There’s also Peter Matthiessen’s unwitting indictment, firmly placing Peltier inside the murder window, standing over the bodies of two federal agents with their heads blown off:
“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.”.
Peltier commenting on Joe Stuntz, wearing Jack Coler’s FBI jacket, as quoted from Matthiessen’s, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse.
Until the 1999 CNN interview, inmate Peltier swore he had never gone down to where the injured FBI agents were, by their bureau cars. How many lies does it take before Peltier supporters get a clue?
The above from Leonard Peltier Still Guilty.
An interesting coincidence as within the last week in conversations with friends we had been discussing ITSOCH and this very incident as related in the book.
I’ve taken a break from blogging about Peltier during the last few blogs, but time to mount up again
ITSOCH is always referenced as a source in these defense attempts, but the book itself is riddled with indictments that contradicts much of what it says, and does so using Peltier’s own words.
For decades Peltier claimed he never went to Williams and Coler’s car, never saw the aftermath, and didn’t take part in what amounted to the looting of it.
This despite after the Oregon RV fiasco where both he and Banks fled like scared rabbits leaving women behind to fend for themselves and one of the agents handguns was found with Peltier’s print on it.
Of course Peltier maintained that story until confronted with Robideau’s own words which squarely placed him there during an interview where he made a stumbling, mumbling, near incoherent admission.
But for those who have read ITSOCH Peltier’s presence is clearly described in quoting his own words as follows:
“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.”
Peltier doesn’t say he saw Stuntz put on the jacket later in a different location- he says very clearly he saw Stuntz pull it out of the trunk and put it on, and that can only mean he, Peltier, was there.
So what can Peltier and the Peltierites offer as a defense or an attempt to deny? Not much I think.
They either have to say it is a lie and the book is inaccurate, thus raising doubts about the accuracy of every word written, or they can admit Peltier lied for all those years-not an enviable position.
But I suspect they will do as they have always done and choose to ignore yet another example of Peltier indicting himself and respond with another lie about such things as shell casings.
Sometimes I can’t help but wonder if those old days of CIA association Mathiessen had compelled him to drop a crumb here and there thinking others might notice it and follow the trail?
One thing I do know is that if the nations had a dollar for every lie told by Peltier and AIM poverty would be non-existent.
Peltier has tripped himself up repeatedly over the years, some of the quotes in earlier blogs attest to that, but as we see in the evolution that has taken place as more becomes known the defense emphasis, such as it is as, morphed from total innocence to that of judicial impropriety.
A tacit admission that has been as difficult to extract as a bad tooth. This is an age of lies and what people either want to believe or are led to believe.
We see this as being so in every level of society, from politics to wannabe anarchists. Conspiracy theories go hand in hand with this type of thing and some actually believe that the mere mention of them is a proof.
What is overlooked in fabricating one is that often the time line or sequence of events is altered, a point is ignored as being an inconvenient truth, but in doing so it can be likened to wearing a pair of mismatched socks-the difference is obvious, and only the blind would fail to notice.
No more based on Peltier’s own words can any say he was out of the country when Annie was murdered.
“I’d been in and out of Canada a half dozen times already. This is why this shit about me, this stuff about me fleeing into Canada and using that as a reason for conviction, fleeing to Canada and all this shit, that’s not true.”
No more can it be said that the motivation for killing Williams and Coler was anything other than Peltier believed they were coming after him for the Wisconsin warrant-nor can it be said by Peltier or anyone that as he has said he only shot in a direction where no one could be hit.
“Especially in this system, I can’t tell the system I was shooting at their police officers that WERE TRYING TO ARREST ME. They’ll hold that against me. I’VE GOT BE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT STUFF. ( Caps mine).
No more can it be said that he only found out about Annie’s murder while in jail in Canada.
“I think it was around that December when I heard that Anna Mae was dead. I was in that jail over there in Canada right around whenever they exposed who she really was and what she died from, but I believe I didn’t hear about it until December. When people say that she tried to contact me, that’s a lie. If she’d have tried to contact me then she would have been with me, and there’s no doubt in my mind because the Indian people knew where I was; certain people knew where I was at. “
The problem with this statement is that he wasn’t in jail in Canada until February of the following year-1976. And by his own admission that he was in and out of the country the question arises was he around in December of ’75? And if so what was he doing and who was he in contact with?
A mainstay, feeble as it is, has been that AIM was over run with informants and became paranoid-so somehow that justifies the murders they committed-yet Peltier takes issue with that in the below quote.
“THERE WEREN’T THAT MANY INFORMANTS, THERE WASN’T.”
In doing so he narrows the field for the motivation in killing Annie, and I say the biggest reason was his ignorant loudmouthed bragging in her presence that he “shot the mfer”-for surely AIM saw the risks involved Peltier’s guilt and association meant for them.
Their intent wasn’t to save Peltier but to save themselves-and in view of their history I think Peltier is fortunate the RCMP got to him before AIM did, or he too could be laying in an unmarked grave somewhere, or his lifeless body handed over.
What has resulted is the proverbial marriage made in hell-AIM and Peltier eternally linked as disgruntled spouses incapable of endangering the other without endangering themself, and staying together for the “benefit” of the their offspring….gangs and criminals.
In separating there would be no division of property, the only “asset” to be shared would be the guilt and the legal ramifications-a price neither side is willing to pay.
So they publicly display a domestic bliss that doesn’t exist and find themselves confined to the same bed they jointly made…. in a marriage made in hell.