incarcerated. This is potentially a legal problem for Leonard and the LPDC.”

Perhaps Peltier should review USP Coleman’s Inmate Handbook, specifically page 40, which states in part, “Inmates cannot engage in any type of business and will be sanctioned for doing so.” 

5) Peltier has falsely claimed that the U.S. government allegedly lied to Canadian authorities and provided false witness testimony to secure Peltier’s extradition.

To the contrary, Peltier and his cronies are doubtless referring to Myrtle Poor Bear. Here’s a surprise, repeated for the umpteenth time for the uninformed Peltierites; Myrtle Poor Bear did not testify during Peltier’s extradition.

However, even more significant is that at Peltier’s 1979 Fargo trial, when the government appeared to be ready to call Poor Bear as a witness, Peltier’s own attorney described her as a “…witness whose mental imbalance is so gross as to render her testimony unbelievable.” ** So, there’s that, Peltier trying to have it both ways.

Nonetheless, the Canadian government, reviewing Peltier’s complaint after the fact, made it very clear he was lawfully extradited:

"As I indicated above, I have concluded that Mr. Peltier was lawfully extradited to the United States."

"The record demonstrates that the case was fully considered by the courts and by the then Minister of Justice. There is no evidence that has come to light since then that would justify a conclusion that the decisions of the Canadian courts and Minister of Justice should be interfered with." ***

6) Peltier has claimed that the government was forced to admit that the weapon (the Wichita AR-15) associated with Peltier did not match the ballistics results. This premise is utterly untrue.

After a three-day evidentiary (ballistics) hearing in October 1984 and a subsequent appeal, the Court of Appeals stated as a finding of fact:

“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.”

(Emphasis added) ****

7) Peltier claimed that the government’s case against him deteriorated to the point that the U.S. Attorney changed the basis of Peltier’s prosecution to indicate that Peltier was simply just there and thus deserved to be convicted. This is a fictitious argument that had been made previously and reached, again, the Court of Appeals, which ruled:

“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.” (Emphasis added) *****

8) In the matter of a claim of defamation, as Peltier has alleged, it must be based on a statement that is provably false.

Peltier is a murderer. True. He was tried, convicted and sentenced for murder and aiding and abetting in the brutal killing of FBI Agents Coler and Williams. Peltier’s numerous appeals have never altered that conviction.

Peltier lied about his only real alibi. True. Peltier claimed that someone they knew, but would not name, the infamous Mr. X in the red pickup, killed the agents. Even on film (Redford’s, Incident at Oglala), Peltier utters the words, “This story is true.” It wasn’t. It was a lie for the better part of two decades. So said co-defendant Dino Butler and one of Peltier’s own attorneys. ******

In 2016 Peltier admitted participating in the killing of Agents Coler and Williams. True.

As incredible as it may seem, Peltier’s attorneys allowed him to make this stunning admission in his latest clemency petition to the President of the United States: “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) ******^

Peltier remains an unrepentant convicted murderer. True. Peltier’s shallow claims of innocence, superficial lip service to the families of the dead Agents, and his own public statements, reveal that he remains unrepentant:

“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

^ Looking Cloud trial transcript at 144-145; In reference to a statement made to the witness by Leonard Peltier: Prosecutor: “Exactly what did he say?”  Witness: “He said the M----- F----- was begging for his life but I shot him anyway.”

^^ Peter Matthiessen, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, p.552

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

** http://www.noparolepeltier.com/585.html (II.B.2.1)

*** http://www.noparolepeltier.com/canadaletter.html

**** U.S. v. Peltier, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, 800 F.2d 772, 21 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 1017, 1986; U.S. App. Decision, September 11, 1986: Sections: “The .223 Casing,” and “The AR-15.” http://www.noparolepeltier.com/800.html

***** http://www.noparolepeltier.com/997.html

****** http://www.noparolepeltier.com/lie.html

http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2012/12/peltier-kuzma-closes-circle-much-more.html

******^ http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2017/01/peltier-another-admission.html

CHICAGO TRIBUNE: PELTIER CLEMENCY? NEVER

Dear supporters:

From the Editorial Board:

Chicago Tribune, January 13, 2017: Editorial Board

Leonard Peltier is 72 and in his 40th year of a life sentence for the 1975 murders of two FBI agents on a reservation in South Dakota. He's a cause célèbre in a movement to persuade President Barack Obama to commute that sentence and let Peltier walk free. That movement has a lot of star power: South African Bishop Desmond Tutu, the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Robert Redford, among others.

Peltier is among a batch of potential pardons and clemency requests that Obama could take up in the waning days of his presidency.

There's Chelsea Manning, the former Army private serving 35 years in prison for disclosing reams of classified material about the U.S. handling of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are also bids for posthumous pardons for Ethel Rosenberg, executed in 1953 for conspiring with her husband to hand over to the Soviet Union secrets about America's nuclear program, and black heavyweight boxing champion Jack Johnson, who was imprisoned in 1913 for transporting his fiancé, a white woman, over state lines for "immoral purposes."

Manning's disclosures of American wartime military decisions and tactics rankled the Obama administration, so commutation in her case is doubtful. Peltier, however, appears to have some momentum.

Besides the celebrities pushing for his release, a former U.S. attorney at the office that prosecuted Peltier is urging Obama to consider "compassionate release" for the jailed American Indian activist. "Forty years is enough," the former prosecutor, James Reynolds, told the New York Daily News.

No it isn't. Peltier should stay in jail for the rest of his life.

Peltier was 30 when FBI agents Ronald Williams and Jack Coler arrived at the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota on June 26, 1975, to arrest robbery suspect Jimmy Eagle. They were met with a torrent of bullets, from what prosecutors say were at least seven assailants. As the two agents lay in the dirt heavily wounded, three of the attackers walked up to them. One, armed with an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, shot both in the head at close range. Brutal, barbaric execution — nothing less.

Peltier was the only assailant wielding an AR-15 that day, according to eyewitness testimony.

In 1977, a federal jury convicted Peltier of the agents' murders. He was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences.

Peltier has consistently maintained his innocence. He and his backers argue that prosecutors never produced anyone who could identify him as the man who fired the fatal shots. But an appeals court found that it didn't matter whether he was the shooter; it was sufficient that he was proven to be an "aider or abettor" in the murders.

Peltier's lawyers have also claimed that the FBI fabricated and withheld evidence. Appellate courts have agreed that there were flaws in how the FBI — and prosecutors — handled the case. But those flaws, the courts ruled, weren't significant enough to warrant a new trial. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear his appeals, and requests for parole have also been rejected.

Peltier's supporters have always framed the plea for his release against the backdrop of long-standing mistreatment of Native Americans by the U.S. government. Pine Ridge is home to Wounded Knee, the site of a massacre of 200 Sioux men, women and children by the Army's 7th Cavalry in 1890.

But Peltier's case is not about the plight of Native Americans. It's about justice for two men who were killed while carrying out their duties as law enforcement officers. Period.

Obama has been unusually generous when it comes to clemency, issuing more commutations than the combined total for the last 11 presidents. Those commutations, more than 1,170, focus on inmates serving long sentences for nonviolent drug offenses.

Peltier's case is wholly different. He was convicted of cold-blooded murder, and for that, he should stay behind bars.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-peltier-obama-clemency-edit-0116-20170113-story.html

"In the Spirit of Coler and Williams"

Ed Woods

PELTIER: JACK COLER, JANUARY 12, 1947

Dear Jack:

Those of us who remain, your family, friends, FBI associates and law-enforcement across the country know that you are looking over us as one more year passes.

Many of us believe that you are still the same strong, dedicated, committed and quintessential police officer, then FBI Agent, that you were in 1975.  It comforts us to keep that memory alive, especially those who knew you personally, that you are ageless and possess an omniscient awareness. As a devoted family man you are no doubt proud to watch over your family and grandchildren.

Today is January 12, 2017, the day you would have turned seventy and within eight days—mere hours, we will know whether justice continues. No matter how it turns out, you know we never stopped trying.

We are grateful to have a guardian angel, a brother in arms, as those in Blue face grave challenges from a growing segment of society that has little respect for those who willingly place themselves in harms way to protect, serve and enforce the laws of this nation.

As you undoubtedly know, you, Ron and all the FBI Service Martyrs are honored every year with a memorial service. And as an ongoing reminder to all FBI employees and visitors, each office displays the names and photos of those who made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty.

Your legacy will never be forgotten.

We collectively pray that January 20^th will pass and we can close this difficult chapter with the understanding that at least justice has been served.

Jack, please continue to look after us and keep those willing to serve from harms way.

“In the Spirit…

Ed

PELTIER: REYNOLDS' FALSE CLAIMS? Part I

(Blog updated January 24, 2022)

Dear Supporters:

In a letter to President Obama urging clemency for Leonard Peltier, former United States Attorney, James H. Reynolds made the following claims:

“I was the United States Attorney, whose office handled the criminal case prosecution and appeal of Leonard Peltier.”

“After my appointment by President Jimmy Carter and Senate confirmation I kept on as an Assistant United States Attorney, Evan Hultman, who preceded me as United States Attorney and had handled the prosecution of Leonard Peltier. I directed Hultman’s handling of the appeal of Leonard Peltier after my appoint (sic).

* * *

However, a review of Mr. Reynolds’ actual position and responsibilities regarding the Peltier case paints an uncomfortably different picture.

In the beginning of the prosecution stages of the case, Evan Hultman was the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Iowa.  

The first trial of Robert Robideau and Dino Butler for the murders of FBI Agents Jack Coler and Ron Williams, was transferred to the Northern District of Iowa and then was held in Cedar Rapids.

Evan Hultman was in charge of the prosecution at that time.

Peltier was not tried in Iowa because he had fled to Canada and was fighting extradition.  After the acquittal of Butler and Robideau in Iowa, and prior to the Peltier trial, venue was changed again, this time to North Dakota.  

Evan Hultman remained the lead prosecutor even though the venue had changed.

Around this time, the administration also changed, and Mr. Reynolds was appointed by President Carter as the U.S. Attorney for the District of South Dakota.  

Eugene K. Anthony was the interim U.S. Attorney in North Dakota followed by President Carter's appointment of James Britton.  

Evan Hultman took on a role as "Special Prosecutor" for the Peltier case and continued as the lead prosecutor.   

Since the case's venue was then in North Dakota, Hultman would have reported to the U.S. Attorney in North Dakota, not the U.S. Attorney in the District of South Dakota. However, by most accounts, Evan Hultman was in charge and actually reported to neither one.  Correspondence from that period went out in the name of the North Dakota, U.S. Attorney (Eugene K. Anthony or James Britton) with Evan Hultman's signature as a Special Assistant.     

Once venue for the Peltier case was designated to North Dakota (prior to Peltier's trial), management of the case was the responsibility of the North Dakota U. S. Attorney's office, where it remains to this day.  

It would appear that Mr. Reynolds, from his position as U.S. Attorney for the District of South Dakota, is attempting to assume supervising authority for Mr. Hultman, who prosecuted Peltier in Fargo, within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Attorney for North Dakota.

There is a matter of credibility as Mr. Reynolds ends his letter to the President with:

“I would join in any request for Clemency of Leonard Peltier by you as being in the best interest of justice in considering the totality of all the matters involved.

Thank you for our (sic) attention in this matter, I am”

“Considering the totality of all the matters involved” is a curious way to express

justification for clemency.

However, a very simple and straightforward question for Mr. Reynolds would be:

As the U.S. Attorney for the District of South Dakota, how did your authority stretch across State lines and judicial boundaries to the District of North Dakota where Peltier was prosecuted?

Also, what would the opinion of the former U.S. Attorney for North Dakota be of Mr. Reynolds’ claim that “(He) directed Hultman’s handling of the appeal of Leonard Peltier…” A claim that reaches well beyond his jurisdiction.

We suspect, and suggest, that there is not a logical explanation, notwithstanding whether or not Evan Hultman remained an Assistant U.S. Attorney, and especially for Mr. Reynolds’ claim of “totality” of knowledge of the Peltier case.

Perhaps, in some unexplainable manner, Mr. Reynolds may have been taken in by the Peltier myth.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

(Editorial note: The original blog incorrectly identified Mr. Reynolds as being the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Iowa. Mr. Reynolds was the U.S. Attorney for the District of South Dakota.)

PELTIER: ANOTHER ADMISSION

Dear Supporters:

If Leonard Peltier is paying for legal representation from the likes of Martin Garbus, Cynthia Dunne and Carl Nadler, he should demand a refund.

Why would attorneys allow a client to make a formal petition for clemency to the U.S. Department of Justice Pardon Attorney, the Attorney General and the President of the United States that included an admission of guilt?

Why would these attorneys make that petition public so all the flaws could be exposed and scrutinized? [i]

In Part 1 of the petition, entitled Remorse, Peltier states (and his attorneys publicize):

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. I was on the Jumping Bull property to protect its residents, not to cause harm. At the end of the day, three young men lost their lives, many others were injured, families were traumatized, and lives were destroyed. (Emphasis added; see below for the additional comments [ii])

We absolutely cannot ignore the timing of this admission, coming on the heels of Peltier’s only opportunity to leave USP Coleman as a free man. The petition and Peltier’s statement is dated February 17, 2016. 2016! That’s forty-one years after the brutal murders of Special Agents Jack R. Coler and Ronald A. Williams. Forty-one years later Peltier can make yet another admission of guilt that’s endorsed and publicized by attorneys who are certainly not looking out for his best interests, nor his legal protection under the law. That is, under the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination. Yet, here Peltier is penning the words, ‘planning’ and ‘participating.’

PLANNING: No, Peltier wasn’t planning that morning to “injure or shoot federal agents.” There was no grand conspiracy (although Peltier claimed there were several on the government’s side[iii]) for an AIM ambush. Peltier and other AIM cowards weren’t lying in wait for federal agents to approach the Jumping Bull property or enter their camp along White Clay Creek.

The fact remains that neither the FBI nor Jack Coler or Ron Williams knew of the existence of the AIM camp or that Peltier had returned to Pine Ridge.

Although, what Peltier did know was that he was then a fugitive for the attempted murder of a Milwaukee police officer. [iv]

Some have suggested that it was an ambush, but we disagree. It was a spontaneous, cowardly reaction when Peltier mistakenly believed that the two late model sedans that followed him from Highway 18 were the FBI coming for him. Peltier panicked and the rest of the AIM cowards, with rifles, pinned down Coler and Williams in an open field and fired the first shots. How do we know this? Ron Williams told us. On the radio he described exactly what was about to happen before the first shot was fired, at them. Those listening on the radio even heard Ron get hit.

PARTICIPATING: Exactly what part of “participating” is difficult to understand? Peltier, pathetically supported by his own attorneys, admits to taking part in the “incident.”

In 1977 Peltier was convicted of murder and aiding and abetting, the elements of which are:[v]

1. That the accused had specific intent to facilitate the commission of a crime by another: Peltier and other AIM cowards took two federal agents under rifle fire and gunned them down in an open field.

2. That the accused had the requisite intent of the underlying substantive offense: Shooting at federal agents shows intent to harm. One hundred and fourteen (114) shell casings were matched to Peltier’s “Wichita AR-15.”[vi]

3. That the accused assisted or participated in the commission of the underlying substantive offense: Over 125 bullet holes were found in Coler and Williams’ vehicles.[vii]

4. That someone committed the underlying offense: Peltier was charged, indicted tried and convicted of murder and aiding and abetting. That charge was even listed on Peltier’s 1975 FBI wanted poster.[viii] Two critically wounded agents were brutally murdered. The government argued at trial that Peltier personally shot Agents Coler and Williams, and if he did not, then he was equally guilty as an aider and abettor in their deaths. Five people know who fired the final three killing shots. Three are dead, Jack, Ron and Bob Robideau.[ix] Dino Butler has remained relatively silent.[x] Peltier has been lurking behind a falsity that in some insubstantial way he was a warrior that day. Peltier cowers behind that façade and denigrates an otherwise proud Native heritage.

Peltier has created a spectacular fiction concocted with a gullible audience in mind, as we watch it unravel like a cheap blanket.

Peltier wasn’t planning to injure or shoot federal agents that day, but he did, and with the blessing of his legal team admits to participating, and that’s enough, even now in 2016, to sustain aiding and abetting.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

---

[i] Three-part blog dismantling the alleged facts of the cover letter and petition: http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2016/05/peltier-clemency-application-thank-you.html, http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2016/05/peltier-clemency-application-thank-you_25.html,

http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2016/06/peltier-clemency-application-part-3.html

[ii] There is only a grain of truth in Peltier’s perpetual folklore. AIM was allegedly at Pine Ridge to “protect” its residents but in the process was escalating the tension and violence. Three young men lost their lives. Two where attacked (and there was an eyewitness), severely or mortally wounded and then brutally murdered. Joe Stuntz participated in the initial shooting, stole Jack Coler’s FBI raid jacket from the trunk of his vehicle—gave Peltier a smile—and then proceeded to shoot at responding agents and officers until his deadly force was met in turn. Many others were injured? This is a new addition to Peltier fabrications/folklore. There were no other reports of anyone else being injured that day, unless Peltier wants to provide a name or make one up. Families were traumatized? That’s arguably true since Angie Long Visitor and her family fled away from the Jumping Bull area towards Highway 18. Certainly they were fearful over an action precipitated by AIM. Lives were destroyed? Peltier’s, yes, self-induced; Stuntz, yes, because he followed Peltier to his own death: Others? Peltier will have to come up with some specifics and more fabrications for that one.

[iii] The Sanctioned Memo: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#critic

The old cowboy boots story: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/faq.html#17

Prison Writings: http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#amazon

[iv] Yes, Peltier was acquitted, but there is more to that story as well; better saved for another day.

[v] https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-2474-elements-aiding-and-abetting

[vi] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/609.html#609

“Later examinations of the remaining  .223 bullet casings submitted in connection with {F. Supp. 1150} the RESMURS case resulted in approximately 114 positive identifications with the Wichita AR-15. Thirty-nine of these were introduced into 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 car (Q# 2628; Trial Ex. 34B).”

       "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 Peltier and carried out by Peltier after the murders."

U.S. v. Peltier, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, 800 F.2d 772, 21 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (Callaghan) 1017, 1986; U.S. App. Decision, September 11, 1986: Sections: “The .223 Casing,” and “The AR-15.”

[vii] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/553_886.html

[viii] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/images/warrant.gif

[ix] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#robideau

[x] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/lie.html Butler came out publicly stating that Peltier’s only alibi—that the infamous Mr. X. killed the agents and drove off in a pickup, was a lie.

PELTIER: REALLY? GARBUS & DUNNE ET.AL.

Dear Supporters: [i]

Within days the final crossroad of the Peltier saga will be reached by January 20^th and there’s no surprise that the Peltierite rhetoric has been ratcheted to vacuous levels.

Fact remains though that The List is growing, and according to the President’s plan for commutations, does not include unrepentant cold-blooded murders.

Recently, in The Guardian, the latest round of Peltier attorneys, Martin Garbus and Cynthia K. Dunne make another feckless attempt to justify Peltier’s criminal acts with  their own misplaced sympathies. [ii]

Their not so clever move to publicize Peltier’s clemency petition—a document filled with the same decades-long myths, folklores and outright fabrications (a polite way of saying they have no issue with continuing to spread the lies), continues unabated.[iii]

They erroneously claim, again for perhaps the ten-thousandth time in the Peltier narrative, “He remains in jail today primarily because of an “accomplice” theory of liability which was included in the written charges but not argued to the jury, that he allegedly assisted someone in an unidentified way.”

Really? Perhaps Marty and Cynthia missed this; the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals stated in 1993:

"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." [iv]

Exactly what part of “fatally flawed” are Garbus and Dunne (and Nadler) incapable of understanding that this baseless argument failed before, as it does now. Peltier and his attorneys can repeat this claim a thousand more times and it will never be true.

They also offer some obvious, perhaps unrecognized, contradictions:

“Under the FBI’s exclusive jurisdiction for the prosecution of major crimes…” and, “On 26 June that year two FBI agents entered private property in unmarked cars and gunfire erupted. By the end of the incident, Agents Coler and Williams died, as did Native American Joseph Stuntz, although no charges were brought against anyone for his death.”

It’s alarming how dense some tunnel-visioned attorneys can be.

Yes, the FBI has exclusive jurisdiction, and in pursuit of a suspected felon Jack and Ron did follow, not Jimmy Eagle as they thought, but Leonard Peltier (along with Norman Charles and Joe Stuntz), driving Sam Loud Hawk’s red and white suburban off Highway 18 onto what turned out to be the Jumping Bull property. No incident then occurred, but a deliberate attack on two federal agents. We know this because of an eyewitness. Ron Williams was on the Bureau radio telling those near enough—exactly—what was happening—before the first shot was fired, at them. It was common knowledge on the Reservation that white guys in civilian clothes driving late model sedans with antennas, were the Feds. (And really, when is the last time Garbus and Dunne saw a ‘marked’ FBI vehicle?) Besides, Peltier knew he was wanted for the attempted murder of a Milwaukee police officer and naively (wrongly) thought they were coming for him.  As for Stuntz, the same person quoted by Peltier, “I seen Joe when he pulled it out of the trunk and I looked at him when he put it on, and he gave me a smile.”[v]

As Stuntz smiles two dead and mutilated human beings (who had been moved by the way—rolled over to face the ground, and they hadn’t just “died” but were murdered), he steals and puts on Jack Coler’s FBI raid jacket and then proceeded to shoot at responding agents and officers. For that felonious act, Stuntz was shot and killed and no charges needed to be brought against officers defending themselves and responding appropriately to deadly force. Fact remains, Stuntz’s blood is on Peltier’s hands.[vi]

Marty and Cynthia also offer, “Federal agents…deliberately withheld critical ballistic reports in order to gain an unfair advantage at trial.”

Standing alone, this out-of-context and oft-repeated fallacy has been another focal point of the Peltier myth.

Attorneys Garbus and Dunne would dare not proffer the rest of the story fearing that anyone could understand that this statement is not only false, but also without foundation:

Simplified: Peltier is convicted. Later, through a Freedom of Information Act request, Peltier is provided with an October 2, 1975 FBI teletype; Peltier moves for a new trail, which is denied by the District Court and he then again appeals to the 8^th Circuit; The 8^th Circuit (including Judge Gerald Heaney) remands the case back to the District Court for an evidentiary (ballistics) hearing. A three-day hearing is held. Not entitled to relief, Peltier appeals yet again to the 8^th Circuit (that includes Judge Gerald Heaney) authoring a decision that concluded:

“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 it’s own ballistics expert, it offered no contrary evidence.” [vii] (Judge Heaney then rules against Peltier based on the law.)

It’s bewildering that practicing attorneys can become so unmoored from the facts.

Garbus and Dunne repeat another tired refrain, “Mr. Peltier is old, ill and a threat to no one.”

As to being a physical threat to anyone is arguable. Certainly the bloated figure I sat next to at USP Lewisburg would have a hard time getting out of his own way. But the central point is that he owes a debt for his crimes that has not been fully repaid.[viii] As to his age and ill health, then ask the important question: Would Jack Coler and Ron Williams prefer to be seventy today facing the aging process that we all must endure at some point? Ask their families about the years they missed with Jack and Ron since Peltier robbed them of that in 1975.

Curiously, they quote Peltier, “I did not wake up ... planning to injure or shoot federal agents, and did not gain anything from participating in the incident … “ (The ellipses are theirs, for whatever the gaps contained, as Peltier provides a shallow explanation we’ve heard countless times before.)

But offering this Peltier quote as they do, it becomes tantamount to another admission of guilt; whether planning to or not, Peltier was there and participated in the murder of two federal agents.  (They all need to wake up to that reality.)

There is little for the President to consider. Peltier is not a prospect for commutation. Once carefully reviewed, the Peltier record speaks for itself. However, Peltier’s own words speak louder and he is the last person deserving of consideration.

Peltier has been hiding behind the veil of the mistreatment of Native Americans but his actions that June day in 1975 had nothing to do with that history but instead the actions of a merciless killer and we need only look to his recent public statements for definitive proof.

Dear President Obama:

If you consider Peltier’s petition at all, please consider the following:

“The direct and circumstantial evidence of Peltier’s guilt was strong…”

(8^th Circuit Court of Appeals)[ix]

“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)

Peltier does not fit into the category of those who received excessive sentences for relatively minor drug offenses, but remains a remorseless and unrepentant cold-blooded murderer.

“In the Spirit of Coler and Williams”

Ed Woods

---

[i] To all those on the NPPA lists: Thank you for your continued support over the past nearly seventeen years. There are a number of Peltier supporters on the lists as well (while they block NPPA access to their online postings, we do not block them). But for everyone; all the best for the holidays and a healthy and happy New Year. We collectively continue this battle from opposing sides. But, that will end, one way or the other, by January 20^th. No matter what the outcome, honoring the memory and sacrifice in the line of duty of Jack Coler and Ron Williams will continue.

[ii] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/21/leonard-peltier-clemency-obama-pine-ridge?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other (last accessed 12/23/16)

[iii] http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2016/06/peltier-clemency-application-part-3.html The Garbus/Dunne piece states “The clemency petition does not reargue the verdict, but rather, it sets forth the facts and is supported by the FBI’s own records.” Not even close, please also see Parts 1 & 2 for a review of a hopelessly defective document.

[iv] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/997.html See Section II

[v] Peter Matthiessen, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse (New York: Penguin Books, 1991) 552. Throughout his extensive research, Matthiessen had the benefit of being able to interview most of those involved in this incident. It is reasonable to assume from his reporting that Agent Williams' attempt to surrender ("Perhaps he waved it [his shirt] as a white flag of surrender…") was related to him during at least some of those interviews. Had this not been the case, noting that Matthiessen reported most of what he was told, it would not have been included within the text. It is reasonable to conclude that this-waving of the shirt, did, in fact, happen. This was not a random inclusion of prose by Matthiessen, it had a purpose. For a further discussion of the initial shooting, please see:http://www.noparolepeltier.com/flag.html

      To demonstrate that even Matthiessen had his doubts about Peltier’s version of events, this is offered: Matthiessen, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, p.544. "On the other hand, the evidence suggests - to me at least - that Coler and Williams had indeed been chasing one or more vehicles, and that whether or not those being pursued stopped at the Y-fork above the junked cars (not wishing, apparently, to lead the FBI cars either down toward the camp or up into the compound), the agents pulled up in that vulnerable place down in the pasture because they heard a warning shot or came under fire; if there is another persuasive explanation of the location and position of their cars, I cannot find it."

[vi] http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/2016/08/peltier-killed-joe-stuntz-41st.html

[vii] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/800.html

[viii] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/debate.html#paroledenied

[ix] http://www.noparolepeltier.com/585.html