There are NO statute of Limitations on MURDER!
VIDEO: Ruby Ridge Documentary
2 hour documentary Video:
The Atrocities at Ruby Ridge
(This is an excerpt from a remarkable book by Gerry Spence called "From Freedom To Slavery, The Rebirth Of Tyranny In America.") First They Came For The Fascists.... by Gerry Spence Randy Weaver's wife was dead, shot through the head while she clutched her child to her breast. His son was shot, twice. First they shot the child's arm, probably destroyed the arm. The child cried out. Then, as the child was running they shot him in the back. Randy Weaver himself had been shot and wounded and Kevin Harris, a kid the Weavers had all but adopted was dying of a chest wound. The blood hadn't cooled on Ruby Hill before the national media announced that I had taken the defense of Randy Weaver. Then all hell broke loose. My sister wrote me decrying my defense of this "racist". There were letters to the editors in several papers that expressed their disappointment that I would lend my services to a person with Weaver's beliefs. And I received a letter from my close friend Alan Hirschfield, the former chairman of chief executive officer of Columbia Pictures and Twentieth Century Fox, Imploring me to withdraw. He Wrote: "After much thought I decided to write this letter to you. It represents a very profound concern on my part regarding your decision to represent Randy Weaver. While I applaud and fully understand your motives in taking such a case, I nonetheless find this individual defense troubling. It is so because of the respectability and credibility your involvement imparts to a cause which I find despicable. .(....remainder of letter deleted for brevity, but wanted Gerry to not defend Weaver, as it would support the militant groups......) The next morning I delivered the following letter by carrier to Mr Hirschfield "I cherish your letter. It reminds me once again of our friendship, for only friends can speak and hear each other in matters so deeply a part of the soul. And your letter reminds me as well, as we must all be reminded, of the unspeakable pain every Jew has suffered from the horrors of the Holocaust. No better evidence of our friendship could be shown than your intense caring concerning what I do and what I stand for. I met Randy Weaver in jail on the evening of his surrender. His eyes had no light in them. He was unshaven and dirty. He was naked except for yellow plastic prison coveralls, and he was cold. His small feet were clad in rubber prison sandals. In the stark setting of the prison conference room he seemed diminutive and fragile. He had spent 11 days and nights in a standoff against the government and he had lost. His wife was dead. His son was dead. His friend was near death. Weaver himself had been wounded. He had lost his freedom. He had lost it all. And now he stood face to face with a stranger who towered over him and whose words were not words of comfort. When I spoke, you, Alan, were on my mind. "My name is Gerry Spence" I began. "I'm the lawyer you've been told about. Before we begin to talk I want you to understand that I do not share any of your political or religious beliefs. Many of my dearest friends are Jews. My daughter is married to a Jew. My sister is married to a black man. She has adopted a black child. I deplore what the Nazis stand for. If I defend you I will not defend your political beliefs or your religious beliefs, but your right as an American citizen to a fair trial." His quiet answer was, "That is all I ask." Then I motioned him to a red plastic chair and I took a similar one. And as the guards marched by and from time to time peered in, he told his story. Alan, you are a good and fair man. That I know. Were it otherwise we would not be such friends. Yet it is your pain I hear most clearly--exacerbated, I know, by the fact that your friend should represent your enemy. Yet what drew me to this case was my own pain. Let me tell you the facts. Randy Weaver's principal crime against the government had been his failure to appear in court on a charge of possessing illegal firearms. The first crime was not his. He had been entrapped--intentionally, systematically, patiently, purposefully entrapped--by a federal agent who solicited him to cut off, contrary to Federal law, the barrels of a couple of shotguns. Randy Weaver never owned an illegal weapon in his life. He was not engaged in the manufacture of illegal weapons. The idea of selling an illegal firearm had never entered his mind until the government agent suggested it and encouraged him to act illegally. The government knew he needed the money. He is as poor as an empty cupboard. He had three daughters, a son and a wife to support. He lived in a small house in the woods without electricity or running water. Although he is a small, frail man, with tiny, delicate hands who probably weighs no more than a hundred and twenty pounds, he made an honest living by chopping firewood and by seasonal work as a logger. This man is wrong, his beliefs are wrong. His relationship to mankind is wrong. He was perhaps legally wrong when he failed to appear and defend himself in court. But the first wrong was not his. Nor was the first wrong the government's. The first wrong was ours. In this country we embrace the myth that we are still a democracy when we know that we are not a democracy, that we are not free, that the government does not serve us but subjugates us. Although we give lip service to the notion of freedom, we know the government is no longer the servant of the people but, at last has become the people's master. We have stood by like timid sheep while the wolf killed, first the weak, then the strays, then those on the outer edges of the flock, until at last the entire flock belonged to the wolf. We did not care about the weak or about the strays. they were not a part of the flock. We did not care about those on the outer edges. They had chosen to be there. But as the wolf worked its way towards the center of the flock we discovered that we were now on the outer edges. Now we must look the wolf squarely in the eye. That we did not do so when the first of us was ripped and torn and eaten was the first wrong. It was our wrong. That none of us felt responsible for having lost our freedom has been a part of an insidious progression. In the beginning the attention of the flock was directed not to the marauding wolf but to our own deviant members within the flock. We rejoiced as the wolf destroyed them for they were our enemies. We were told that the weak lay under the rocks while we faced the blizzards to rustle our food, and we did not care when the wolf took them. We argued that they deserved it. When one of our flock faced the wolf alone it was always eaten. Each of us was afraid of the wolf, but as a flock we were not afraid. Indeed the wolf cleansed the herd by destroying the weak and dismembering the aberrant element within. As time went by, strangely, the herd felt more secure under the rule of the wolf. It believed that by belonging to this wolf it would remain safe from all the other wolves. But we were eaten just the same. No one knows better than children of the Holocaust how the lessons of history must never be forgotten. Yet Americans, whose battle cry was once, "Give me liberty or give me death", have sat placidly by as a new king was crowned. In America a new king was crowned by the shrug of our shoulders when our neighbors were wrongfully seized. A new king was crowned when we capitulated to a regime that is no longer sensitive to people, but to non people--to corporations, to money and to power. The new king was crowned when we turned our heads as the new king was crowned as we turned our heads as the poor and the forgotten and the damned were rendered mute and defenseless, not because they were evil but because, in the scheme of our lives, they seemed unimportant, not because they were essentially dangerous but because they were essentially powerless. The new king was crowned when we cheered the government on as it prosecuted the progeny of our ghettos and filled our prisons with black men whose first crime was that they were born in the ghettos. We cheered the new king on as it diluted our right to be secure in our homes against unlawful searches and to be secure in the courts against unlawful evidence. We cheered the new king on because we were told that our sacred rights were but "loopholes" but which our enemies: the murderers and rapists and thieves and drug dealers, escaped. We were told that those who fought for our rights, the lawyers, were worse than the thieves who stole from us in the night, that our juries were irresponsible and ignorant and ought not to be trusted. We watched with barely more than a mumble as the legal system that once protected us became populated with judges who were appointed by the new king. At last the new king was crowned when we forgot the lessons of history, that:when the rights of our enemies have been wrested from them, we have lost our own rights as well, for the same rights serve both citizen and criminal. When Randy Weaver failed to appear in court because he had lost his trust in the government we witnessed the fruit of our crime. The government indeed had no intent to protect his rights. The government had but one purpose, as it remains today, the disengagement of this citizen from society. Those who suffered and died in the Holocaust must have exquisitely understood such illicit motivations of power. I have said that I was attracted to the case out of my own pain. Let me tell you the facts: a crack team of trained government marksmen sneaked on to Randy Weaver's small isolated acreage on a reconnaissance mission preparatory to a contemplated arrest. They wore camouflage suits and were heavily armed. They gave Randy no warning of their coming. They came without a warrant. They never identified themselves. The Weavers owned 3 dogs, 2 small crossbred collie mutts and a yellow lab, a big pup a little over a year old whose most potent weapon was his tail with which he could beat a full grown man to death. The dog, Striker, was a close member of the Weaver family. Not only was he the companion of the children, but in winter he pulled the family sled to haul their water supply from the spring below. When the dogs discovered the intruders they raised a ruckus, and Randy his friend Kevin, and Randy's 14 year old son Sam, grabbed their guns and followed the dogs to investigate. When the government agents were confronted with the barking dog, they did what men who have been taught to kill do. They shot Striker. The boy, barely larger than a 10 year old child, heard the dog's yelp, saw the dog fall dead. and as a 14 year old might, he returned the fire. Then the government agents shot the child in the arm. He turned and ran. the arm flopping, and when he did, the officers, still unidentified as such, shot the child in the back and killed him. Kevin Harris witnessed the shooting of the dog. Then he saw Sam being shot as the boy turned and ran. To Kevin there was no alternative. He knew if he ran these intruders, whoever they were, would kill him as well. In defense of himself he raised his rifle and shot in the direction of the officer who had shot and killed the boy. Then while the agents were in disarray, Kevin retreated to the Weaver cabin. In the meantime Randy Weaver had been off in another direction and had only heard the shooting, the dog's yelp and the gunfire that followed. Randy hollered for his son and shot his shotgun into the air to attract the boy. "Come on home Sam, Come home." Over and over he called. Finally he heard the boy call back "I'm comin' Dad". Those were the last words he ever heard from his son. Later that same day, Randy, Kevin, and Vicki Weaver, Randy's wife went down to where the boy lay and carried his body back to an outbuilding near the cabin. There they removed the child's clothing and bathed his wounds and prepared the body. The next evening Weaver's oldest daughter, Sarah, sixteen, Kevin, and Randy went back to the shed to have a last look at Sam. When they did, government snipers opened fire. Randy was hit in the shoulder. The three turned and ran for the house where Vicki, with her 10 month old baby in her arms stood holding the door open. As the 3 entered the house Vicki was shot and slowly fell to her knees, her head resting on the floor like one kneeling in prayer. Randy ran up and took the baby that she clutched, and then he lifted his wife's head. Half her face was blown away. Kevin was also hit. Huge areas of muscle in his arm were blown out, and his lung was punctured in several places. Randy and his 16 year old daughter stretched the dead mother on the floor of the cabin and covered he with a blanket where she remained for over 8 days as the siege progressed. By this time there were officers by the score, troops, armored personnel carriers, helicopters, radios, televisions, robots, and untold armaments surrounding the little house. I will not burden you with the misery and horror the family suffered in this stand-off. I will tell you that finally Bo Gritz, Randy's former commander in the special forces, came to help in the negotiations. Gritz told Randy that if he would surrender, Gritz would guarantee him a fair trial, and before the negotiations were ended, Randy came to the belief that I would represent him. Although Gritz had contacted me before I had spoke to Randy, I had only agreed to talk to Randy. But the accuracy of what was said between Gritz and me and what was hard by Randy somehow got lost in the horror, and Randy's belief that I would represent him if he surrendered was in part, his motivation for finally submitting to arrest. And so my friend Allan, you can now understand the pain I feel in this case. It is pain that comes from the realization that we have permitted a government to act in our name and in our behalf in a criminal fashion. It is the pain of watching the government as it now attempts to lie about its criminal complicity in this affair and to cover its crimes by charging Randy with crimes he did not commit, including murder. It is the pain of seeing an innocent woman with a child in her arms murdered and innocent children subjected to these atrocities. Indeed, as a human being I feel Randy's irrepressible pain and horror and grief. I also feel your pain, my friend. Yet I know that in the end, if you were the judge at the trial of Adolph Eichmann, you would have insisted that he not have ordinary council, but the best council. In the same way, if you were the judge in Randy's case, and you had a choice, I have no doubt that despite your own pain you might well have appointed me to defend him. In the end you must know that the Holocaust must never stand for part justice,or average justice but for the most noble of ideals--that even the enemies of the Jews themselves must receive the best justice the system can provide. If it were otherwise the meaning of the Holocaust would be accordingly besmirched. Alan, I agree with your arguments. They are proper and they are true. I agree that my defense of Randy Weaver may attach a legitimacy and dignity to his politics and religion. But it may, as well, stand for the proposition that there are those who don't condone this kind of criminal action by our government. I view the defense of Randy Waver's case as an opportunity to address a more vital issue, one that transcends a white separatist movement or notions of the supremacy of one race over another, for the ultimate enemy of any people is not the angry hate groups that fester within, but a government itself that has lost its respect for the individual. The ultimate enemy of democracy is not the drug dealer or the crooked politician or the crazed skinhead. The ultimate enemy is the new king that has become so powerful it can murder its own citizens with impunity. To the same extent that Randy Weaver cannot find justice in this country, we too will be deprived of justice. At last, my defense of Randy Weaver is a defense of every Jew and every Gentile, for every black and every gay who loves freedom and deplores tyranny. Although I understand that it will be easy for my defense of Randy Weaver to be confused with an endorsement of the politics of the Aryan Nation, my challenge will be to demonstrate that we can still be a nation where the rights of the individual, despite his race, color, religion, remain supreme. If this be not so, then we are all lost. If this is not so, it is because we have forgotten the lessons of our histories--the history of the American Revolution as well as the history of the Holocaust. And so my friend Allan, If I were to withdraw from the defense of Randy Weaver as you request, I would be required to abandon my belief that this system has any remaining virtue. I would be more at fault than the federal government that has murdered these people, for I have not been trained to murder but to defend. I would be less of a man than my client who had the courage of his convictions. I would lose all respect for myself. I would be unable to any longer be your friend, for friendship must always have its foundation in respect. Therefore as my friend, I ask that you not require this of me. I ask instead for your prayers, your understanding and your continued love. As ever, Gerry Spence Jackson Hole, Wyoming "From Freedom To Slavery, The Rebirth Of Tyranny In America" by Gerry Spence $10.95 St. Martin's Press 175 Fifth Ave NY, NY, 10010 USA http://www.wco.com/~altaf/fascist.html
Charges dropped in Ruby Ridge case
Prosecutor declines to prosecute
FBI sniper in Ruby Ridge case
Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi
IDAHO v. HORIUCHI
Randy Weaver Family Christian Homeschoolers Last Days
Kevin (friend of Weavers)
Subj: Re: Appeals Panel Hears Ruby Ridge Case
Date: 12/21/00 2:35:54 PM US Mountain Standard Time
From: (David T. Hardy)
This is extremely interesting, since the 9th Circuit almost NEVER grants a
rehearing en banc. There are 21 or so judges there, and they sit in panels
of three. The original ruling was 2-1 in favor of Horiuchi.
If you're disatisfied, you can ask for rehearing en banc (in theory
that means to ALL the judges, sitting as a huge panel, but in 9th Cir. it's
actually to a large 10 judge panel). The rules say that's granted only
where you have a split in authority inside the circuit.... this 3 judge
panel said X is not the law, but another 3 judge panel a year ago said X
was he law. Even at that, it's almost impossible to get. In Sheriff Mack's
appeal, we had four splits in authority--right down to this panel saying a
given past decision had not been good law since another case ten years ago,
but a different panel only the year before had said it was good law. And
the Ninth Circuit refused rehearing en banc!
I told Ramsey of a point I'd make: (1) there is no federal law against
a federal agent killing a civilian. None. There are federal laws against
civilians killing agents, but not the other way around. (2) under this
decision, there are no state laws against killing which can be applied to
agents. So (3) federal agents actually are licensed to kill, completely
above the law. If in the course of duty, a federal agent kills someone, he
cannot be prosecuted by anyone.
Which also means, I just discovered, that Congress rates our lives as
less than that of a federal dog. This last session, Congress passed a
statute imposing 1 year's imprisonment for assaulting a federal police dog,
and 10 years' imprisonment for seriously injuring or killing one.
David T. Hardy
Appeals Panel Hears Ruby Ridge Case
Wednesday December 20 11:41 PM ET
Appeals Panel Hears Ruby Ridge Case -
The FBI (news - web sites) shooting of a white separatist's wife during the
1992 Ruby Ridge standoff was recounted in a federal courtroom Wednesday in a case that is testing whether federal agents are immune to state prosecution.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) didn't immediately indicate whether prosecutors would be allowed to try agent! Lon T. Horiuchi on manslaughter charges for the death of Randy Weaver's wife, Vicki. The federal government declined to prosecute the agent.Wednesday's hearing stemmed from a request by Boundary County,Idaho, prosecutors, who argued in court papers that the shooting was done by a ``wild-headed government sniper.'' The county asked the court to review its June decision that said the county couldn't prosecute the sharpshooter for ``actions taken in pursuit of his duties as a federal law enforcement officer.'' Attorney Ramsey Clark, arguing for the county, said the court must reverse that decision in a case defining ``when government agents can kill with immunity.''
Solicitor General Seth Waxman told the 11 judges that it didn't matter
whether Vicki Weaver's death was the result of excessive force.``These
federal law enforcement officials are privileged to do what would otherwise
be unlawful if done by a private citizen,'' Waxman told the panel during the
hour-long hearing. ``It's a fundamental function of our government.''Judge
Alex Kozinski questioned Waxman's argument, saying: ``If the Constitution
does not provide limitations for federal agents' actions, then what does?''
Much of the discussion focused on the facts surrounding Vicki Weaver's
killing. Judge Susan Graber asked whether Horiuchi, who wasn't in the
courtroom, knew the unarmed woman was in the line of fire when he shot at Weaver's cabin. ``Reasonable people could differ whether Agent Horiuchi's actions were reasonable or not,'' she said.``You really don't know the facts until you go to trial,'' Clark responded.
Waxman said the facts are irrelevant, and that federal agents subject to
various state laws could chill the government's ability even to guard the
president.The court didn't indicate when it would rule.
During the weeklong standoff at northern Idaho's remote Ruby Ridge, Horiuchi shot and killed Weaver's wife and wounded family friend Kevin Harris. Witnesses have said the sharpshooter fired as Vicki Weaver held open the cabin door, her 10-month-old baby in her arms, to let Randy Weaver, their daughter and Harris in.
Horiuchi maintains he didn't see Vicki Weaver when he fired at Harris, who was armed and was ducking into the cabin as federal agents attempted to arrest Randy Weaver on a weapons trafficking charge. He also has said he fired to protect a government helicopter overhead.
The Justice Department (news - web sites) this summer announced the
settlement of the last remaining civil lawsuit stemming from the standoff.
The government admitted no wrongdoing, but paid Harris $380,000 to drop his $10 million civil damage suit.
In 1995, the government paid Weaver and his three surviving children $3.1
million for the killing of Weaver's wife and their son, Samuel. The
14-year-old boy died in a shootout with federal marshals that ignited the
siege. A deputy marshal was also killed.-
On the Net:9th Circuit Court of Appeals,case is
Idaho vs. Horiuchi, 98-30149: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov
WINDS - Kevin Harris Charged with Murder - Double Jeopardy From Ruby Ridge?
Court: FBI Sharpshooter May Be Charged in Ruby Ridge Slaying
Tuesday, June 5, 2001,
SAN FRANCISCO A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that an FBI sharpshooter can be tried by Idaho prosecutors for manslaughter in the slaying of white separatist Randy Weaver's wife during the 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff.
The ruling from a sharply divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revives a case mentioned in the same breath as Waco and cited by Timothy McVeigh as motivation for the Oklahoma City bombing.
It could also mean that FBI officials will be hauled into court to defend decisions made during the 11-day confrontation in northern Idaho. The agency is already stinging from recent gaffes in the bombing case and the recent indictment of agent Robert Hanssen on espionage charges.
The Ruby Ridge case is seen as a test of whether federal agents are immune from state prosecution. The federal government declined to prosecute agent Lon Horiuchi, but Tuesday's ruling clears the way for Idaho prosecutors to pursue charges against him in the death of Vicki Weaver, 42.
"When federal officers violate the Constitution, either through malice or excessive zeal, they can be held accountable for violating the state's criminal laws," Judge Alex Kozinski wrote in the 6-5 decision.
The court agreed with Idaho's contention that immunity cannot be granted until there is a hearing to determine whether Horiuchi acted unlawfully. If a judge rules Horiuchi broke the law, the case can go before a jury, the court ruled.
The panel rejected arguments that it didn't matter whether Weaver's death was the result of excessive force.
"When federal law enforcement agents carry out their responsibilities, they can cause destruction of property, loss of freedom, and as in this case, loss of life all which might violate the state's criminal laws," Kozinski said.
Horiuchi's attorney, Adam Hoffinger, declined comment and a Justice Department spokesman wouldn't say whether the decision will be appealed.
Outgoing FBI Director Louis J. Freeh said he was disappointed with the ruling and said the agency stands behind Horiuchi.
"As so often happens in law enforcement, split-second life and death decisions must be made by those sworn to enforce the law," Freeh said. "We continue to believe strongly agent Horiuchi met the legal standard that protects law enforcement officers when they carry out their duties, even when the consequence in hindsight is regrettable."
Ramsey Clark, a former U.S. attorney general under President Johnson who argued the case for Boundary County, Idaho, called the ruling "courageous" and said it showed that law enforcement would be held accountable for violence.
Randy Weaver also praised the decision.
"We've said all along that federal agents should be held accountable for their actions just like the rest of us," Weaver said from his home in Jefferson, Iowa. "If the state can't bring charges, who will hold them responsible?
"We're happy with the decision," he said. "The American people should be happy with the decision. It's a good day for America and the justice system."
Stephen Yagman, who also represented Idaho in the case, said the decision was a significant victory for individual and states' rights.
"It puts another nail in the open coffin ... of the FBI," he said.
The standoff prompted a nationwide debate on the use of force by federal agencies.
It began after federal agents tried to arrest Randy Weaver for failing to appear in court to face charges of selling two illegal sawed-off shotguns. His cabin had been under surveillance for several months.
The violence began with the deaths of Deputy U.S. Marshal William Degan, Weaver's 14-year-old son, Samuel, and the Weaver family dog, Striker.
Horiuchi later shot and killed Weaver's wife and wounded family friend Kevin Harris. Witnesses said the sharpshooter fired as Vicki Weaver held open the cabin door, her 10-month-old baby in her arms, to let her husband, their daughter and Harris inside.
Horiuchi has said he didn't see Vicki Weaver when he fired at Harris, who was armed and was ducking inside the cabin. He also said he fired to protect a government helicopter overhead.
The appeals court appeared troubled with the case. Those in dissent said the majority was using hindsight in "dissecting the mistakes" of Horiuchi.
They called the majority's opinion a "grave disservice" to FBI agents and argued that Horiuchi, who is still an FBI agent, should be immune from prosecution.
"Every day in this country, federal agents place their lives in the line of fire to secure the liberties that we all hold dear," Judge Michael Daly Hawkins wrote for the minority. "There will be times when those agents make mistakes, sudden judgment calls that turn out to be horribly wrong.
"We seriously delude ourselves if we think we can serve the cause of liberty by throwing shackles on those agents and hauling them to the dock of a state criminal court when they make such mistakes."
The standoff ended after Harris and Weaver surrendered. Both men were acquitted of murder, conspiracy and other federal charges. Weaver was convicted of failing to appear for trial on the firearms charge.
In 1995, the government paid Weaver and his three surviving children $3.1 million for the killings of Weaver's wife and son.
The Justice Department last summer settled the last civil lawsuit stemming from the standoff. The government admitted no wrongdoing, but paid Harris $380,000 to drop his $10 million civil damage suit.
Children, Dogs Hold Off Idaho Sheriff
The Siege of Shirley Ann Allen
APFN Waco Page
Inside Mount Carmel
The Donald & Frances Scott Story
6630 West Cactus Road #B107-760
Glendale, Arizona 85304
American Patriot Friends Network
"...a network of net workers..."
APFN IS NOT A BUSINESS
APFN IS SUPPORTED BY "FREE WILL" GIFT/DONATIONS
Without Justice, there is JUST_US!
APFN Message Board
APFN Contents Page
APFN Home Page
Last updated 02/23/2012