Posted on 02/28/2007 6:26:37 AM PST by rellimpank
The media have been quick to report the motive behind Hollywood mogul David Geffen’s dissing of Hillary Clinton, namely his pique at her husband’s failure to pardon jailed Indian activist Leonard Peltier.
What they have not reported is why liberal icon Peltier remains in jail. Indeed, Clinton’s failure to pardon Peltier stands as one of the more honorable moments in his dubious career. A little background is in order.
“There is nothing in this message that can make you happy,” so wrote Paul DeMain, editor of News From Indian Country (NFIC) to his faithful readers in February 2002. He was preparing them for his and his staff’s final conclusions about the case of Peltier, still in prison after twenty-five long years.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
To "make" him innocent you have to disbelive the testimony of all the witnesses (including his accomplices) . . . or else accept the notion that an Indian couldn't be guilty because of previous years of oppression (gee, where have we heard THAT argument before?)
He should have been executed for the crime.
That dope was such a dysfunctional loser that his entire presidency was really just one long string of disconnected policies, broken promises, etc.
I am not all that familiar with the background of this story or of Peltier,but right now i will make a bet.
I bet Peltier didnt have the money to buy a pardon from Clinton,nor a wife or girlfriend who would get on her knees to get it for him.
Even though his co-defendents were found not guilty by reasons of self-defense. Even though the prosecutor said they were not certain of the role Peltier played in the killing of the agents (that reasonable doubt thingy).
Even though the feds got involved in a range war. And lied to get Peltier extradicted back from Canada.
Even though now we are dealing with prosecutorial misconduct, from Duke Lax to the Texas 3.
Nah, he's guilty, dadgumit!
That's why he's so p!ssed off at the Clintons today . . . He paid for this pardon, but never got it.
Robbie Robertson has been an activist for Peltier for years. He was the presenter for the first Native American music Grammy in 2001, right after Clinton's pardons fiasco. He commented that Peltier didn't get a pardon because he apparently wasn't "Marc Rich enough."
I was howling.
Leonard Peltier = Prairie Home Mumia
I don't believe the prosecution ever proved Peltier was the triggerman for that. They just wanted someone to go to jail for the crime.
I had a friend in my younger days whose father was an FBI agent. The kid got messed up in drugs and died of an overdose. The guy who he was getting them from was never arrested or charged, but he did disappear off the face of the earth, never to return.
http://freepeltiernow.org/java/lp_faq.htm
snip
No known witnesses exist as to the actual shooting of FBI Agents Coler and Williams. Three adolescents gave inconclusive and vague testimonies, contradicting their own earlier statements as well as each other. All three witnesses admitted they had been seriously threatened and intimidated by FBI agents.
Critical ballistic information reflecting Mr. Peltier’s innocence was withheld from the defense team making a fair trial impossible. Specifically, at the trial, the FBI ballistic expert Evan Hodge testified that he had been unable to perform the best test, a firing pin test, on certain casings found near Agent Coler's car because the rifle in question had been damaged in a fire. Instead, he stated that he had conducted an extractor mark test and found the casing and weapon to match. Years later, documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) showed that in October 1975, a firing pin ballistic test had indeed been performed on the rifle and that the results were clearly negative. In short, the fatal bullets did not come from Leonard Peltier’s weapon. It should also be made very clear that the AR-15 and FBI-issued M-16 deliver the same .223 caliber round. However, the jury never heard about any of these crucial issues.
Equally disturbing are the numerous discrepancies regarding the key vehicle in the case. Agents Williams and Coler had radioed that they were chasing a "red pick up truck" which they believed was transporting a suspect. The chase led to the Jumping Bull Ranch and the fatal shoot-out. At trial, however, the evidence had changed to describe a "red and white van," quite a different vehicle and which, not coincidentally, was more easily linked to Mr. Peltier.
The court, at Mr. Peltier’s trial, did not permit the jury to learn of the FBI’s pattern and practice of using false affidavits and intimidating witnesses in recent related cases against other AIM leaders where such evidence had been admitted. The jury was thus unable to properly evaluate the credibility of prosecution witnesses’ testimony.
There was no witness testimony that Leonard Peltier actually shot the two FBI agents. There was no witness testimony that placed Mr. Peltier near the crime scene before the murders occurred. Those witnesses placing Peltier, Robideau, and Butler near the crime scene after the killing were coerced and intimidated by the FBI. There was no forensic evidence as to the exact type of rifle used to commit the murders. Several different weapons present in the area during the shoot-out – evidence now shows that there were other AR-15 rifles in the area – could have caused the fatal injuries. In addition, the AR-15 rifle claimed to be Mr. Peltier’s weapon was found to be incompatible with the bullet casing allegedly found near Agent Coler's car. Although other bullets were fired at the crime scene, no other casings or evidence about them were offered by the prosecutor in this case. In short, there was no reasonable evidence that Mr. Peltier committed the murders.
----------
This sounds an awful lot like the antics of Sutton in trying the two BP agents.
Robbie was on to something.
Hmmmm, I'll look into that.
Agree.
Peltier is trash equal to that T--d in Philly, Mumia Abu-Jamal that murdered Officer Daniel J. Faulkner.
Given the current prosecutorial misconduct we are seeing, I am more than willing to entertain the notion that Peltier was subject to past prosecutorial misconduct.
I am also willing to entertain evidence to the contrary - other than a simple statement that a jury convicted Peltier. We've seen what juries can do when prosecutors act unethically.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.