Posted on 03/10/2016 5:16:33 AM PST by HomerBohn
Following the release of the synced video from the aerial footage provided by the Department of Justice and the phone video from Shauna Cox, it became even clearer that LaVoy Finicum was murdered in cold blood and that though he was killed by Oregon State Police, at least one FBI agent took two shots at him as he exited the vehicle with his hands raised. Now that the video has been released, Ammon Bundy's attorney has come out and exposed the lies of the FBI saying, "We weren't given the full truth at that initial FBI press conference after the shooting."
Indeed, America was not given the truth about the shooting. They were fed a lie about the shooting just like the media, the FBI, the BLM and even GOP politicians were feeding the lie about the protest.
In my previous report, you can easily see and hear what took place when LaVoy Finicum was gunned down. In that report, the FBI said that they were investigating one agent for firing two shots, but not reporting those shots. Yet, Greg Bretzing, special agent in charge of the FBI in Portland said, "The question of who fired these shots has not been resolved." How can that be? Are FBI agents not required to report when they fire their weapons? Are they not accountable for each and every round in their gun? We are told though that the FBI has it under control and they are investigating themselves, including four other agents at the scene. Sure, that's not a conflict of interest.
Bundy attorney Mike Arnold questions the same thing I have questioned and that is whether or not the FBI can actually be impartial when it comes to investigating their own in the shooting of LaVoy Finicum.
The Deschutes County Sheriff's Office uncovered the evidence that FBI agents fired on Finicum's truck and discovered that the FBI failed to report that information. They then reported that to the Office of the Inspector General.
At least one of those shots hit the truck.
"We weren't given the full truth at that initial FBI press conference after the shooting," Arnold said. "They selectively released information to the public. They gave us the aerial video. They made certain representations to the public, and they were incomplete and incorrect. And this is why transparency in government is so important."
Arnold was referencing this press conference.
(Watch video at link)
According to Mr. Arnold, the occupation of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge was nothing more than a political protest, and that protest included being armed for self-defense, not for preemptive strikes. In other words, the men and women protesting were exercising their rights protected under the Second Amendment to protect their rights, which are to be protected under the First Amendment! Apparently, from the DC governments view and many other politicians, these two rights don't belong together, but that's not how our forefathers saw things when they dealt with English tyranny.
"So what we have is a bunch of folks protesting the government, then the government investigating the government protesters, and then the government accused of covering up the investigation of the government protesters, and then the government investigating their own coverup in the investigation of the government protesters," Arnold said.
That's exactly right, and this leads us back to the point that Ammon Bundy brought up to Megyn Kelly and that is the DC government becomes both plaintiff and prosecutor, which is a serious conflict of interest when they are the actual criminals in the matter.
Thanks, but that looks like department policy for the Portland PD, not state law.
I don’t think that all the law enforcement personnel involved in this came there to shoot people.
It’s quite possible one of them did.
And when the shooting starts, all the rules go out the window.
Look at who was in charge. Who in the world sets up an operation this poorly?
Nobody in front of the cars at the stop? That’s just stupid.
And the next government location is that far away? Stupid.
What was the purpose of this operation?
Traffic stop? Failed.
Take people into custody? Failed.
Send a message that if you disagree with the Democrats they will shoot you? OK.
This operation was screwed up. It remains to be seen if that was intentional or not.
Loyalty to incompetent law enforcement is not loyalty to the law. It is loyalty to incompetence.
Yeah, Im looking around. I was wondering if the state had anything like that in their statutes?
They knew who he was.
They knew where he was living and where he was going.
His driving posed no kind of threat until he was boxed in.
And no one had been involved with any kind of life-threatening felony.
Just because he said they were going to have to kill him doesnt give them the freedom to do so or even make it necessary.
Stick up for, and endorse these gestapos!
We went over all this at the time of the shooting. Get up to speed, RightFluffer:
freeper bone52 explains in great detail in post #178:
At 9:32 in the unedited film, the officer to the left is no more than two times the width of the Lavoy’s truck from Lavoy. Assuming the back of the truck is about 6-6.5 feet, that would put the officer at about 12 feet.From Wiki and multiple product sites, the effective range of the taser is based on the cartridge used, but almost every model has an effective range of at least 15’ and many up to 35’. Also, the farther spread of the prongs, within reason, increases the effectiveness of the taser.
Also, the angles look liked he got tased in the front/side, not in the back, so clothing would not be nearly as big an issue.
Finally, read my first post and watch the video to see how the officer is behaving. There is no rational basis for some of his actions unless he used a taser.
This is from
FBI Video Release of Lavoy Finicum Shooting and Why CTH is Reluctant to Engage
The Conservative Treehouse ^ | 1/31/2016 | Sundance
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3391034/posts
Try to remember that right fighter or bluebird as I like to call him is here to obfuscate and muddy the water in support of the unlawful actions of law enforcement. Its his job.
You’re just saying that, because it’s true. :)
> Brower v. County of Inyo
> City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris
> Tennessee v. Garner
A quote from a discussion paper from the DOJ:
Fixed roadblocks, which block road to extent that little or no outlet remains.
"Fixed roadblocks are extremely dangerous and are rarely justifiable."
You have to remember that the apologists will NEVER seek the truth about .govthug overreach.
They're not interested in questioning their own allegiances. :)
The shooting of Finicum was NOT justified, and his family will get a very significant payout for wrongful death.
(1) The roadblock was positioned so that it could not be seen and so it caught Lavoy by surprise. Specifically, the roadblock was behind a blind curve and there was no warning of the roadblock. Further, the visible trucks forming the roadblock were not marked and did not have flashing lights. All of this combines to result in the initial firing of 3 bullets into the car as unjustified - because of the positioning of the roadblock, Lavoy did not have a chance to stop.
(2) The shots fired at Finicum (were likely intended to kill Lavoy) would have been interpreted by Finicum as an attempt to kill him. Knowing that he hadn’t used “lethal force” up until this point, the combination of the shots fired at the truck and the two fired at Finicum after getting out give him the privilege of self-defense. (LEO’s do not have the right to murder you - which is likely what he thought was happening).
(3) We still don’t know when the 3 shots were fired at Finicum, however, the video is NOT properly synced as the angle of Finicum’s body at the time the shots are heard does not match the autopsy report. But, going back to my point above, because of the unjustified shots fired, Lavoy was legally entitled to self-defense, and him going for a weapon would not justify his killing. (Unless you believe that shiny badges give special rights).
The taser was deployed. If you watch the video closely, you can see the officer stripping line from the taser as he maneuvers toward the road.
How do you know when the shots were fired? Also, Lavoy was entitled to self-defense (see my post above). Unless you believe shiny badges give special rights, this was not justified.
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.