10 comments on “ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND

  1. Referencing Rezinate at http://wwwnoparolepeltiercom-justice.blogspot.com/

    Would like to continue the discussion regarding why Perry Ray’s killers were not brought to justice.

    Perhaps Michael K can provide input since he has some documentation. He probably can at least place the events and who learned what and when in their proper sequence.

    You are correct that in some places a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich. The federal system is a bit more structured though.

    I have no personal knowledge, of course, but considering what has been presented here so far, retracing the events, or the facts that are known so far, regarding the statute of limitations on crimes less than first degree murder, no doubt presented a problem. If, as the unnamed witnesses stated that Perry (probably in fear for his own life) picked up a knife; proving the motive of intent would be problematic. The subjects could claim self-defense. B.S., but they could.

    I mentioned several months ago, and I know this just sounds like making excuses, but I listened to two people who were very knowledgeable of the Robinson case and I can assure anyone that there was no lack of compassion or sincerity in their attempt to make a viable case against his killers. They mentioned a number of barriers (I can’t recall them all at the moment), but there was no doubt that had they been able to, they would have.

    • While I’m not familiar with all the statute of limitations regarding various degrees of murder I would assume something less than first degree, like second degree, would have a limitations statute in excess of that of other crimes like manslaughter- so the question is why wasn’t this prosecuted prior to expiration?
      How many CW’s and wiretaps were needed? How many cases have been made with less than what was and has been available related to Ray’s murder?
      It’s like some huge fix is in that even involves the black leadership who don’t want to touch this with a ten foot pole.
      Then there’s all the murky figures like the Abourezks and Janklow – politicians and attorneys with access and influence, the coveting of resources on the rez, and PR’s equivalent of Panama’s Noriega – Dick Wilson.
      There was certainly more than enough that would have been required to indict a ham sandwich.
      I fail to see how a self defense plea could have been mounted when an individual is confronted by a gun bearing gang and reacts in a true self defensive posture by picking up a knife…if indeed Ray did- which is undoubtedly a selective recounting and contradictory to other witness statements.
      In a similar situation though I would have done exactly the same if that were the way it played out and looking to take somebody with me if I felt there was a very real threat. I don’t believe as a matter of choice anyone takes a knife to a gunfight with the exception of cinematic ninjas.
      AIM has basically offered three alibis- Dennis Banks retarded he never knew of, saw, or heard anything about Ray until years later – obviously he’s a liar of epic proportions among several other things.
      Secondly, Ray was an informant with the subtext AIM can’t really be held to account because they were the victims of a cultivated paranoia, and thirdly that Ray was the threat and those who confronted him were little more than a well intentioned welcome wagon committee.
      People can be arbitrarily hauled in for questioning and held for a period of time under the heading of suspicion, I haven’t heard of such an occurrence taking place with any of the usual and logical suspects related to Ray’s murder.
      The government and other authorities love high profile cases – Martha Stewart, Madoff, Simpson, Robert Blake, Gotti, Bulger, and a litany of others – yet the AIM leadership has pursued their own high profile for decades and done so with impunity.
      All this coupled with what is known raises a huge question mark – we’re talking thugs, not high ranking officials or corporate heads – it’s like Hill walking, impossible if he wasn’t “protected”.
      Vernon Bellecourt was able to secure literally thousands of pages of FOI’s and selectively revealed what was thought to serve the AIM purpose – seems to me an effort should be made to secure FOI’s on the AIM leadership regardless of how redacted they might be.
      The question now is if the “official” investigation, as in no more ongoing investigation, is over, then what need exists to avoid releasing all related documents?
      Ray wasn’t JFK and national security can’t be employed as a device.
      In fact regardless of the motivation for shooting Ray, premeditated or not, in the sure
      knowledge that he was grievously wounded and the decision was made not to seek proper
      medical attention in opting to lock him in a closet and allow him to bleed to death those
      choices made the response an act of premeditated murder in and of itself.

      • These are valid points and I don’t disagree. Still, though, (and I agree it certainly feels that way), proving premeditation to satisfy the elements of the statute is a high level to reach. Perhaps, Michael K could shed some light (if he is willing to share some of the information he’s obtained), that can help clarify what was known, from whom, and when…which would be critical in the timeline that the U.S. Attorney’s office had to consider whether or not they could prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt, or any lesser charges. Again, I have no personal knowledge but have been down similar paths many times and more often than not, it is not an easy process no matter how the investigators may feel about the facts. Cases that were to me, clearly where the subject was guilty as sin, were declined because once the defense gets involved and all the evidence and testimony is placed under the proverbial microscope, the burden of proof could not be met.

      • The law as practiced in the court room has become so nuanced and technicality bound that guilt or innocence has become secondary, it is singularly about “winning” and the core principle suffers in the process.
        There are advantages and disadvantages in such an approach that impact the quality of what is referred to as justice.
        The right to discovery has become a shell game presided over and manipulated by judges who allow or disallow, seal testimony from the public view, and prosecutors who withhold and conceal seeking to gain an edge – hardly a judicious climate.
        Reputations are sought, and successfully building one a career move whether acting as a prosecutor or a defender – the results are both visible and inevitable.
        Proving premeditation in Ray’s murder might well be difficult under the scenario I presented but options could have been added to convict under a lesser statute just as they are in other cases, and not an uncommon approach in federal or state courts.
        Law enforcement should be about the pursuit of justice and nothing else, no political considerations, no vested interests influence – standards and yet more laws designed to insure that should be strictly adhered to, no exceptions…and violators should be imprisoned themselves.
        When was the last time a prosecutor, judge, or defender went to jail for lying or manipulating evidence?
        Attorney client confidentiality is such an essential element it cannot be abused, yet at times I find myself wishing that an attorney would elect to do so placing the greater value on truth just as whistleblowers do.
        It’s become cliche to say the system may not be perfect but it’s the best we’ve got – better I think to admit what is wrong and focus on correcting it – every ruling made by a judge can set a precedent. Some will be challenged and some accepted as law depending on which side of the legal fence the individual happens to be standing on – that seems a little haphazard to me when the procedural system itself has become dysfunctional.
        Is there a solution to this? Not if left to those who wear the wigs and robes, it will take a sustained public outcry and pressure, who after all are the employers of those who “serve”. A truth routinely overlooked.
        History becomes the final arbiter, and I believe it will look back at this dog and pony show with a critical eye, that may be the only justice possible for the victims and their survivors.
        If Ray, Annie, or any of AIM’s other victims had been federal agents like Williams and Coler every one of the AIM leadership and their close associates with any involvement would have been rounded up and making license plates alongside Peltier – you know it as do I and everyone else, the fact that they aren’t speaks to a lack of desire and who knows what else.
        Our history of association with the “law” as a people has been that others could steal, kill, and rape and abuse our women pretty much at will, this was never the case when we governed ourselves as sovereign nations.
        Now due in part to this so called “rule of law” and the results of assimilation our own can do the same.
        Precedent has been set in furtherance of that and it is yet another wound to endure.
        All this while being told we must respect the law, the great white or black father, and those who operate under the aegis of his office and the corporate umbrella of government.

    • Well, it’s about more than what is or isn’t said, it’s about transparency and equal
      justice under the law – a fair shake for everyone regardless of ethnicity or social
      standing.
      A novel concept from the landing of the first boat people to the present.
      The law has taken varied paths during the course of history in this country, some
      so archaic as to be ridiculous and or inhumane, some though I admit had a value.
      One would be the practice of pillory – a device whereby the offender was subject
      to public display and the ridicule and scorn of the community.
      I think such public ridicule and scorn have a great deterrence value… imagine some
      high and mighty CEO who has bilked the public being pilloried instead of hiding
      behind a non human corporate entity or the laughable nolo contendere – the humiliation
      and example it would set. The message it would send.
      Granted such things could be a slippery slope but we’re already caught up in an
      avalanche of abuse.
      The Swiss have what is known as a direct participatory democracy, strict standards
      apply and are enforced related to politicians and legal authorities. Politicians in
      fact have to appear and explain the positions they take- if counter productive to the
      public interest they’re out, period.
      Citizens also have the right to freely introduce and vote on new resolutions – all
      of which politicians in this country would rather eat their shoe than have to contend
      with.
      Federal judges are appointed in this country and others I imagine, a pitfall in that
      is an inherent cronyism based on the bias of the party in power – the seeking of judges
      who will further a parties interpretation of law and the direction they would take.
      To say no influence exists in such a system is like saying gravity doesn’t exist.
      Bush and the Republicans bent the law to their end with the appointment of a DOJ
      AG and judges that would serve them, Obama and the Democrats have done the same.
      And that doesn’t even begin to address secret FISA courts. Courts that have always been
      the hallmark of oppression wherever they have existed.
      What’s next, a person will be rounded up, told they have been convicted by a secret
      court on a secret charge and never told what it was? What “crime” they committed?
      We’re already headed in the direction portrayed in the movie Minority Report, a future
      where you don’t actually have to do anything, just merely think about it.
      And the nations were described as being “uncivilized”? I submit that what is routinely
      spoken of as “civilization” is becoming increasingly uncivilized.

  2. Can’t disagree with much of how the argument is framed…it does cover a lot of ground. Holding those responsible is certainly critical and should be systemic. I may have mentioned that I am still “working” a civil rights case from 1996 (wrote another letter just last week and had an appointment ‘downtown’ last month) over an out-of-control prosecutor who lied-like-a-thief to get his conviction. The inmate was factually and actually innocent and it took me two years to get him out (after serving eight) but was unable to get any level of the ‘system’ to prosecute the prosecutor…so it wasn’t for a lack of desire…

    Would like to reopen a recurring theme mentioned above: “…this was never the case when we governed ourselves as sovereign nations.”

    Is that to say that prior to the European invasion, colonial and U.S. expansionism and Manifest Destiny, that all was peaceful among the Nations before that? Hasn’t history shown that there wasn’t a Valhalla on the continent as more aggressive tribes dominated, enslaved or eliminated others for much of the same reasons why the white man did; land, resources and a sense of dominance and superiority?

    • The governance I speak of was that of a tribal nature within the communities of each.
      Unlike the late Russell Means I have never disputed the fact that inter tribal warfare
      existed here just as it has on every continent and among every race that has ever
      existed.
      The land was big enough and the population small enough when considering the national
      population currently that coupled with the needs and mindset no thought of a global
      or national dominance existed.
      We never had a Khan, Hannibal, Alexander, Napoleon, or anyone even vaguely resembling such figures who sought to conquer the world.
      Admittedly we have a few currently who seem to be cast from the same mold as Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin, and the like – but that’s another story.
      That is distinctly what the colonizers brought to these shore – the arrogance of papal
      bulls, unfettered greed, and sense of superiority fueled with a provenance they preferred
      to call manifest destiny rather than what it really was.
      If there were a way to calculate the number of slain during our history prior to the
      invasion of this hemisphere and the number following it at the hands of others which do
      you think would be higher?
      Neither have I ever said that what I consider to be attrocities were committed by a
      singular side, the fact that they were committed by both sides may have been one of
      those inconvenient truths for revisionists like Means, but a truth nonetheless.
      I’ve also said as a people we don’t walk on water inspite of the current romanticism,
      that we are human beings and as such have flaws.
      To your credit if you were willing to go after a prosecutor in the name of innocence,
      and the first duty I think of any who wear a badge or function in any capacity as an
      an “officer of the court”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s