LAVOY FINICUM

 

Grand jury considers FBI’s use of force in Finicum shooting

PORTLAND, Ore. — A federal prosecutor revealed in a court document that the investigation of FBI agents involved in the traffic stop that led to the killing of Oregon standoff spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum is before a grand jury.

Attorneys for the defendants accused of taking part in the Ammon Bundy-led takeover of a national wildlife refuge in Oregon have been seeking records from the investigation into the FBI’s use of force in the Finicum shooting and whether there was a cover-up.

In a motion to keep reports sealed, Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles Gorder wrote Thursday that matters before a grand jury are protected from disclosure rules.

Oregon State Police troopers fired the rounds that killed Finicum during the Jan. 26 confrontation on a remote road, and the shooting was deemed to be justified.

Investigators, however, discovered FBI agents failed to disclose they fired two rounds that missed Finicum.

Petition · Ellis Pitchford: Arrest the Officers who shot at the passengers of Lavoy’s truck! · Change.org

Petitioning Senator Ted Cruz and 5 others

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/cindy.wisner1?_fb_noscript=1″ />(3) Cindy Wisner

Ella Lindsey Purvis's photo.

 

2 hrs ·

He should be charged with conspiracy to commit murder, and as an Accessory to murder along with all the other Confidential Informants – FBI agents involved – HRT agents involved and any other agencies who took part in the Cold Blooded Premeditated and calculated Murder of Robert LaVoy Finicum.

To the Low life officials responsible for LaVoys Murder, if you aren’t tried in this life time. You will answer to the Lord, and you will know we’re your future will be, in the hottest part of Hell ! ! !

Image may contain: 2 people

Angry

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
David McCoy III
Remove
David McCoy III Brother I agree with you totally agree with that
Like · Reply · 1 · 1 hr

 

Anthony Rollins
Remove
Like · Reply · 1 · 1 hr

 

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/dscottvenetucci?_fb_noscript=1″ />(5) Cliven Bundy’s Army!

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/dscottvenetucci?_fb_noscript=1″ />(4) Cliven Bundy’s Army!

The family of Robert LaVoy Finicum — the Arizona rancher and Malheur wildlife refuge occupier who was killed by police on Jan. 26 — has retained a California attorney to pursue a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Oregon State Police and two FBI agents.

Brian Claypool of the Pasadena, Calif., based Claypool Law Firm has been retained by Finicum’s widow, Jeanette, and their 12 children, according to a Tuesday news release.

Finicum, along with Ryan Bundy and other ranchers, “had been peacefully protesting on the federal wildlife refuge, when law enforcement, motivated by political reasons, escalated the otherwise peaceful demonstration by pursuing Finicum despite his repeated instruction to them that he was on his way to John Day, Ore., to meet with local law enforcement and others in an attempt to resolve the protest,” the news release states.

VIDEOS
Hermine Strikes FL: One Dead, 200K+ Without Power
Weather Channel
Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov dead at 78
BNO

Indonesian man claims to be world’s oldest person at 145
ITN

Hermine Strikes FL: One Dead, 200K+ Without Power
Weather Channel

Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov dead at 78
BNO

More videos:

Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov dead at 78

Indonesian man claims to be world’s oldest person at 145

Hermine Strikes FL: One Dead, 200K+ Without Power

Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov dead at 78

Indonesian man claims to be world’s oldest person at 145

Hermine Strikes FL: One Dead, 200K+ Without Power

Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov dead at 78

Indonesian man claims to be world’s oldest person at 145

Hermine Strikes FL: One Dead, 200K+ Without Power

TOP JOBS
Top Jobs
Ada County Highway District
Deputy Director Of Engineering…Top Jobs Arrow

Christy Sports
Clothing Sales Associates – Rental Equ…Top Jobs Arrow

Ogden-Weber Tech College
NON-DESTRUCTIVE INSPECTION PROGRAM INS…Top Jobs Arrow

Wayne Community Health Center
Chief Financial Officer (CFO) …Top Jobs Arrow

United Health Group
Customer Service Representatives…Top Jobs Arrow
Check out all of the Trib Top Jobs

Video of the fatal police shooting appears to show Finicum reaching into his jacket before he fell into the snow at a police roadblock. The FBI has said the man had a loaded gun in his pocket.

But the Claypool news release states “there is now physical evidence (shell casings) that proves that two FBI agents lied during the law enforcement investigation by stating that they did not fire the first shots at Finicum’s vehicle.”

The news release also claims the U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the two FBI agents for perjury.

Claypool also will be representing Ryan Bundy in federal civil rights lawsuit arising from Bundy’s being shot in the arm by law enforcement, “as well as multiple egregious constitutional violations by prison guards during his incarceration in a Portland jail while he awaits trial,” the news release states. Claypool will also be co-counsel in Bundy’s upcoming criminal trial in Portland.

Ryan Bundy — the son of Cliven Bundy, who headed a 2014 armed standoff between federal law enforcement at his Nevada ranch — had participated in the Malheur occupation and was riding in the vehicle with Finicum, before Finicum was fatally shot.
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest Email Print
Share This Article

Ads by Revcontent

You May Like

No Pill Can Stop Tinnitus But (1) Weird “Trick” Can

Tinnitus Terminator
10 Survival Skills Your Great-Grandparents Knew (That Most Of Us Have Forgotten)

The Lost Ways
New Unauthorized Video Could Force Hillary to Give Up Her White House Dreams

Health Sciences Institute
7-Time Lotto Winner Reveals The Truth How To Win Any Lottery

Lotto Crusher
Dead Simple Trick Brings Any Battery Back To Life (Never Buy Batteries Again)

EZ Battery Reconditioning
The Cameraman Just Kept Recording (PHOTOS)

ModernNews
Rare Photo Of Trump Without Makeup Shows His Age

ChoiceorLife
This Old House Is Actually The Most Secure Place on Earth

The Lost Ways
Quantcast

ARTICLE PHOTO GALLERY
LaVoy Finicum, a rancher from Arizona, who is part of the group occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge speaks with reporters during a news conference at the the refuge Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2016, near Burns, Ore. At the time, law enforcement had yet to take any action against the group numbering close to two dozen who are upset over federal land policy. Finicum said the group would examine the underlying land ownership transactions to begin to
(Scott Sommerdorf | The Salt Lake Tribune) LaVoy Finicum’s widow, Jeanette speaks about what she called her husband’s
(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) A ribbon and photograph on a mourner at the funeral for Robert
FILE – In this Jan. 9, 2016 file photo, LaVoy Finicum, a rancher from Arizona, speaks to the media after members of an armed group along with several other organizations arrive at the at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns, Ore. The FBI and Oregon State Police arrested the leaders of an armed group that has occupied a national wildlife refuge for the past three weeks during a traffic stop that prompted gunfire — and one death — along a highway through the frozen high country. The Oregonian reported that Finicum was the person killed, citing the man’s daughter. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer)
Arizona rancher LaVoy Finicum speaks to reporters at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2016, near Burns, Ore. Ammon Bundy, the leader of a small, armed group that is occupying a remote national wildlife preserve in Oregon said Tuesday that they will go home when a plan is in place to turn over management of federal lands to locals. (AP Photo/Rebecca Boone)
5 photos VIEW PHOTO GALLERY

comment bubbleJOIN THE DISCUSSION
64 comments Post a Comment

&l<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/dscottvenetucci?_fb_noscript=1″ />Facebook

Per this article, dated 23 August, Brian Claypool is 1) representing the Finicums in their suit against the FBI for LaVoy’s murder; 2) representing Ryan Bundy for being shot in the arm and multiple abuses in jail; 3) representing Ryan as co-counsel in his legal trial in Portland. I don’t know how I missed all this, but apparently I have. I found another article about the same date with the same story.

The family of Robert LaVoy Finicum — the Arizona rancher and Malheur wildlife refuge occupier who was killed by police on Jan. 26 — has retained a California attorney to pursue a federal civil rights …
sltrib.com|By The Salt Lake Tribune
t;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(15) Facebook
5 elite national FBI agents under criminal investigation for shots fired at LaVoy Finicum, FBI also Attempted to coverd it up.

One or more FBI agents from a special “elite national unit” are suspected of lying about shots that were in fact fired at Oregon Occupier, rancher and family man LaVoy Finicum while he and others were en route to meet with the Sheriff of a neighboring county on Jan. 26, and are currently being investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice.

This also follows lockstep with reports of “mercenaries

” in the area who may have been operating outside the official scope of the law. What is extremely interesting about this new finding is that fact that Finicum was actually shot at by FBI upon disembarking his vehicle, while having held his hands held high in the air, in what may have even have been an attempt to quell him, ultimately stopping him from meeting with Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer who he was scheduled to speak with in John Day, North of Burns Oregon. Moreover, this would have also led to Finicum actually being the one in fear for his life and not law enforcement officials as originally claimed with the FBI tryed to justify Finicum’s death

earlier this week, Slow moving Video—> The gun shots fired at Lavoy

Les Zaitz reports:
Finicum, 54, an Arizona rancher, was one of the leaders of the Jan. 2 takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns. Investigators gave no details to explain why the one FBI agent, a member of the Hostage Rescue Team, wouldn’t report the two shots. They also didn’t indicate what his four colleagues did to warrant investigation other than saying it was related to conduct after the shooting. “The question of who fired these shots has not been resolved,” said Greg Bretzing, special agent in charge of the FBI in Portland. The federal agency is cooperating with the inspector general’s investigation, he said at a news conference.
Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer said the roadblock operation was an “ambush” and suspects foul play. Ammon Bundy’s attorney, Mike Arnold, told members of the press, “I’m going to have to go back and reconsider all the conspiracy theories that I’ve written off, after this new evidence has come to light.” “Finicum was driving the truck that carried carried Ryan C. Bundy, 43, Ryan W. Payne, 32, Shawna Cox, 59, and Victoria Sharp, 18. In the Jeep behind them was driver Mark McConnell, 37, Brian D. Cavalier, 44, and Ammon Bundy, 40, the public face of the occupation,” the Oregonian reports.

Bundy’s lawyer requested

a less-stringent protective order based on the new findings in hopes of his client moving about more freely. Now some are wondering if Finicum was even armed with the 9mm handgun the FBI claims he was, despite the fact that eyewitnesses have said that Finicum left his firearm at the refuge before traveling to John Day with the group as part of a protocol to keep things safe. As of yet now the agents have been unnamed by law enforcement.

Written By: Shepard Ambellas
<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(46) Facebook
Why LaVoy Finicum’s Shooting & FBI Cover-up May be Relevant to Conspiracy Defense: Did the Government Act in Bad Faith?

In the Malheur protest case, the evidence lost from the scene of the shooting of LaVoy Finicum and the arrest of the protesters is irreplaceable and taints the reliability of the entire investigation that is not remedied by merely being pointed out to a jury, which the court has ruled cannot even be done. The decision by the court to preclude the evidence of the shooting of Finicum may not at this point be error reversible on appeal, as the record created by the defendants may be insufficient for her to have made the determination correctly.

In the alternative to dismissal, a defendant could request exclusion of all post-shooting evidence to level the playing field and address this egregious due process violation. Unfortunately, because the government has selectively released information to the public while attempting to use the Court’s power for a protective order to gag the defendants, they selectively released a video with their chosen narrative. They did so while knowing that they were releasing information about an FBI cover-up, but chose, suspiciously, to not include that in their explanation, which was a thinly veiled attempt to vilify Mr. Finicum, the very man they killed.

Why have guns at a political protest? Is it reasonable in light of perceived prior FBI overreach at Waco, Ruby Ridge, & Bundy Ranch?

This is an interesting a question that a jury should potentially be tasked to answer. However, it is unclear if any defendant is raising the issue at this point according to a government memorandum that said, “Defendants have not formally provided notice that they are seeking a self-defense instruction.”
The argument is essentially this: Since the conclusion of the occupation, the protesters have been arguing that through their effectiveness at marshaling First and Second Amendment protections, they frustrated and lawfully provoked their government – and they did so by exercising statutory and constitutional rights – in their most pristine and classic forms. However, it appears the executive branch of government didn’t tolerate it. Reportedly, the FBI caused the protest to escalate due to the FBI’s interference with the First Amendment right to petition representatives in a redress of grievances. It has been reported that the FBI told certain elected officials not to respond to any of the petitions regarding the Hammonds, including the official Notice of Redress of Grievances. The FBI reportedly interfered with and stopped this process of a republican form of government, an important safety valve in a constitutional republic, causing additional frustration in the protesters and activists.
In contrast to the astute (albeit novel) peaceful protest at the refuge, prior to the ambush, the FBI began their show of force during the FBI’s militaristic occupation of Burns, Oregon and Harney County. They built up a military-like presence by taking over the local airfield. They carried guns around town in tactical positions, intimidating locals and attempting to put the protesters in fear of imminent deadly force, purportedly in hopes of provoking them to respond when an ambush was eventually employed.

The Death of LaVoy Finicum

The evidence indicates that just hours before Mr. Bundy, his colleague LaVoy Finicum, and others were to give a public presentation on land rights topics to hundreds of Oregon supporters who had gathered in neighboring Grant County, Oregon government officials concluded, as Senator Ron Wyden phrased it, that the “virus” of this particular political speech “was spreading” and there “had to be consequences.” Apparently, included in the “consequences” sought by the government was using deadly force on fellow protesters and an 18-year old girl who had never threatened anyone as they rounded a corner and approached a “deadman’s roadblock,” a roadblock with serious risk that a collision is inevitable due to line of sight and other attendant circumstances. Effectively, the agents of the government made up their mind to fire at the protesters after they rounded the corner sending a fairly explicit message as to the perceived intentions of the government.
These shots were fired after agents acknowledged that there were women in the car, as heard on Ryan Bundy’s cell phone recording. The agents also knew that their ambush blockade was impenetrable due to the size of the vehicles, their positioning, and the snowbanks flanking their position, rendering deadly force unreasonable and unnecessary. But, nonetheless, they positioned officers behind the collision zone either out of carelessness or to give an excuse to shoot at anyone who approached this impenetrable blockade at a high speed.
The “deadman’s roadblock” was in fact employed and at least one vehicle was shot at while stopped (purportedly with a less-than-lethal round which to the occupants would have been indiscernible to a lethal round). Possibly believing that they were likely facing imminent deadly force, Finicum sought to turn himself in to a county law enforcement officer who he believed could protect their personal safety, given what he knew about government force in protest situations, In his mind and the others in the truck, was the killing of Randy Weaver’s wife while holding their infant son at Ruby Ridge, the burning of the Branch Davidian compound at Waco, killing women and children, and the government’s purported sniper positions during the Bundy Ranch protest).
Here’s the thing: the reports of government overreach in the past doesn’t even have to be true to be relevant to someone’s state of mind in possessing firearms at a protest or driving away from a police stop. It just has to be reasonable for them to believe it. And whether it’s reasonable to believe the stories and photos about the Bundy Ranch’s government snipers (pictured above) is for the jury to decide.

“Here’s the thing: the reports of government overreach in the past doesn’t even have to be true to be relevant to someone’s state of mind in possessing firearms at a protest or driving away from a police stop.”

I myself, while touring the Bundy Ranch earlier this year, heard terrifying firsthand accounts from women with children alone on back roads having sniper guns leveled at them. It’s likely that Finicum and others heard the same stories which affected their state of mind at the protest and at the arrest. And evidence of their subjective state of mind at the protest is their reaction to the government ambush. Furthermore, evidence of the government’s response and cover-up is evidence of the objective reasonableness of such belief. In effect, it’s a subsequent “bad act” relevant under FRE 404.
Was it reasonable to believe that they were at grave risk given the circumstances? Was it reasonable for them to believe that, with the backdrop of Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Bundy Ranch, and the fact that they had been available for arrest when in public, something was amiss when they were approached on a vacant highway far away from help and out of cell phone range? Lavoy Finicum even announced where they were heading and invited the federal agents to follow. However, his fear turned out to be prophetic as the ambush was waiting for them. Inexplicably, agents of the government shot at the vehicle, using unlawful deadly force, and then saying the magic words of “fear,” “imminence,” and “training and experience” to law enforcement investigating the death. Agents of the government still tried to spin the narrative as they covered up their use of deadly force by hiding bullet casings that would show the truth, which may be a constitutional Due Process violation as described below.

Investigating the Investigators

Not knowing that there was an active cover-up of evidence in this case, after the shooting, I requested in open court to have an investigator present while the FBI was processing the evidence. The Government replied, by breathtakingly citing Youngblood and saying that “[h]ere, defendants have proffered nothing to establish that the FBI ERT personnel are not processing the scene meticulously and collecting the physical evidence using their best efforts and with the utmost good faith.” Government’s Second Response to Defendants’ Motions for Site Access, p. 4. The Government went on to argue that “Defendant Ammon Bundy complains that without his requested order he will ‘be forced to depend on the good will and diligence of State actors’ to do their job properly…as if that is anything but the normal and well-settled practice in criminal matters.”
The Government argued this to the court, as FBI agents were under investigation for a cover-up where a political protester was killed by his government. The cognitive dissonance it must take to make such an assertion to the court in these circumstances is astounding and is likely due to agents not properly notifying the US Attorney’s office of the ongoing constitutional violations and cover-up investigations. As more information later came out, it showed that the protesters were right to suspect the government that killed their friend and then attempted to cover up what happened afterwards.

“Not knowing that there was an active cover-up of evidence in this case, after the shooting, I requested in open court to have an investigator present while the FBI was processing the evidence.”

In response to my request, the Court determined that any prejudice was speculative given the representations by the government. The Court was not candidly informed that there were already allegations of an FBI cover-up for unknown reasons (i.e., the FBI, DOJ and the deadly force investigators may have hidden the cover-up from the US Attorney’s Office). The facts of this cover-up, the FBI Hostage Rescue Team’s (HRT) place in the chain-of-command, the evidence affected, who directed the lack of body cameras, etc. should have been fleshed out in the evidentiary hearing, as these facts are actually relevant and important to the case as set forth below.
Notwithstanding the repeated use of deadly force by the government, it is an impressive fact that no force was ever used and no firearms were ever fired by any protester prior to the ambush. They never even lifted or pointed a gun or held a gun in intimidation, as the FBI was routinely doing in Burns. In fact, the evidence shows that it was Ammon Bundy’s leadership that helped keep things peaceful, along with several others like his brother Ryan Bundy who stayed calm and peaceful in the back of LaVoy Finicum’s pick-up, with multiple weapons at his disposal, and who did not return fire during a hailstorm of bullets and the ultimate killing Mr. Finicum. Ryan Bundy possibly faced unlawful force by the agents of the government and ironically may have entirely within his rights to defend himself with deadly force given State v. Oliphant, 221 Or App 384 (2008), if he reasonably believed unlawful deadly force was being used against him (i.e., the shooting at the moving vehicle after rounding the corner and not knowing that prior and subsequent shots were less-than-lethal rounds.)
One firearm found in Finicum’s pickup. Given that restraint and the absolute peacefulness of this protest, it is appalling that the government resorted to violence and death which were clear Fourth Amendment violations. See Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). However, this case could potentially be put to rest via dismissal due to the gross Due Process violations that have occurred on video and other yet-to-be-explored constitutional violations for which video was not fortunate enough to be present due to the likely deliberate choices of the agents who failed to wear body cameras or activate their in-car videos or who destroyed video footage.
There are screen shots of agents who appear to be wearing head cameras although they could be audio equipment (by ABC News video).

Why is Finicum Shooting Relevant to the Conspiracy Case?

The destruction of evidence of the killing of a government protester is the epitome of a Due Process violation that strikes at the very heart of what processes are due to a citizen. The plot for the ambush and decisions leading up to this are clearly relevant to bias and motive to fabricate and the killing of a defense witness and the destruction of evidence illustrated that bias on the part of the Federal Government. The FBI HRT marksmen “missed” when firing at LaVoy Finicum for one of three possible reasons: they missed (1) by accident and contrary to their marksmen training; (2) on purpose to provoke a protester to return fire justifying use of deadly force against them; or (3) to provoke OSP to fire on the protesters. These issues and more illustrate Due Process violations linked to the destruction of evidence and should be explored in the evidentiary hearing before trial and possibly at trial before the jury.

The Case Law on Destruction of Evidence

I. The killing of a defense witness and the destruction of evidence by the FBI Hostage Rescue Team may be a violation of constitutional Due Process rights.

The government destroyed evidence and killed a witness in a high-profile case and defendants and defense counsel had to learn of it from journalists. But does that have any legal significance to the criminal case? A due process violation can occur when the Government fails to preserve potentially useful evidence, fails to provide favorable evidence, or fails to preserve favorable evidence in the Government’s possession. Federal precedent establishes three separate and distinguishable analyses that could arise out of the Government’s destruction of evidence, set forth below in Brady v. Maryland, 373 US 83, 87 (1963), California v. Trombetta, 467 US 479, 488 (1984), and Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 US 51, 57 (1988).

“The government destroyed evidence and killed a witness in a high-profile case and defendants and defense counsel had to learn of it from journalists.”

As demonstrated in United States v. Cooper, 983 F2d 928 (1993), and United States v. Bohl, 25 F3d 904 (1994), there is more than one way to determine whether Trombetta or Youngblood applies. In Cooper, for example, the court started initially with the existence of bad faith before moving on the other factors of the Trombetta analysis. United States v. Cooper, 983 F2d at 931. In Bohl, the court began with the importance of the destroyed materials and used its determination of the value of the lost evidence to continue with the Youngblood analysis. United States v. Bohl, 25 F3d at 910. Regardless, it seems that the first task of importance is to decide which law applies. There are three options when the Government fails to provide evidence:

A. The Government fails to provide favorable evidence in its possession (bad faith irrelevant).

A due process violation occurs when the prosecution fails to provide evidence favorable to a defendant upon request, where the evidence is material to either guilt or punishment. Brady, 373 US at87 (1963). If the evidence is favorable to the defendant and material to guilt, the good or bad faith of the prosecution is irrelevant. Id. at 87. Under Brady, and more recently, Strickler v. Greene, 527 US 263, 281-282 (1999),[1] a defendant must prove the following:

B. The Government fails to preserve favorable evidence in its possession.

Under California v. Trombetta, 467 US 479, 488 (1984), to prove a due process violation for the failure to preserve favorable evidence, the defendant must prove the following:

C. The Government fails to preserve potentially useful evidence in its possession.

Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 US 51, 57 (1988), set apart due process violations involving destruction. To prove a due process violation for the failure to preserve potentially useful evidence, the defendant must prove the following: This case is about destruction or failure to preserve evidence rather than a failure to provide evidence in the Government’s possession. Thus, the appropriate analysis will be Youngblood and/or Trombetta. While the principles of Brady are persuasive, the Court’s determination does not fall to Brady per se. Regardless, Defendant asserts that whether this case falls within the confines of Youngblood or Trombetta is an important but moot point, since he can prevail with each analysis.

II. The determination of bad faith in the context of a due process violation for the government’s failure to preserve evidence is challenging because there is no specific criteria established.

Youngblood provided the specific test involving bad faith, has been applied so broadly throughout the United States. However it does not specifically provide a concrete explanation for what constitutes bad faith. In the context of explaining the importance of good/bad faith when the government is alleged to have lost evidence, the Youngblood court referenced the requirement that the defendant make a showing that the government intentionally delayed to gain a tactical advantage as set forth in United States v. Marion, 404 US 307 (1971), and the government’s deportation of illegal aliens who possess evidence favorable to a defendant in United States. Valenzuela-Bernal, 458 US 858 (1982). These references mean that the Youngblood court meant to convey that bad faith is found when the government intentionally delays to gain a tactical advantage, and when the government deports an an illegal alien knowing that the witness possessed evidence favorable to the defendant in a criminal prosecution. In a footnote, the Youngblood court stated:

The presence or absence of bad faith by the police for purposes of the Due Process Clause must necessarily turn on the police’s knowledge of the exculpatory value of the evidence at the time it was lost or destroyed. Cf. Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264, 269 (1959).

While it is tempting to use this footnote comment in a Youngblood bad faith determination, simply because subsequent cases on this issue lack the apparent clarity of these words (‘bad faith is’ or ‘bad faith means’), Defendant submits that this would be in error. First, the Napue case is from 1959, years before the Youngblood opinion. Second, the footnote discussing bad faith in the context of what police knew or did not know is placed in a paragraph in the Youngblood opinion discussing Trombetta, which is a case that requires a defendant to prove the police’s knowledge of the exculpatory value of the lost evidence. Id. Third, by the very holding in the Youngblood case, (“We therefore hold that unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence does not constitute a denial of due process of law.”) there is no specific requirement that Defendant prove that the evidence was exculpatory or that police knew of the exculpatory value of the evidence before it was destroyed.
Trombetta clearly incorporates the Napue case comments about bad faith and police knowledge. Trombetta does not require the proof of bad faith when a defendant can establish the specific elements of the case, primarily because the question of bad faith is already incorporated into the test. Defendant submits that the reason Trombetta does not require a separate bad faith finding is because, if a defendant can satisfy Trombetta (or Brady even) he has essentially established that the police have acted in bad faith. Trombetta describes a very specific kind of bad faith—the kind of bad faith that exists when police know of the value of the evidence to a defendant and then lost/destroyed it anyway. Youngblood and Trombetta are not inapposite. Certainly if a defendant can satisfy the elements of Trombetta, then the elements of Youngblood have also been established. Exculpatory evidence is, at the very least, potentially useful evidence. But a defendant can satisfy the elements of Youngblood without satisfying the elements of Trombetta. Further, to require that a defendant prove that the police knew of the exculpatory value of the evidence before its destruction to satisfy the Youngblood bad faith requirement muddles the requirements of the two distinct tests into a Youngblood/Trombetta hybrid that does not appear to have been intended in the Youngblood opinion. Defendant submits that this Court should not insert into the opinion that which the United Supreme Court chose not to insert into the opinion. The court chose not to state directly at the time of the holding (or even place the footnote in the holding) that bad faith in the Youngblood context means only the type of bad faith described in Napue. Defendant submits that Napue sets forth one way to establish bad faith, and others exist. Other Ninth Circuit cases confirm that this court is free to consider other evidence of bad faith, under a more general definition of what bad faith means. Defendant also submits that the Court must utilize the plain meanings of good and bad faith, as well as other descriptions of bad faith, in its review of the evidence. Black’s Law Dictionary at 139 (6th ed. 1990) describes bad faith as follows:

The opposite of “good faith, generally implying or involving actual or construction fraud, or a design to mislead or deceive another, or a neglect or refusal to fulfill some duty or a contractual obligation, not prompted by an honest mistake as to one’s rights or duties, but some interested or sinister motive. Term “bad faith” is not simply bad judgment or negligence, but rather it implies the conscious doing of a wrong because of dishonest purpose or moral obliquity; it is different from the negative idea of negligence in that it contemplates a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or ill will. (Internal citations omitted).

In contrast, Black’s Law Dictionary p 639 (6th ed. 1990) describes good faith as follows:

Good faith is an intangible and abstract quality with no technical meaning or statutory definition, and it encompasses, among other things, an honest belief, the absence of malice and the absence of design to defraud or to seek an unconscionable advantage, and an individual’s personal good faith is concept of his own mind and inner spirit and, therefore, may not be conclusively determined by his protestations alone. Honesty of intention, and freedom from knowledge or circumstances which ought to put the holder upon inquiry. An honest intention to abstain from taking any unconscientious advantage of another, even through technicalities of law, together with absence of all information, notice, or benefit or belief of facts which render transaction unconscientious. In common usage this term is ordinarily used to describe that state of mind denoting honesty of purpose, freedom from intention to defraud, and, generally speaking, being faithful to one’s duty or obligation. (Internal citations omitted).

In civil cases, away from the issues of good/bad faith of the State in a criminal prosecution, bad faith is: A conscious wrongdoing or breach of a known duty through some ulterior motive. Davis v. White, 794 F3d 1008 (8th Cir 2015). Not simply bad judgment or negligence, but rather the conscious doing of a wrong because of a dishonest purpose or moral ambiguity, a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or ill will. United States v. Manchester Farming P’ship, 315 F3d 1176, 1185 (9th Cir 2003). Not based on honest disagreement or innocent mistake. Dailey v. Integon Gen. Ins. Corp., 331 S.E.2d 148, 155 (1985). Acting with intent to deceive, harass, mislead, delay, or disrupt. Cf. Leon v. IDX Sys. Corp., 464 F3d 951, 961 (9th Cir 2006). · “[S]ynonymous with dishonesty.” Salsbery v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 54 Or App 522, 528 (1981), citing Bank of California etc. v. Portland H & W Co., 131 Or 123, 138-39 (1929).

A. United State v. Cooper

United States v. Cooper, 983 F2d 928 (9th Cir 1993), is not a case that addresses the legal issue of bad faith; the district court made the determination and the government did not challenge it. Id. at 931. However, this opinion is helpful in the case at bar because it addresses other issues relevant to the determination before the court. In Cooper, the defendants managed a small chemical laboratory that made legal chemical fuel products. Id. at 929. The DEA suspected them of participating in methamphetamine production. Id. A DEA policy authorized the destruction of hazardous materials which agents discovered when dismantling clandestine labs. Id. at 930. A contractor removed the glassware and equipment at the direction of the DEA and stored it pending disposal. Id. One of the defendants and his attorney contacted the DEA, requesting that the materials seized be returned. Id. The DEA responded that the materials were being held as evidence. Id. However, contractor holding the materials was not informed that the items it held should be preserved, and the materials were shipped to a toxic waste dump for burial. Id. The defendants were charged with conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and maintaining a place to distribute methamphetamine. Id. They moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the government violated their due process rights by its bad faith destruction of potentially exculpatory evidence. The motion was granted at the district court level. On appeal, the government only challenged the district court’s determination that defendants could not reasonably obtain evidence comparable in value to the destroyed laboratory equipment. Id. at 931. The court identified the two court cases that set out the test applied to determine when the government’s failure to preserve evidence rises to the level of a due process violation:

In California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 489, 104 S.Ct. 2528, 2534, 81 L.Ed.2d 413 (1984), the Court held that the government violates the defendant’s right to due process if the unavailable evidence possessed “exculpatory value that was apparent before the evidence was destroyed, and [is] of such a nature that the defendant would be unable to obtain comparable evidence by other reasonably available means.” In Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 58, 109 S.Ct. 333, 337, 102 L.Ed.2d 281 (1988), the Court added the additional requirement that the defendant demonstrate that the police acted in bad faith in failing to preserve the potentially useful evidence. See also Paradis 954 F.2d at 1488 (explaining Trombetta and Youngblood test). Youngblood‘s bad faith requirement dovetails with the first part of the Trombetta test: that the exculpatory value of the evidence be apparent before its destruction. Trombetta, 467 U.S. at 489, 104 S.Ct. at 2534. The presence or absence of bad faith turns on the government’s knowledge of the apparent exculpatory value of the evidence at the time it was lost or destroyed. Youngblood, 488 U.S. at 56-57 n. *, 109 S.Ct. at 336-337 n. *.

Id. at 931.[2] The government argued that the defendants would have been able to obtain comparable evidence of the physical capabilities of the destroyed equipment, by calling expert witnesses or through a jury instruction. Id. The court rejected that argument; it noted that general testimony about the possible nature of the equipment would be an inadequate substitute for testimony informed by its examination, and the pictures taken during the seizure were inadequate to assess the capabilities of the equipment. Id. The court also concluded:

The court appropriately rejected such an instruction. It would cheat Cooper and Gammill out of the opportunity to establish the weight of their claim to innocence. If the equipment were structurally incapable of methamphetamine manufacture and if the equipment was specially configured for legitimate procedures, that would be powerful, weighty evidence. The proposed jury instruction is not of comparable substance.

Id. at 932.

Was relevant evidence hidden or destroyed?

The killing of a defense witness and destroyed or hidden evidence of the scene of the killing of LaVoy Finicum are possibly both material and favorable. Witnesses could be called from the government and potentially other witnesses to establish a factual record regarding the benefit of this evidence. The defendants’ expert in Cooper testified that if the defendants’ description of the reaction vessel were accurate, it could not manufacture methamphetamine. Id. at 932. But he also testified that to make a firm determination about the reaction vessel’s capabilities, he would need to examine the evidence. Id.

B. United States v. Bohl

While Cooper did not address the issue of bad faith, the United States v. Bohl, 25 F3d 904 (10th Cir 1994), court did make a determination on the facts regarding the bad faith of the government actors. In Bohl, the defendants were charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States when the composition of three radio transmission towers constructed for the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) failed to conform to the required specifications. Id. at 907. Defendants requested access to the towers to conduct an inspection of the steel in advance of indictment. Id. The government’s investigator also requested that FAA preserve the towers for the government’s case. Id. at 908. After indictment, defendants requested access to the towers. Id. The government responded with assurances that it would provide the present condition and location of the towers. Id. However, the only actual tower material the government ever provided to defendants was an 18-inch portion from one of the towers and some shavings from the other towers. Id. Defendants filed a pretrial motion to dismiss due to the government’s destruction of essential evidence, arguing that the scant evidence precluded them from conducting their own tests on the towers’ chemical composition. Id. At the hearing, the government conceded that it failed to respond to requests for information and that the towers could not be located. Id. It also asserted that defendants had access to photographs of the towers, small samples and the government’s test results, and thus had access to comparable evidence. Id. The district court denied the motion to dismiss. Id. The motion was renewed at trial on the grounds that the government’s destruction of the towers deprived them of the opportunity to conduct their own examination. Id. at 908-909. It was again denied. Id. at 909. The motion was renewed again at trial, and it was again denied on the grounds that there was no evidence that there was any intent on the part of the government to cause the destruction of the towers. Id. The Bohl court began its due process analysis with a discussion of the starting point—Trombetta or Youngblood. Id. at 910. The Bohl court determined that tower legs offered only potentially useful evidence for the defense, and applied the rule set forth in Youngblood. Id. In making that determination, the Bohl court emphasized that the defendants conceded that the exculpatory value of the legs lay only in the potential results that might be obtained from further tests, tests that they could not perform because the towers were destroyed. Id. at 910. The court stated, “Hence, the exculpatory value was latent, rather than patent, and it was not apparent at the time of the destruction of the legs what further tests of the legs would reveal.” Id. In its determination that the government acted in bad faith, the Bohl court emphasized that the government had been put on notice that defendants thought the evidence was exculpatory, defendant’s assertions that the tower legs possessed potentially exculpatory value was backed up with objective, independent evidence, the government still had possession or control over the evidence at the time it received notice from defendants about the potential value of the evidence, the evidence disposed of was central to the government’s case and the government offered no innocent explanation for the failure to preserve the evidence which formed the core of its criminal charges against defendant. Id. at 911-912.

The Bohl court also acknowledged that the government does not necessarily engage in bad faith conduct when the destruction of evidence results from a standard procedure employment by the governmental agency regarding the disposal of like evidence, such as destruction of marijuana plants seized due to lack of storage capacity. Id. at 912-913. It also acknowledged and found it significant that, even though defendants had the burden to prove bad faith of the government, the government offered no reasonable rationale or good faith explanation for the destruction of the evidence. Id.

Is hiding bullet casings in bad faith?

Here, there can be no standard procedure to kill a man and then hide bullet casings and lie to investigators afterwards. There can be no other inference from hiding evidence than bad faith. The FBI didn’t want the sun to shine in on their investigation, because it threatened their control of the narrative that these protesters were violent men that deserved to be shot at and killed. So, they tried to make the evidence fit their predetermined facts—that LaVoy Finicum deserved to be shot, so it was okay to shoot him. Unfortunately, that couldn’t be further from the truth. The Court should be staked with determining if the evidence destroyed in this case was exculpatory and destroyed in bad faith. The government has no reasonable rational or good faith basis for destroying bullets after shooting a political protester. As in Bohl, the court could find any assertion of good faith to be incredulous, and grant sanction the Government with a dismissal or limitation on evidence.

“The FBI didn’t want the sun to shine in on their investigation, because it threatened their control of the narrative that these protesters were violent men that deserved to be shot at and killed.” C. United States v. Elliott

The opinion in United States v. Elliott, 83 F Supp 2d 637 (E D Va 1999), is a logical, well-written example of how a Court could approach the analysis of the issue of destroyed evidence in this context. It contains a helpful summary of the controlling legal principles when a defendant moves to dismiss an indictment based upon the destruction of evidence. Id. at 642-643. However, instead of choosing to hoe the row of Youngblood or Trombetta, the court acknowledged that either Youngblood or Trombetta could apply, and began with the exculpatory value of the destroyed evidence. Id. at 643. As the State notes, the Elliott court did take into consideration the government’s compliance (or lack thereof) with established procedures for preserving evidence. Id. at 646-648. However, in making the bad faith determination, the Elliott court also addressed the agent’s statements to defendant (as proof of bad faith) and the agent’s belief that he was authorized to destroy the evidence. Id. at 644-645, 648. The court concluded that defendant’s due process rights had been violated, but found that the facts of the case did not support dismissal. Id. at 649.

D. United States v. Zaragoza-Moreira

he most recent pre-conviction Ninth Circuit case addressing the question of the government’s bad faith in the context of an alleged violation of a defendant’s due process rights when the government failed to preserve evidence is United States v. Zaragoza-Moreira, 780 F3d 971 (9th Cir 3-18-2015). The defendant, charged with importing heroin and methamphetamine, appealed the district court’s denial of her motion to dismiss based upon the government’s destruction of evidence that might have supported her claim for duress. Id. at 973. The defendant’s statements at the border were video recorded, but destroyed when it was automatically recorded over within 30-45 days of the arrest. Id. at 976-977. The government asserted that the loss of the video was an “oversight.” Id. The Ninth Circuit did not agree, because the agent who failed to preserve the video recognized the importance of the defendant’s statements in the video, admitted she had a professional obligation to collect and preserve inculpatory as well as exculpatory evidence, and she admitted that she understood that a defendant who is threatened with a crime has a possible defense to that crime. Id. at 980. The court determined that when Agent Alvarado knew of the potential usefulness of the video footage and acted in bad faith by failing to preserve it, Zaragoza’s due process rights were violated. Id. at 982.

IV. Dismissal of the Indictment is one possible remedy.

The Trombetta court confirmed the remedies that are available when a due process violation involving destruction of evidence has been found:

Whenever potentially exculpatory evidence is permanently lost, courts face the treacherous task of divining the import of materials whose contents are unknown and, very often, disputed. Cf. United States v. Valenzuala-Berna, supra, at 870. Moreover, fashioning remedies for the illegal destruction of evidence can pose troubling choices. In nondisclosure cases, a court can grant the defendant a new trial at which the previously suppressed evidence may be introduced. But when the evidence has been destroyed in violation of the Constitution, the court must choose between barring further prosecution or suppressing…the State’s most probative evidence.

California v. Trombetta, 467 US at 486-487. The Bohl court noted:

Unlike cases in which the prosecutor fails to disclose Brady material, where a court may order a new trial at which the undisclosed evidence can be introduced, the disposition of evidence that is central to the case may permanently deprive the defendant of due process. Accordingly, after concluding that there has been a violation of Youngblood, the decision to either suppress the government’s secondary evidence describing the destroyed material or to dismiss the indictment turns on the prejudice that results to the defendant at trial. Such factors as the centrality of the evidence at trial, the reliability of the secondary evidence, and the effect such destruction had on the defendant’s ability to present a defense, must be considered in the calculus.

United States v. Bohl, 25 F3d at 914.[3] See also United States v. Bagley, 473 US 667, 687 (1985) (when the government violates a defendant’s due process rights under Brady, a court must determine whether the suppressed evidence would “undermine confidence [ ] in the outcome of the trial”). The Bohl court ultimately concluded that the appropriate remedy when the government destroyed evidence was dismissal:

Inasmuch as the chemical composition of the steel in TSL’s towers was critical to the government’s case, Bell and Bohl offered credible evidence both that their owns tests might have produced exculpatory evidence and that the government’s testing methodology was flawed, and the government does not suggest an alternative to protect Bell and Bohl’s due process rights, we have no choice but to remand with instructions to dismiss the indictment.

Bohl at 914. The Cooper court also ultimately concluded that the appropriate remedy was dismissal, as a proposed stipulation by the government was an inadequate substitute for the lost evidence. United States v. Cooper, 983 F2d at 933. The court also concluded that suppression of the government’s evidence was inadequate; it noted, “[Defendants] should not be made to suffer because government agents…in bad faith, allowed its proof, or its disproof, to be buried in a toxic waste dump.” Id.

Can anything be done to right this perceived wrong?

In the Malheur protest case, a dismissal of the Indictment may be the only way to practically or adequately remedy the violations committed by the Government. The evidence lost from the scene is irreplaceable and taints the reliability of the entire investigation that is not remedied by merely being pointed out to a jury, which the court has ruled cannot even be done. Exclusion of the State’s evidence is not an adequate remedy. In the alternative to dismissal, a defendant could request exclusion of all post-shooting evidence to level the playing field and address this egregious due process violation. Unfortunately, because the government has selectively released information to the public while attempting to use the Court’s power for a protective order to gag the defendants, they selectively released a video with their chosen narrative. They did so while knowing that they were releasing information about an FBI cover-up, but chose, suspiciously, to not include that in their explanation, which was a thinly veiled attempt to vilify Mr. Finicum, the very man they killed.
Written By Mike Arnold
Arnold Law firm Eugene
LikeShow more reactions

Comment

2 Comments
Comments
Rose Phelps
Remove

Rose Phelps I do believe the attorney is on to something. Sounds like a smart man.

 

Billie Dickison
Remove

Billie Dickison there are more and more issues coming to light in the whole debacle that those in the know and getting paid to know these issues should have been paying attention to

Cindy Wisner
Write a comment…
l<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(8) Facebook<meta http-equiv=”X-Frame-Options” content=”DENY” />
  • To all concerned,

    In reference to the memorial site:
    I have been informed that Oregon state officals were coming to gather up all the items, including the rock, left at the memorial site. To avoid any blood shed or arrest of innocent persons, I have asked that all items be removed to a safe place until we can obtain a permit to place a permanant memorial.(Which is in the works)
    I want to express my gratitude to all of you who have given of your time to watch over, clean, and visit the site. Thank you so much for the love and kindness that you have shown our family. We very much appriecate all of you!!! I hope this clears up any confussion. Thank you and God Bless you all!
    Sincerely,
    Jeanette Finicum

    See More

    Like

     

    Like

     

    Love

     

    Haha

     

    Wow

     

    Sad

     

    Angry

    Comment

    Comments
    Manuel Y Sarita Rivera
    Remove

    Manuel Y Sarita Rivera Good idea and let us all know what we can do to help

    Like · Reply · 1 · 47 mins
    Trena Heaton Schuster
    Remove

    Trena Heaton Schuster Document the removal and why, so we have proof that we are not the aggressor.

t;meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />John Holiday<meta http-equiv=”X-Frame-Options” content=”DENY” />

18 hrs ·

Camp Freedom and Lavoy’s blessed memorial site this morning.. It was beyond surreal to be there. To sit on the very ground his blood was spilled. I gave myself a couple hours today to just sit there and think, relive that awful day and the videos Of all their voices that are etched in my head.. I walked out the ambush scene, found the tall trees the sniper would likely have been in when he shot thru the roof and hit Ryan.. I stood in the trees where the killer stood and looked where he would have looked as he murdered an innocent man… And I cried for the loss of a man who taught me more in a month than my own 12 yrs of schooling taught me about the Constitution, about my God given rights and about what it looks like to ‪#‎stand‬ for freedom even when your friends and your country tell you to surrender.
Some things are more important than your life. And I believe Freedom is one of them.

See More

Love

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(1) The William Tell Project<meta http-equiv=”X-Frame-Options” content=”DENY” />
 F<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/?ref=tn_tnmn&_fb_noscript=1″ />Cindy Wisner<meta http-equiv=”X-Frame-Options” content=”DENY” />

Jon Ritzheimer

 5/274/2016

4 months today since my friend was murdered. The Oregon law enforcement already investigated themselves and found themselves of no wrong doing. And now every article I read about the FBI shots that were lied about have tried to paint a picture as if those shots did not contribute to his death. When a man gets out of a truck with his hands in the air and you start shooting it causes those around you to be extra edgy. Those FBI shots contributed to his death and they should be charged with murder. They are delaying this simple investigation and hoping it will die down before they announce that the FBI did no wrong doing. R.I.P. LaVoy Finicum. They could not have killed a better man. We know the truth

<meta http-equiv=”refresh” content=”0; URL=/groups/824803440964974/?_fb_noscript=1″ />(1) Facebook<meta http-equiv=”X-Frame-Options” content=”DENY” />

4 months today since my friend was murdered. The Oregon law enforcement already investigated themselves and found themselves of no wrong doing. And now every article I read about the FBI shots that were lied about have tried to paint a picture as if those shots did not contribute to his death. When a man gets out of a truck with his hands in the air and you start shooting it causes those around you to be extra edgy. Those FBI shots contributed to his death and they should be charged with murder. They are delaying this simple investigation and hoping it will die down before they announce that the FBI did no wrong doing. R.I.P. LaVoy Finicum. They could not have killed a better man. We know the truth!

BI agents under investigation for possible misconduct in LaVoy Finicum shooting | OregonLive.com<!–

FBI agents under investigation for possible misconduct in LaVoy Finicum shooting
OregonLive.com
Les Zaitz | The Oregonian/OregonLive
Investigators find evidence that an FBI agent fired at Finicum, but later denied it. His bullets didn’t hit Finicum or contribute to his death. The investigation found two state troopers were justified in shooting the occupation spokesman three times in the back.
http://image.oregonlive.com/home/brightcove01/width620/img/13/260825828001/201603/1694/260825828001_4792043683001_vs-56df3607e4b08a13f9813bae-767904719001.jpg?pubId=260825828001
0
03/08/2016
03/09/2016

–>

FBI agents under investigation for possible misconduct in LaVoy Finicum shooting

Video shows two camera angles of LaVoy Finicum shootingIn a video shown at a Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office press conference today, the aerial FBI video of the LaVoy Finicum shooting has been synced with a cellphone video Shawna Cox recorded from within Finicum’s truck.

Les Zaitz | The Oregonian/OregonLive By Les Zaitz | The Oregonian/OregonLive OregonLive.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on March 08, 2016 at 10:10 AM, updated March 09, 2016 at 5:26 PM

BEND – An FBI agent is suspected of lying about firing twice at Robert “LaVoy” Finicum and may have gotten help from four other FBI agents in covering up afterward, authorities revealed Tuesday.

The bullets didn’t hit Finicum and didn’t contribute to his death, but now all five unnamed agents, part of an elite national unit, are under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. Inspector General Michael Horowitz is leading the independent inquiry.

The remarkable disclosure came as a team of local investigators released findings that two state troopers shot Finicum three times in the back during the chaotic scene at a police roadblock Jan. 26. One bullet pierced his heart, an autopsy showed.

A prosecutor ruled the fatal shooting was legally justified, saying state law allows use of deadly force when officers believe a person is about to seriously injure or kill someone. Finicum kept moving his hands toward a pocket that contained a loaded handgun. Although he was shot from behind, Finicum had a trooper in front of him armed with a Taser who was thought to be in danger.

Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum’s death is investigatedRobert “LaVoy” Finicum was a leader in the 41-day armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife refuge. He was shot and killed Jan. 26, 2016. FBI said he was reaching for a gun when he was shot. Others call his death a murder.

Finicum, 54, an Arizona rancher, was one of the leaders of the Jan. 2 takeover of  the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns.

Investigators gave no details to explain why the one FBI agent, a member of the Hostage Rescue Team, wouldn’t report the two shots. They also didn’t indicate what his four colleagues did to warrant investigation other than saying it was related to conduct after the shooting.

“The question of who fired these shots has not been resolved,” said Greg Bretzing, special agent in charge of the FBI in Portland. The federal agency is cooperating with the inspector general’s investigation, he said at a news conference.

FBI agents did not disclose two shots, says Deschutes County SheriffAt a press conference on Tuesday, March 8, 2016, Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson, Malheur County District Attorney Tim Colahan and FBI special agent in charge Greg Bretzing spoke about the failure of FBI agents to disclose two shots fired during the attempted arrest of LaVoy Finicum on January 26. Neither shot hit Finicum.

The revelation is certain to inflame suspicions about Finicum’s death and shake confidence in the FBI, which came under intense fire for botched handling of violent sieges at Ruby Ridge in Idaho and Waco, Texas.

Some supporters have claimed Finicum was shot while surrendering, that he was unarmed and that he was shot nine times. The sheriff in neighboring Grant County, Glenn Palmer, described the police operation as an “ambush.”

Finicum’s family said in a statement a month ago that he was “executed in cold blood” and accused police agencies of deliberately misleading the public about what happened. His widow, Jeanette Finicum, didn’t retreat from that stance after watching the news conference.

“My husband was murdered,” she said in a statement.

The attorney for Ammon Bundy, the occupation’s now-jailed leader, found the  news of the FBI shots troubling.

“I’m going to have to go back and reconsider all the conspiracy theories that I’ve written off,” said the lawyer, Mike Arnold.

Investigators had planned to release police reports, interview transcripts, photographs, the autopsy report and new video to allow the public to evaluate the police findings in Finicum’s death.

But they ended up releasing only one video and 19 photographs, citing the new criminal investigation for the change in plans. They also withheld the names of the involved troopers and FBI agents, saying they’ve tracked up to 80 threats against them, mostly on social media.

Document: Text of announcement of findings

The shooting happened after police stopped a Jeep and a pickup carrying the key figures of the occupation along a remote stretch of U.S. 395 north of Burns.

Finicum was driving the truck that carried carried Ryan C. Bundy, 43, Ryan W. Payne, 32, Shawna Cox, 59, and Victoria Sharp, 18. In the Jeep behind them was driver Mark McConnell, 37, Brian D. Cavalier, 44, and Ammon Bundy, 40, the public face of the occupation. They were bound for a community meeting 100 miles north of the refuge in John Day.

LaVoy Finicum: “Just shoot me. I’m going to meet the sheriff”This is an excerpt from the FBI video released March 8, 2016 that merges audio from cell phone video taken by refuge occupier, Shawna Cox, with aerial footage taken by the FBI. The full video is 12-minutes long.

Officer statements and cellphone video taken by Cox from inside the truck showed that Finicum repeatedly ignored police orders, first at the traffic stop and then after he crashed trying to elude officers. He nearly ran over an FBI agent before stalling in a roadside snowbank.

What happened in just seconds after that crash could lead to criminal charges against the FBI agents.

Cox’s video showed that one shot hit the truck’s left rear passenger window as Finicum stepped out. At the time, Finicum appeared to have his hands at least at shoulder height.

Slow-motion video of gunshot FBI allegedly lied about in LaVoy Finicum confrontationNew cell phone video captures Robert “LaVoy” Finicum as he steps out of his truck the instant after a bullet pierces the truck roof and hits the passenger window through which he is seen. The U.S. Justice Department is investigating whether an FBI agent lied about firing that shot. Here we show the video in slow-motion.

Investigators later established that the bullet entered the truck through the roof before shattering the window and concluded it was fired by an FBI agent. Another bullet from the same FBI agent apparently went wild and missed the truck altogether, the investigation showed.

Finicum then moved toward the back of his truck and out of view of Cox’s phone, but she was still able to record what was said outside the truck.

Officers repeatedly ordered Finicum to get on the ground, according to the video. The investigation found that Finicum first faced a state trooper taking cover in nearby trees, then turned toward two troopers advancing from the highway.

Those two state troopers fired when Finicum turned back toward the trooper in the trees while reaching for a loaded 9 mm Ruger semi-automatic pistol inside his jacket, investigators said.

Finicum was struck from behind in the left shoulder, the left upper back near his neck and the right lower back, a state autopsy found. The bullet in his lower back migrated up and hit several organs, including his heart. He died at the scene.

One of those two troopers moments earlier had fired at Finicum’s truck as it barreled toward the police roadblock. That trooper hit the truck with three rounds, investigators concluded.

“All six shots fired by the Oregon State Police, the three into the truck and the three that struck Mr. Finicum, are justified,” said Malheur County District Attorney Dan Norris. The shots were “in fact, necessary,” he said.

Although Norris cleared the troopers of wrongdoing, the entire operation remains under a cloud with the disclosure of possible misconduct by the FBI agents. Law enforcement officials tried to blunt the impact, noting that investigating officers discovered and reported the alleged cover-up.

Just days before announcing the investigation results, hundreds of people gathered for weekend demonstrations scheduled in at least 35 states to protest Finicum’s death. They repeated claims that police murdered the occupation spokesman and condemned what many said is the federal government’s renewed effort to silence self-described patriots and militia members.

They were reacting in part to 12 more arrests last week related to the 2014 armed standoff in Nevada involving rancher Cliven Bundy, the father of Ammon and Ryan Bundy. So far, 37 people face federal charges related to the Oregon and Nevada standoffs.

Videos show LaVoy Finicum shooting was justified, say authoritiesDeschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson gave a video presentation and analysis of video of the LaVoy Finicum shooting at a press conference on Tuesday, March 8, 2016. Malheur County District Attorney Dan Norris said that the six shots fired by OSP officers, three of which hit Finicum, were all justified. Two additional shots, believed to have been fired by FBI agents, did not hit Finicum but are still under investigation.

The Finicum shooting investigation showed that the FBI and state police jointly planned the operation when they learned on Sunday, Jan. 24, through media reports that many of the occupation leaders would be on the road to John Day two days later.

State troopers were tasked with conducting the traffic stop at a predesignated area, near a U.S. Forest Service road where police forces could wait out of sight. A squad of FBI agents and troopers was assigned to set up the road block roughly two miles north to contain any fleeing suspects and to stop other motorists from driving into the operation.

The teams expected Finicum to be armed. He was photographed repeatedly at the refuge with a holstered handgun.

Investigators determined that five of the eight people in the Jeep and truck carried loaded handguns. Detectives also recovered three rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammunition from the vehicles.

Ammon Bundy didn’t mention the weapons in a jailhouse interview last week with The Oregonian/OregonLive. “We were headed with weapons of laptops, projectors and PA systems,” Bundy said. “We were going peacefully to a community meeting.”

The reports showed that Bundy wasn’t armed. He, Cavalier and McConnell surrendered without incident.

Finicum stopped his 2015 Dodge pickup a short distance away. Payne, the tactical leader of the occupation, surrendered after a state trooper fired a plastic tipped 40mm pepper spray round that struck the truck’s canopy. The other four people stayed in the idling pickup and Finicum launched into a back-and-forth shouting match with troopers, the investigation found.

He told troopers he was leaving to reach the sheriff in John Day. He referred to Palmer six times at the initial stop.

“The sheriff is waiting for us,” he said at one point. “I’m going over to meet the sheriff in Grant County,” he said moments later.

He taunted troopers to shoot him or otherwise let him go to Palmer. The sheriff has become something of a national hero among anti-government protesters for appearing to support the armed occupiers and opposing federal government control of public land.

“You want my blood on your hands?” Finicum shouted out the window of his truck.

Click for larger image

Finicum then sped away, hitting up to 70 mph, the investigative reports showed. Two FBI pickup trucks and one from the state police were parked in his path down the highway, with agents and troopers arrayed around them.

After Finicum crashed into the snowbank and left his truck, state troopers told him at least three times to get on the ground, according to the video. The trooper with the Taser stepped through the snow toward Finicum.

“He was attempting to control or subdue Mr. Finicum with less lethal force after Mr. Finicum refused orders to get on the ground,” said Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson, who led the investigation into the shooting.

Finicum repeatedly challenged police to shoot him as he moved toward them.

“You’re going to have to shoot me,” he said and was told again to get on the ground, the video showed.

“In the midst of that command, Mr. Finicum grabs his jacket with his left hand and reaches with his right hand for his gun,” Nelson said.

That’s when the two troopers behind Finicum fired the fatal shots.

“Mr. Finicum repeatedly and knowingly made choices that put him in this situation,” said Harney County District Attorney Tim Colahan. “It was not the outcome that any of us wanted but one he, alone, is responsible for.”

— Les Zaitz

@leszaitz

http://www.livefyre.com/v3/tracking/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oregonlive.com%2Foregon-standoff%2F2016%2F03%2Foregon_standoff_fbi_agents_und.html

5813 comments

+ Follow
Post comment as…
Custom HTML Preview
Loading

farmrdave

farmrdave 5ptsFeatured
May 1, 2016

Quote from this article, “One of those two troopers moments earlier had fired at Finicum’s truck as it barreled toward the police roadblock. That trooper hit the truck with three rounds, investigators concluded.”  The actions of shooting at a moving vehicle are claimed to be justified by Malheur County District Attorney Dan Norris.

This I have questions about.  By shooting at a moving truck which was occupied by several persons other than the driver the police (the shooter) were intentionally endangering those others not involved in driving a speeding truck.  From the overhead video it appears that the police roadblock which stopped Finicum was vary close to a blind corner.  Intentionally placed.  With forethought.  Intending to cause an accident and injury to those persons in the vehicle?  Would this scenario fit the description of deadly ambush.  I think it would.

Elsewhere in the article is discussion of this event fueling the distrust of FBI’s disregard of law.  Especially the coverup by the three other agents.  Whom ever fired live rounds at a civilian vehicle carrying civilians not in operation of a speeding vehicle must be tried in court for recklessly endangering the lives of those he is charged to protect.  Shooting protesters might be accepted practice in some parts of the world but it isn’t here and never will be.

Jaded

Jaded 5ptsFeatured
Apr 17, 2016

From what I can see in the Video these FBI agents and state troopers are sadistic killers and cowards. They should be put on trial and hung like we did the Nazis. Never mind Finicum, it’s what they do to the others after they killed Finicum. These FBI agents are sicos

Phaser45G

Phaser45G 5ptsFeatured
Mar 19, 2016

Lots of “what ifs” in these 5000+ comments. The facts are Finicum’s failure to obey the police commands got him shot.  Whats going on with the FBI and the cover up is yet to be disclosed. The trials of the defendants will proceed and life will go on. So get out there and enjoy life as its too short not too.

John

John 5ptsFeatured
Apr 15, 2016

@Phaser45G

If you kill people for failing to obey your commands that is called murder.

Talky

Talky 5ptsFeatured
Mar 19, 2016

“Cox’s video showed that one shot by the FBI hit the truck’s left rear passenger window as Finicum stepped out with his hands up. At the time, Finicum appeared to have his hands at least at shoulder height.”

An FBI agent shot into a truck trying to kill a man with his hands up at least shoulder high?  No one in that truck had any criminal record whatsoever.  An FBI agent missed from fifteen feet away?  They could have killed anyone in that truck, including a young girl, by shooting into it.  Now no one remembers hearing or firing those shots?  Five FBI agents may be involved in the cover-up?  The shell casings are nowhere to be found?  What else can we believe from the FBI’s narrative?

Birder

Birder 5ptsFeatured
Mar 19, 2016

@Talky Also, considering that his buddy had just gotten knocked over by the car and the shooter didn’t know if was seriously injured or not, and couldn’t see the position of Finicum’s hands or what they were holding through the dark tinted windows of the truck,  my guess is that he assumed Finicum would come out with guns blazing, as he had previously vowed to do.

Shot: justified.  Lie: CYA.

Birder

Birder 5ptsFeatured
Mar 17, 2016

While I was initially persuaded by Bob Owen’s thoughtful analysis of the FBI videos http://bearingarms.com/lavoy-finicum-murdered-forced-oregon-police-shoot/ , but viewing the Shawna Cox video changed my mind.  I no longer believe that Finicum died by “suicide by cop” but rather of something far more outrageous.

After Waco, after the 2014 stand off at the Bundy ranch, after coming and going unimpeded from the Malheur Refuge for weeks, after appearing in town without a concealed-license-to-carry and never being challenged about the lump on his left side, he was convinced no one would ever effectively stop him from doing whatever he wanted to do.

He could order LE around (“Stand down!”), insult them “waste of oxygen,” assault them (driving a truck into a crowd of people and cars is assault; it would also have been battery had he hit one of them.) ignore orders (“Lie down!”) by running around flailing his arms (OK, they were often at shoulder level, but they were never raised all the way and held steady and he continued to walk towards the officers.) and nothing, nothing would happen.

His wife said he died because he had faith that the government wouldn’t hurt him.  I think she used the wrong word.  What he had was contempt.  He kept yelling, “Just shoot me!” because he was sure they wouldn’t, because they were too timid, too afraid of bad publicity or under orders not to.

However, when you threaten one officer, the rest react.  I’ll be he died with a mildly surprised look on his face.

John

John 5ptsFeatured
Apr 15, 2016

@Birder

You can’t park your cars in the middle of the highway and then shoot oncoming traffic with the claim that you are being threatened with deadly force by the oncoming traffic. By parking in the middle of the highway you put yourself in danger along with the oncoming traffic and you are to blame. Further, shooting at someone simply driving down the road is attempted murder.

You can’t murder someone because they yell at you to either.

Quiet Professional

Quiet Professional 5ptsFeatured
Mar 16, 2016

  I have been involved in this from the beginning, I have been out of the net for over a week being in Florida, and came home to find all the new video and articles that have come to light during the first week of March.  I have been reading the posts below and some are very good and have substance others I have to shake my head at.  Plain and simple this was an orchestrated L Shape Ambush which I have used on may occasion in the Military.  Having served 25 years Active and 20 as a Private Contractor.  The first stop before the barricade should have given LaVoy and others an idea that there was more to this than just a stop.  Especially when Ryan Payne stuck his hands out the window and they took a shot at him but hit the mirror, why isn’t that mentioned in the hits on the truck?  You can argue his hands were up in the air or out to his sides, either way they were not in an offensive posture, they were in a submissive posture.  As far as him not obeying the orders to get down, to that I can only speculate, his adrenaline was pushed to the limit at this time, it appears that he was confused at times and his moving away from the vehicle I venture to say was to protect or try and protect the 3 still in the vehicle.I read comments such as that from SARGE and I shake my head.Why would LaVoy Finicum put a pistol in his inside left coat pocket when he was right handed?Do you realize how hard that would be to take that pistol out of that pocket being he was right handed, he would not only have to reach in but would have to turn his wrist inward to get the pistol.It would have been much easier if he had put it in his right pocket to reach in and draw the pistol out.I don’t buy the BS being put out that he was reaching for a pistol, I believe he was hit two times from the front and that is when you see him flinch and reach to his side and then the coward who came out of the wood line shot him which caused him to fall backwards from the shooter not the ones that were up on the road as they want you to believe. The only reason that there is this investigation going on by the DOJ is because of all the information that has been put out on social media and has spread like wild fire and so they have to come up with a reason to quiet the masses. PYSOPS 101.

alien2

alien2 5ptsFeatured
Mar 16, 2016

@QuietProfessional

Wrong.

Better read all the available evidence .

If you did, read it again.

Chokersetter

Chokersetter 5ptsFeatured
Mar 18, 2016

@Quiet Professional Agree, and the cops were shooting into the pickup at the first stop and then hundreds of feet before it got to the blockade, apparently a ‘shoot to kill’ order was in effect.  Also it is claimed that the shooter that came out of the brush above was trying to tazer him but I’ve never seen a ‘tazer’ that looked like an assault rifle, they all look like pistols as precision sighting isn’t a requirement of a tazer as they are close range, no more than 25′, weapons.  Also there had to be several dozen body, helmet or dash cams yet none of those videos have been released.  Too much stinks about this whole thing!

Chokersetter

Chokersetter 5ptsFeatured
Mar 15, 2016

Gotta admit that it was stupid for a guy to keep telling them to shoot him repeatedly but really find it hard to believe that one of the cops was trying to tazer him after they had been shooting bullets at the vehicle with AR’s  when it came to within a couple hundred feet and then shortly after they’d just shot out the passenger window behind the driver and wounded Ryan Bundy inside the pickup in the shoulder.  From the video, it looks like the so-called ‘tazer cop’ was holding a assault rifle that he used to shoot finicum in the head from about 15 feet away.  Don’t think I’ve ever seen a tazer gun that was anything but a pistol and the so-called ‘tazer cop’ didn’t shoot with a pistol, it was an assault rifle.  Also why if he was shot from behind, did he fall away from the ‘tazer cop’ as it looks like anyone shot 3 times would fall in the direction the bullets travel?  Why no helmet, body, or dash cam videos released that would either confirm or discredit the official story as there must have been many on both at the traffic stop and the ambush site?

TheTruth

TheTruth 5ptsFeatured
Mar 16, 2016

Wow, that’s quite the imagination you have there. I don’t think you could fit more misinformation in one post. Try reading the investigative report, then come back and try again. Sheesh.

John

John 5ptsFeatured
Apr 15, 2016

@Sarge

So you believe what you read over what you can see with your own eyes?

Leonard Wood

Leonard Wood 5ptsFeatured
Mar 15, 2016

I think they lie.  Big time.  I don’t believe he had a weapon in his jacket pocket.  I honestly believe they planted that.  I have watched the videos repeatedly.  I have watched a slowed down zoomed in enhanced version.  I have watched the one from inside the truck.  The cops goal was to murder these people is what it looked like.  I generally support the police completely, but there was some really messed up stuff that happened in this situation.

TheTruth

TheTruth 5ptsFeatured
Mar 16, 2016

If their goal was to murder everyone, they’d all be dead. If LaVoy would have got on the ground like he was told to do repeatedly, he would still be alive. Geezus.

1alien2LikeReply

@TheTruth  U R SO STUPID

ChrisJensen

Dustin Skye

easwen

RVInit

Birder

BrianJLG

BenDover2

ThoseArePeopleWhoDied

shallowender

Jathtech

Share
Post comment as…
Custom HTML Preview

John

John 5ptsFeatured
Apr 15, 2016

@TheTruth

You can’t murder someone for not getting on the ground.

apathicsx

apathicsx 5ptsFeatured
Apr 16, 2016

@John @TheTruth

If you know they’re armed, threatened a blood bath, just ran a road block and were barreling down an icy road in a 3 ton pickup truck right into you at 70MPH… Yes, you most definitely can.

In fact, you can count on it.

farmrdave

farmrdave 5ptsFeatured
May 1, 2016

@apathicsx “if you know they’re armed”  It is a safe assumption that every American might be armed at any time since that right is a natural right which is protected from infringement by constitutional law.  In other words it must be assumed everyone is armed at all times.  Under your theory it is OK to shoot anyone whose hands you cannot see?

” just ran a road block”  If the road were blocked they could not have driven further on the road.

“barreling down an icy road in a 3 ton pickup truck”  How fast would you be driving if you were being shot at and thought you would be killed if you stopped?

These people did some things that were foolish and contributed to the death of Mr. Finicum I have no doubt.

But no one can think what happened was acceptable procedure.  It was no more acceptable than killing the Weavers at their home in Idaho or the Davidians in Texas.

Under the circumstances of this incident you must understand Mr. Finicum believed what is written in our constitution.  It states vary clearly the federal government cannot own such land within any state as a wildlife refuge.  He knew the facts of how ranchers are being forced off of their ranches and legal binding grazing contracts are being revoked in order to squeeze these ranchers out.  He knew about the Hammond’s being forced into double jeopardy and returned to prison at the whim of our authoritarian government after serving their sentences.  He knew how they had been railroaded into jail in the first place and convicted as terrorists.
If or when Federal agents order me to stop farming my farm so they can heard me into a city and let the land remain unused I will know they are completely outside of constitutional law and intent.  That they are in violation of my human rights.  And a bunch more things wrong as well.  But my belief in god does not contain the sureness of Mr. Finicum.  He came to the decision that to follow the illegal orders from BLM made him bad for following those illegal orders and that he could not permit them to “stain his character”, he had to do the right thing.  In fact he didn’t but he died trying.  I feel sorry for the poor souls who shot down a man who believed in our constitution and way of life more than life itself.

Talky

Talky 5ptsFeatured
Mar 14, 2016

From above:

“Cox’s video showed that one shot hit the truck’s left rear passenger window as Finicum stepped out. At the time, Finicum appeared to have his hands at least at shoulder height.”  They were trying to kill him.

Chokersetter

Chokersetter 5ptsFeatured
Mar 14, 2016

The cop who ‘had to jump out of the way’ had intentionally just moments before jumped in front of the pickup that had swerved off the road to avoid hitting the 3 cop cars that were in the middle of the road.  When a pickup is in over 3 feet of snow there is no control so there wasn’t an attempt to hit the stupid cop that then had to jump back out of the way.  Also what was the justification for shooting at the pickup at the first traffic stop and then as it was approaching the ambush site?  With the ‘wedge’ configuration of the vehicles at the ambush site, this wasn’t a ‘roadblock’ it was intended to kill.  More proof of that was the over a dozen assault rifle armed swat team that was set up in sniper positions around the ambush site.  IT WAS A PLANNED SHOOT TO KILL OPERATION!  The 3 that lived to survive, including the 18 year old gospel singer that wasn’t a protester and Ryan Bundy shot while inside the pickup, were very luckey indeed.

So we now have a higher quality video shot from hundreds of feet overhead and a video taken from inside the pickup but where are ANY of the dozens of body, helmet, and dash cams that the cops had at both locations during this entire shoot-to-kill ambush?

TheTruth

TheTruth 5ptsFeatured
Mar 16, 2016

There weren’t dozens of body, helmet, and dash cams. Why do you just make stuff up?

Chokersetter

Chokersetter 5ptsFeatured
Mar 18, 2016

@Sarge So you’ve never seen the dual videos or don’t have a mind of your own?  Ever hear of Ruby Ridge where the gov’mt and their ‘elite’ FBI hostage rescue team murdered Weaver’s wife and son and then in order to avoid a 200 million dollar lawsuit gave him and his surviving children over 3 million taxpayer dollars in order to avoid a trial?  How about Waco in which in order to “save the women and children” attacked the branch dividian compound with a tank and armored vehicles and blasted and bombed everyone inside to death, all the women and children, over a dozen of which were 5 years and younger?  Yeah “elite FBI hostage rescue team”, my A__!

UWHM

UWHM 5ptsFeatured
Mar 11, 2016

We know they can’t shoot. But they are very adept at falling out of helicopters.

This comment has been deleted
This comment has been deleted

Chelanistani

Chelanistani 5ptsFeatured
Mar 10, 2016

@John Liberty1 Right.  No one asked them to come to Oregon to stand for our freedoms.  They came for their own selfish agenda and they intended to do so at the point of a gun.  Not very American or democratic.  I hope they are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

This comment has been deleted

Scott McDaniel

Scott McDaniel 5ptsFeatured
Mar 10, 2016

Y’all all posting these epistles and manifestos know that the FBI sniper that fired twice missed, right?

Finicum was shot at close range by a handgun.  That was made plain from the first press conference.  What you all OUGHT to be getting mad at, is the reason that prompted these people to have the sit in at the refuge in the first place.  Anyone who saw the mashup of the videos between the law enforcement agencies and the cell phones in Finicum’s truck …that is, those who are HONEST….will have to come away with the conclusion that Finicum didn’t want to use a cooler head to engage in civil disobedience.  He wanted to be a damned hero, and tainted his entire cause as a bunch of yahoos.  Sometimes, you can be your own worst enemy.

This comment has been deleted

John

John 5ptsFeatured
Apr 15, 2016

@Scott McDaniel

The the only yahoos I saw in the video were the government criminals attempting to arrest people simply for protesting, parking their cars in the middle of the highway and shooting at oncoming traffic, attempting to murder people that were not threatening anyone else, and then actually murdering one person when he got out of his truck.

Even if Finicum actually had pulled out a gun and fired at the criminal cops he would have been justified in doing so in self defense after the criminal cops had already put his life in danger by blocking the highway, shooting at him in his truck, and shooting at him when he got out of his truck with his hands up.

All the criminal cops should be charged with murder or attempted murder.

fezline

fezline 5ptsFeatured
Mar 10, 2016

It is clear that they lied and used an unjustified amount of force. They had an unquestionable tactical advantage, they had cover, they had more people, they had more weapons. They knew they were not in danger especially when the guy had his hands raised high in the air. Yes he did tell them to shoot him but if anyone thinks that qualifies as justification to kill someone well… I don’t really care about the opinions of those types of people.

The principle underlying this situation is no different than the principle underlying the perspective that men should not hit a woman back if assaulted by a woman. The justification that is generally given for this perspective is the fact that the woman doesn’t possess the physical prowess to properly defend herself in a full on head up altercation with an average male. No matter how severe the abuse that is inflicted upon the man at the hand of a woman, the man is always viewed upon as the villain if he defends himself. So… holding said perspective in mind without any desire to entertain any sort of cognitive dissonance, I would have to say that the feds in this situation were analogous to the guy in a domestic dispute and unfortunately Lavoy takes on the analogous role of the woman. I don’t mean to make this reference to be insulting but rather to illustrate a point. To draw a corollary to a domestic violence situation, in my humble opinion, I would have to say that this would be a like a woman yelling and screaming at a man to kill her while waving her hands in the air and the guy deciding to oblige her request. In a situation like that not only would there be no question of who was at fault but the guy would be a piraiah for the people of the nation. The event would surely be used as a talking point for feminists for the next few decades. Now… I am not saying this perspective is right. I do not agree with this perspective but when you are dealing with people who do hold on to this double standard and justify it by the inequity of force and ability, you can use that logic to point out the failure of these people to do the right thing. You can point out how they murdered this man with intent to make an example and intimidate all those who choose to follow his path.

In closing, I am uncertain how anyone could watch these videos and listen to the audio and still harbor any sort of notion that what happened here was justified. A shot rang out and hit the truck approximately 2 seconds after he exited the vehicle and threw his hands visibly in to the air. I don’t think a person can reasonably state that the officers thought they were in danger given the extreme tactical advantage that they had in this situation.

It is my hope that they make an equally profound example out of these anti American trigger happy goose stepping drones. I don’t advocate any physical punishment but I do hope they are shamed into obscurity and their futures destroyed.

Emmett

Emmett 5ptsFeatured
Mar 10, 2016

@fezline A roadblock will always give a tactical advantage, what is your point? You want the Police and FBI to say “Hey, you bring 10 guys and we’ll bring 10 guys and will meet behind the refuse at 3pm..”???They were waiting to take people into custody for breaking the law.

-When you have been pulled over, how many times have you exited the vehicle immediately?

-Finicum threatened them and said there would be a bloodbath…

-Video captures them going for the guns and getting ready…

-Finicum is known to be carrying in most pics and video posted..

-he almost hit an officer on the side of the road when he had plenty of time to stop..

-he went for his gun in the video…

What parts dont you get?

Comparing this to hitting a woman?  Wow, that is hysterical!

This comment has been deleted
This comment has been deleted

Jay Warren Clark

Jay Warren Clark 5ptsFeatured
Mar 10, 2016

@Emmett @fezline Odd that not only do you have all the facts but are certain as to their definite meaning, when it is quite clear that nothing like all the facts have been put out for citizens to make truly informed judgments–nor will all the facts be released unless the authorities are forced to do so.  It is increasingly clear that it is only force that they understand.

One fact is clear though; Finicum was stopped, surrounded, outnumbered and outgunned, and yet he was summarily executed on the spot.  Indeed he was shot at immediately upon stepping from the vehicle and raising his hands.

And he will never have a trial where witnesses can be compelled to testify and sworn to the truth and cross examined by competent professionals who have as their concern that the truth be discovered and made public.  JWC

Emmett

Emmett 5ptsFeatured
Mar 14, 2016

@Jay Warren Clark @Emmett @fezline So Fezline post goes as fact, but mine does not. Interesting!  I guess fezline and yourself have been presented with more evidence than what is given to the public.  I do know that threatening police as was done by Finicum and reaching in your jacket during a police interaction are not wise things to do.  Also, driving into a snow bank and almost hitting a police officer is not smart either.  Lastly if he would have stopped and surrendered during the first traffic stop or if he would have sat in the truck like a normal citizen at the road block things would have ended differently.

Finicum himself is to blame for not having a trial as he repeated stated he would not go to jail.  On the in truck video he stated there would be blood shed. He got his wish.

John

John 5ptsFeatured
Apr 15, 2016

@Emmett @fezline

You can’t murder someone for simply carrying a gun. You can’t murder someone for simply making threats. You can’t murder someone as a result of your own negligence in parking in the middle of the highway. You can’t even murder someone because you assume they are reaching for a gun.

Jaded

Jaded 5ptsFeatured
Apr 17, 2016

@Emmett @fezline Your obviously not the sha

rpest tool in the shed. Watch the video again and you should see that what you say here  is stupidity. If not, I guess your just a fool. Hint: The agent jumped in front of the truck and took a reckless shot then moved out of the way and continued to fire at the truck. Never was any law enforcement almost hit nor did the man have enough road to stop. They shouldn’t have put the block just after a bend in the road.

Dr_Doctorstein

Dr_Doctorstein 5ptsFeatured
Mar 10, 2016

@fezline

Um, if Finicum had KEPT his hands up and not reached for his pocket, he’d be alive today.

Sorry.

fezline

fezline 5ptsFeatured
Mar 10, 2016

@Dr_Doctorstein @fezline Apparently you didn’t watch all of the videos. It’s not a good plan to believe everything you hear Doctorstien… I watched all the videos and took note of when the shots started to ring out… which was 2 seconds after he exited the car.. Sorry but your false trivialization is just that… false… you can’t lie yourself past a video recording with audio buddy but nice try..

kbbpll

kbbpll 5ptsFeatured
Mar 11, 2016

@fezline If they know you’re armed, you evade arrest, they perceive that you just ran over another officer, and you immediately jump out of the vehicle you just used as a deadly weapon, you’re going to get shot at. Why is that so difficult for some people to comprehend?

John

John 5ptsFeatured
Apr 15, 2016

@kbbpll @fezline

You can’t park your car in the middle of the highway and then be justified at shooting at oncoming traffic. If you do, then you’re the one that caused the deadly situation and put everyone’s life at risk. Not to mention that you actually attempted to murder passengers of oncoming traffic by shooting at them.

RVInit

RVInit 5ptsFeatured
Mar 11, 2016

@fezline Hands raised high in the air?!!??!?  I would invite you to get a single screen shot of any moment in time when Finicum had his hands raised high in the air. The highest he ever raised his hands was straight out to the sides – never UP in the air. I challenge you to find a moment in time when his hands were UP in the air higher than shoulder level. Hands straight out like a cross is NOT interpreted as being the sign of “I give up”.

The OSP officers who shot Finicum did not lie and they did not use unjustifiable force. They very likely saved the life of the officer who was trying to get close enough to use his Taser on Finicum. Finicum reached for a weapon THREE times before he was shot. According to the investigation THREE OSP officers at exactly the same time judged Finicum to be a danger to the life of the OSP who had the taser. TWO of those officers fired at the same time. The third officer was slightly slower, when he heard the others shooting and saw Finicum fall at the same time as the shots, he did not fire as he determined it was unnecessary to fire at that point. All three continued to point their guns at Finicum in case he continued to show signs of being a danger. These actions were justified. Nobody is responsible for Finicum’s death except for Mr Finicum.

All other persons exited the vehicles in such a way as to indicate that they were NOT a danger to law enforcement and law enforcement did not shoot a single round at any of the others – with the exception of shooting a non-lethal round at Ryan Payne when he first stuck his hands out the windows and appeared to be holding something that could have been a weapon. When he brought his hands back into the vehicle, and then back out, he no longer had the item in his hands and law enforcement did not fire any more rounds at that time.

Chokersetter

Chokersetter 5ptsFeatured
Mar 14, 2016

@fezline You are so right.  It looks like another Ruby Ridge where FBI snipers murdered Randy Weaver’s wife and son and then they paid Weaver and his surviving children over 3 million in order to avoid a 220 million dollar lawsuit which they definitely would have lost.  Also remember Waco where the FBI, ‘in order to save the women and children’, used a tank and armored vehicles to blast and fire bomb the entire Branch Dividian compound and murdered all inside, including all the women and children, over a dozen of which were under 5 years old!  The brown suited goose stepping drones were also at the LaVoy Finicum ambush site!

Show More Comments


Gallery

“Too stinking…too stinking lax. You think things are dandy and fine: We got too damned lax.”

12814764_1080975758631936_6856565595861799126_n

The words in the title are Ryan Bundy’s as he, Shawna Cox and Victoria Sharp were “hunkered down” in the truck “trying not to get shot.” Ryan Bundy’s words are a WARNING TO US ALL !!!!!!

I could write much more about how “too damned lax” we are, but it may be way past midnight; too late to make a difference. Even the III% appear to have hunkered down trying not to get shot. LaVoy knew he had been specifically targeted and that is why he said after being shot at and stepping out of his truck into the open, “Go ahead and shoot me !” He was in fact diverting shots away from his friends, and after his assailants murdered him, his fellow patriots were arrested. Their protest against this government’s willful violations of the United States Constitution is now over (entirely silenced). LaVoy’s friends are now jailed and facing false charges of “conspiracy” — no longer protesters, but the victims of a tyrannical and treasonous government that We the People do not hold accountable.

You know there is tyranny and treason when citizens are murdered or arrested for supporting and defending the Constitution.

There will be no justice in the federal courts for LaVoy’s friends, because the federal courts are there only to enforce the unconstitutional legislation of the federal government, not to protect the rights of United States citizens, nor to uphold the rule of law. If justice existed in the federal courts LaVoy would not have been murdered and the protesters would not now be jailed and charged with “conspiracy” against the federal government. We can hope that they will be released, but that is not the federal government’s intention. And it is exactly as LaVoy WARNED US — that the federal government would send the FBI to enforce its unconstitutional laws with “lethal force” and if not murdered would arrest citizens who oppose the unconstitutional legislation and haul them into federal courts. This is what LaVoy referred to as “centralized power,” not intended by our Founding Fathers. It is in fact not our government — it does not represent We the People — does not follow the rule of law. Instead this tyrannical and treasonous government acts solely at the whims of the political and legal elites in Washington DC. It is “snob rule”.

Fact: We the People are no longer a republic. The snobs in all the three branches of government have for many years been slowly supplanting our Constitution with their oligarchy.

You know that you have all been warned numerous times, and you know the consequences. Most American men (and there are very few real men in America today) only want to lay back on their sofas and watch football…the heroes of today are the football players, the baseball players, and the basketball players, not men like LaVoy. We don’t see this government murdering our professional athletes now, do we? That’s because they don’t play against tyranny.

NOTE: One of the shooters who shot LaVoy in the back (“Officer No. 2”) said that when LaVoy and his passengers at the initial “traffic stop” did not get out of the truck and instead drove on and left them standing in the road, that he and his Oregon State Police SWAT team and the FBI were “a little bit behind the game.” I have to agree with Shawna Cox, they are all “assholes”.

Blind Curve and Kill Box

Shooter (“Officer No. 2”) falsely said in the investigation that the Oregon State Police (OSP) SWAT team gave “lawful commands” at the initial “traffic stop” to LaVoy Finicum and his passengers, i.e., “You are under arrest and you need to come out of your vehicle with your hands up. Turn your vehicle off.” The fact is that “Officer No. 2” knew that their “commands” were in direct violation of the United States Constitution, and he also knew that the Oregon State Police (OSP) had not been assigned to arrest LaVoy and his passengers.

In response Ryan Bundy and LaVoy Finicum said, “You need to back off.” LaVoy Finicum then said, “Okay, I’m going over to meet the Sheriff in Grant County, you can come along with us and can talk with us over there.” — silence — LaVoy continues, “You can go ahead and shoot me, put the laser right there, put the bullet through the head. Boys, it’s going to get real. You want my blood on your hands [murder] back off or kill me here.” LaVoy gave the OSP the choice and knew well that he was the target for murder. Which means that he knew that their attempt to arrest him and command for him to exit his vehicle were not “lawful”. 

People are finally waking up to the outlaws cloaked in legalese. It’s time to exert our rightful force and see these criminals where they belong! Some will end up in jail but a few are going to swing.

I’ll get the rope.

Fred Brownbill to LaVoy Finicum; One Cowboy’s Witness #LibertyRising

To Mr. Neil Kornze,
Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Washington DC and his staff.

You must disarm your BLM federal forces and return all your weapons and ammunition stock piles to the nearest Governor controlled National Guard Armories across this nation.

Legislation at the Congressional level is being worked so that you will longer be permitted to unconstitutionally police and intimidate Americans on state land illegally held by the federal BLM forces of Washington DC.

I am working closely with congressional representatives across this nation to disarm you and eventually remove you from your illegal and unconstitutional centralized control of state lands.

Washington DC has no authority to control state land unless it is within the confines of Article 1, section 8, clause 17 of the US Constitution.

The United Nations, Agenda 21 Communist mandates infesting this nation at the highest levels of leadership implemented by President George H.W. Bush in 1989 will soon be dismantled by the incoming Trump administration.

If your BLM federal forces in Utah attempt to intimidate, harass and or threaten private citizens and ranchers they will be arrested in Piute County Utah.

This is the first step to return this nation back to constitutional governance.

My reach is far and wide and I am educating Sheriffs all over this nation of their constitutional right to protect all land, property and people in their counties free of federal intrusion.

Sheriff Marty Gleave from Piute County Utah has released a statement that he will not allow his county to be overrun by your unconstitutional BLM and US Forest Service militarized forces.

Be advised that your unconstitutionally GOP funded BLM federal forces occupying state land will soon be held to follow Article 1, section 8, clause 17 of the US Constitution.

Those BLM forces who if they threaten ranchers and private citizens will be arrested including any attempt of illegal policing and or unconstitutional actions like those initiated by your BLM forces against the ranchers in Nevada and Oregon.

The ranchers in Piute County Utah will not be intimidated. The Sheriff has got their backs as per the US Constitution. If you want to play in the sand box of the patriots who follow constitutional law in Utah be ready to be covered in sand.

Sheriff Gleave will if need be “deputize everyone in his county and arrest all federal agents” should they enter his county in a similar manner like those in Nevada and Oregon.

I repeat this so it sinks in to your statist Communist mindset.

Sheriff Marty Gleave has been Sheriff in Utah for nearly 25 years and all sees across this nation as do we that things are “getting progressively worse and worse and worse with the so-called land police.”

Your BLM land forces are out of constitutional control.

President Obama thinks he is immune from this Communist assault on the people. Not so. A new government will soon be in place to deal with him.

Your Obama – Communist Agenda 21 Marxist Stalinist stealing of state land for federal use will soon be ending as will your BLM military police units.

This is all rolling out in response to the unconstitutional threats made against the ranchers by your BLM thugs in Nevada and Oregon.

This includes the arrests of many protesters who stood up for constitutional rule of law under Article 1, section 8, clause 17 of the US Constitution.

All the unconstitutional state land grabs including the events leading up to and affecting rancher Mr. Cliven Bundy and others will be investigated and will be prosecuted by the Trump Administration.

All these unconstitutional actions initiated by federal and state forces which resulted in the execution style murder of Mr. LaVoy Finicum (of whom I am friends with this God fairing peaceful family) will get justice.

Mr. Finicum is a brave man who stood with his hands in the air surrendering to said federal and state forces as he was brutally ambushed and cut down. Orders were initiated I am sure from the Governor or Oregon and the DOJ.

These people too will be held to account in the Trump administration.

You have pissed me off Mr. BLM. I am going to use all my powerful friends in the current and future new government to fix this unconstitutional mess created by the Communists in the White House and the Congress.

The folks who shot this man in cold blood did not uphold their oath of office to protect the US Constitution. They will be investigated and prosecuted as per constitutional law.

Mr. BLM, Director in Washington DC, Sheriff Gleave addressed all these issues to the Rural Caucus of the Utah State legislature on February 12, 2016. We are not rolling over dude.

He stated “You know, we’ve got FBI, DEA, ATF and ICE,”

He said.

“We’ve always been able to work with them people because they would only come and do major felony cases and different things like that. So, they were always out of the way until we needed them.”

He said

“We’ve got a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) police and Forest Service police who are out doing the same exact jobs that my deputies can do and every other deputy sheriff and sheriff can do,”

Sheriff Gleave is telling you Mr. BLM that he will handle with his deputies any issues on all land in his county.

The federal government has no authority to control land in the states unless it is a port, a military base or a post office as per Article 1, section 8, clause 17 of the US Constitution.

Sheriff Gleave is telling you Mr. BLM you are in full “mismanagement” of your pretended authority. The game is about up. Over. Terminated. Done with.

Mr. BLM you must disarm your BLM forces and remove yourself from state land.

You must return all buildings and assets back to the Governors of each state for legal repatriation from federal back to state control.

Your days are about up using BLM forces for pointing guns at ranchers, tazering pregnant women, and punching out teenagers who were defending their constitutional rights.

Soon you will no longer be authorized to rustle and shoot cattle, shoot wild horses and occupy state land. I would start looking for a new job.

The Hammonds and the Bundy’s and others are political prisoners of the Obama Agenda 21 Communists and their minions. They will be pardoned and released by my friend Mr. Trump when he is president.

Then we will come after those who violated the said constitutional rights of these individuals including the Governor of Oregon and the federal prosecutors on this case. A man who was fired by President Bush for poor work ethic while working in his administration.

Mr. BLM if you venture into Sheriff Gleave’s county in Utah with weapons drawn with intent to harass, intimidate and violate the ranchers and other private citizens on state land or private land you will find yourself in the county jail.

It is unfortunate that the Sheriff’s in the counties in Oregon and Nevada do not have the same intestinal constitutional fortitude as Sheriff Gleave.

But in the words of Clint Eastwood, “This town need a new Sheriff” Feel free to forward my E mail to Comrade President Obama. AKA Barry Soetoro.

He just spent over $7 million of our tax payer money on his trip to celebrate his pals in Communist Cuba and Argentina. Thank your GOP led congress for funding it.

Cheers.
Senior Chief Geoff Ross
Surface warfare Air Warfare
United States Navy retired
Santa Rosa Militia
Article 1, section 8, clause 17 of the US Constitution

See More

Haha

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Reid Reasor
Remove
Reid Reasor BINGO! BLM has no authority to use guns.
Give us our rights back, or we take them back 2017.
Down letter of warning herehttp://www.headexplosionfx.com/Liberty’s%20open%20letter%20of%20warning.doc

Like · Reply · 4 · 5 hrs
Scott Bannister
Remove

Scott Bannister None of this criminals Tyrants should go to jail. They All should swing from their necks

Like · Reply · 3 · 4 hrs · Edited

 

Mike Ladines
Remove
Mike Ladines Nuremberg trials, no tyrant left  behind
Brad Hill
Remove
Brad Hill tic-toc
questions go unanswered in Oregon; reminders of Bruingate in NC
March 23, 2016 Asheville , Hendersonville , News Stories3716 Views
Lots of questions go unanswered in Oregon; reminders of Bruingate in NC

Red_SMith jpg_RS

Red Smith

Ten Facts That Point Out LaVoy Was Murdered

By Red Smith- The murder of LaVoy Finicum, a Constitutional activist, late last January has raised the ire of many across the nation. The initial narrative clung to by law enforcement officials, that they did not fire upon Mr. Finicum until he was believed to be reaching for a firearm, has been proven a categorical lie and left tattered in the bloody Eastern Oregon snowbank it originated in. Upon reviewing the hundreds of pages of documents made available by the Deschutes County Sheriff investigation team regarding the shooting, several facts have been made clear, confirmed and a few new ones exposed. The picture that is drawn is troubling to say the least and confirms the worst fears and suspicions of many Patriots since the beginning.

Also hundreds of emails (that will be detailed in further articles) from the Governor Kate Brown’s office draws a picture that extends into the White House itself. Drawing upon those documents and from sources present on the ground at the Occupation and those incarcerated with Ammon Bundy we will now draw you the most complete truthful catalog available of the stop and the command decisions leading up to the murder of LaVoy Finicum and it’s repercussions. We will begin with the traffic stop and botched execution of the members of the Bundy Convoy on that cold, desolate Eastern Oregon 395 Highway.

1st is the revelation of Oregon State Police Officers involved in the planning of the highway ambush that the road block was moved from Grant County, as originally planned by the FBI, to occur within Harney County specifically to insure Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer was not involved in the traffic stop. This was done according to the deposition of an Oregon State Police Officer because “I knew going into it there was a Sheriff in Grant County supporting the movement or the ideology behind what they were pushing…was a large amount of community members in Grant County, that supported their beliefs and had similar Constitutional beliefs, and to the point of the Grant County making it clear they are a U.N. Free Zone…” When asked if this is the reason the traffic stop was moved to Harney County that officer replied, “Absolutely”. The FBI originally intended to conduct the operation in Grant county as they believed, with Sheriff Palmer’s relationship with the Malhuer Activists and their trust of him, that the probability of a peaceful resolution was greater in Grant County than Harney County. This decision was overridden by Oregon State Police and the FBI Tactical specifically to reverse that probability. A reasonable person could easily conclude from that fact, that Oregon State Police and the FBI Tactical Team wanted to create the opportunity for violent confrontation.

2nd is the fact, corroborated by video evidence, that Law Enforcement Officials failed to identify themselves or provide credentials when asked by both LaVoy Finicum and Ryan Bundy. In the recently released Shawna Cox video (taken from inside the passenger compartment of Finicum’s truck) LaVoy and Ryan Bundy clearly ask the officers to step forward and identify themselves several times. Law Enforcement fail to do so with each and every request. In fact during depositions in the investigation report officers describe how they adorned “civilian type” clothing to avoid being detected by Patriot members whom Law Enforcement believed was conducting counter surveillance upon them. In testimony by Law Enforcement identified only as “Officer 4” it is revealed that “FBI” team members failed to truthfully identify themselves to even Oregon State Police Officers, and were identified by fictitious first names only. (Pg. 151-152)

3rd, also backed up by the Cox video, is LaVoy’s clear statements that he intended to travel further up Highway 395 to meet Sheriff Glenn Palmer, where he felt safe, and that the officers were welcome to follow him. This is of great importance because LaVoy was within his clear rights to do so unimpeded. The law states; “If you suspect that the person trying to pull you over is not a police officer (for example, he or she is driving an unmarked car), you do not have to immediately pull over. Instead, put your flashers on, indicate that you acknowledge the ‘officer’s” presence by waving at him, continue driving at the speed limit towards a busy, well-lit area, and call 911. Inform the 911 dispatcher that you are worried that someone posing as a police officer is trying to pull you over. Tell the dispatcher your current location and direction of travel as well as the make and model of your car. Do not get out of your car until the 911 dispatcher can confirm that person trying to pull you over is a real police officer. If the dispatcher cannot confirm that the person, carefully drive to a safe place such as your local police station and follow all of the dispatcher’s additional instructions.” Remember Law Enforcement failed to identify themselves, were in “civilian type” apparel, were driving unmarked vehicles and cell phone service to reach 911 was unavailable do to the location of the ambush.

4th, LaVoy Finicum’s vehicle and it’s occupants were fired upon by Law Enforcement at the initial traffic stop. According to Officer’s own testimony, Finicum’s vehicle was struck by a 40 mm grenade round. Ryan Payne, a fellow activist riding in the front passenger seat of LaVoy’s truck who exited the vehicle to identify the individuals conducting the stop, was struck in the left arm also by a 40 mm grenade. Confirming Shawna Cox’s testimony that the side mirror was struck by live fire, copper shards consistent with a bullet jacket was recovered from the remains of the side view mirror. Finicum did not flee the scene until after he and his passengers had been fired upon by unidentified individuals, in civilian clothing, driving unmarked vehicles.

5th, the roadblock established by the Oregon State Police was illegal as ruled by the United States Supreme Court as it did not allow an avenue of egress for the fleeing vehicle nor did it allow sufficient time or distance for a vehicle to come safely to a stop. The term for this type of road block according to the United States Supreme Court is a “Dead-mans Roadblock.” This is appropriately deemed a Dead-mans Roadblock because there was no alternative course of travel and the roadblock was placed at the end of a blind turn in which the driver could not see the roadblock with sufficient time to react and effect a stop before colliding with the components of the roadblock. A roadblock in and of itself is use of deadly force and in some cases unlawful seizure. The Justice Departments own policy on pursuits and roadblocks read; “Fixed roadblocks are extremely dangerous and are rarely justifiable.”, “…When the road is totally blocked, so that even a slow moving vehicle cannot go around—or through—safely, the degree of risk is heightened. When a complete blockage of the roadway is undertaken, officers should ensure that the oncoming suspect has a clear view of the roadblock, and has ample time to stop safely, should he or she decide to do so. This complete blockage usually represents a higher level of control, and could be constitutionally unreasonable unless properly managed.” As seen in the video, LaVoy clearly applied brakes and kept them on until his vehicle came to a stop 40’ past the point of intended impact with the vehicles used to block the roadway. His brake lights come on midway between the two sign posts and stayed on. He simply could not stop and averted a horrific impact which would have injured and killed the other occupants of the vehicle as well as the officials standing behind and around the trucks. This was a completely intentional, inappropriate use of deadly force. It was in conflict with the US Dept of Justice’s Restrictive policies for High Speed Police Pursuits.

6th Finicum’s vehicle began, once again, taking live fire this time from .223 rifle fire at the exact moment the vehicle crested the corner and approached the ambush. Finicum was never provided the opportunity to slow his vehicle before Law Enforcement began using deadly force, .223 rounds were found to have penetrated the windshield, hood and radiator prior to LaVoy ditching his vehicle into the snow bank. This is confirmed by the FBI drone surveillance video, the Cox cellphone video and officer’s testimony. In testimony the officer that discharged his weapon stated he felt justified in using deadly force due to “It was clear to me, the speed the truck was traveling…was traveling at a speed which I knew from my training and experience, it was…it became apparent to me based off my training and experience as a crash, you know, technician, and overall time as a police officer, I knew there was…it had crossed the threshold of being able to stop prior to…that’s when I felt the use of force was my only option…” In short, the officer discharged his weapon, exercising his intent to implement deadly force and justified that action, because in his training and expertise there was not enough time for the suspect vehicle to stop safely. This confirms point 5 that the roadblock was illegal and intended as an ambush.

7th, contrary to initial officer and FBI statements immediately following the execution, Law Enforcement did discharge their weapons prior to the point LaVoy was perceived to reach for a potential weapon. LaVoy Finicum and the occupants of the truck were fired upon for a 3rd time in a sustained manner, almost immediately upon LaVoy’s vehicle coming to rest in the snowbank. As the Cox video clearly depicts, upon impact Mr. Finicum exits the driver side door of his vehicle, his hands clearly, indisputably raised in the air in the universal sign of surrender and almost simultaneously a bullet strikes the door frame near Finicum’s head, followed mere moments by at least one, possibly two, rounds that shatter the drivers side passenger window next to LaVoy. It is at that point LaVoy walks away from his vehicle clearly yelling “shoot me”, “you’re gonna have to shoot me”. Shawna Cox and April Sharp have stated they believe LaVoy did this in an attempt to direct the officers murderous fire away from them and the vehicle. Sometime during this exchange another round, believed to be a larger, heavier .308 bullet, punched through the roof of the cab of the pick up and out a passenger window. It is thought that this was the round that wounded Ryan Bundy in the shoulder. Due to the caliber of the bullet an FBI HRT member is most likely responsible for the shot. With the severe steep angle of the shot, it is obvious that the shooter was in an extreme elevated position and gives credence to Victoria Sharp’s claims of snipers in the trees of the ambush zone.

8th, Law Enforcement had no expectation of the traffic stop to resolve in arrests. Officer testimony clearly states that the ultimate termination of the plan was to conclude, in what they believed to be three vehicles, being driven and pursued into the road block where a final resolution to the incident would be processed. Law Enforcement did not even have arrest warrants for the members of the convoy. Testimony of “Officer 4” and Oregon State Policeman “An had infor-basically knowledge they had um,…uh…an active, uh, arrest warrant for ’em….uh, not warrant, but uh,…um…information they could be detained.” This is confirmed by further numerous depositions of other officers that they were not aware of, advised of or ever viewed any actual arrest warrants or charges to be brought against the refuge occupiers. In point of fact the indictment against the members of the Bundy convoy was not filed until 9:29 the next morning. As well the search warrant for Finicum’s pick up was not issued until a full two days after the incident.

ambush19th, The roadblock was a prepared and pre-scouted ambush. Statements from Oregon State Police show that the location of the ambush that culminated in the execution of LaVoy Finicum was scouted days ahead of time. The location was selected specifically for the blind corner that terminated in the kill zone and the fact that there was no cellular communications possible. FBI operators were at the location two days prior to the stop preparing fighting positions, clearing underbrush and tree limbs for clear lines of sight and creating sniper positions by clearing snow away from tree bases. This can be attested to by the investigation and by a citizen who visited the scene the day after the murder and photographed the evidence of the preparations. The road block was not a procedural Law Enforcement road block, but a standard military style “L-Ambush”.

L-Shaped sm

10th, The orders for the authorization of this operation leads to the White House and “National Command Authority.” On more than one occasion Oregon Officers indicate that they were led to believe the operation was authorized by individuals outside of the direct FBI chain of command and came from higher up the political food chain. This is includes reference to the Attorney General of the United States Loretta Lynch and in two separate testimonies a “National Command Authority” is alluded to. Normally, “National Command Authority” is a military term referring to the President of the United States. However after cross referencing emails from Oregon Governor Kate Brown’s office regarding the occupation we believe “National Command Authority” in this case to be Valerie Jarrett. Jarrett is the Iranian born Senior Adviser, whose immediate family are acknowledged members of the Communist Party, to Barack Obama. She is as well a notorious United Nations Globalist. Jarrett’s involvement and possible authorization of the murder of LaVoy Finicum will become more clear and telling in a Shasta Lantern follow up article. That article will detail the actions of Governor Kate Brown, her emails pertaining to the Reserve Protesters and Brown’s senior staff, most notably Heidi Moawad head of Oregon public safety, recently identified, by our affiliate Agenda 21 Radio, as a close personal friend of Huma Abedin, long time senior staff member of Hillary Clinton with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The evidence herein presented is but a mere taste of the evidence and truth embedded within the investigation documents and the emails of Kate Brown yet to be reported on. Rest assured that truth will continue to be brought to the service through the tireless efforts of citizen journalists and patriot activists across the great nation. Where light shines, darkness cannot exist.

Share this story

Email

Gilbert Cope
February 6

They MURDERED Scalia…to hide Robert Lavoy Finicum’s MURDER!!!
PLEASE join us in our efforts to get Justice for Robert Lavoy Finicum!!!
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1217632434916979/

This is my tribute to Robert Lavoy Finicum, who was MURDERED by our out-of-control government!!! His MURDER occurred just days before the Super Bowl…this wiped his story away from the biased news media!!! His life and MURDER should become the largest story of 2016…besides Hillary getting indicted and Obama getting ARRESTED FOR TREASON!!! PLEASE HelpUsSaveTheUSA!!!
https://vimeo.com/157666869

Although the FBI planned the operation and asked its “partners” Oregon State Police (OSP) to “assist,” all the six shots reported to the investigators, including the three fired into Lavoy’s back in the KILL BOX, were fired by two OSP SWAT team troopers.

Two other shots fired after LaVoy had exited his truck with his hands up were fired by an FBI sniper, but were not reported to investigators. In fact five elite FBI snipers denied firing shots. Neither did the OSP report hearing those shots before shooting LaVoy.

The OSP shooter who fired the first shot lied in the investigation, saying he saw the other OSP trooper run up into the trees out of fear for his life. Not so, the shooter knew that the trooper was taking his planned position opposite the KILL BOX. He also knew an FBI agent was hiding behind the black truck…preparing to jump out (to force) LaVoy off the highway, and they all knew that the truck would end up sitting on an angle pinned on a rock ledge under the snow. If the first shot did not kill LaVoy the intent was to force him to the left; the headlights on the truck (right) were on, the black truck made it appear smaller, and even the obvious (planned) space between the black truck and the snowbank, albeit too small to avoid a serious collision, was to pull LaVoy to the left.

The OSP trooper in the trees may not have know the intent and is why he aimed a taser at LaVoy, but the two shots by the FBI sniper, one of which went through the roof of the truck and almost hit Victoria and Ryan, were intended to draw return fire (begin a fire fight) wherein all the protesters would have been murdered. FBI snipers plan each shot (each shot has a purpose) and they do not miss their intended targets.

LaVoy had invited the OSP to follow him and meet at the Sheriffs. He was not running from the law: The OSP had not properly identified themselves, were not assigned to arrest him and the FBI never identified themselves. LaVoy knew that he and the other protesters had been fired upon from an unidentified roadblock (from a great distance), and again even while he had been holding his hands up. He knew their intent was to murder.

CONCLUSION: LaVoy Finicum would have been justified to shoot every one of them, including the OSP trooper with the taser gun and drawn pistol.

See More

Everest Wilhelmsen's photo.

Everest Wilhelmsen

Although the FBI planned the operation and asked its “partners” Oregon State Police (OSP) to “assist,” all the six shots reported to the investigators, including the three fired into Lavoy’s back in the KILL BOX, were fired by two OSP SWAT team troopers.

Two other shots fired after LaVoy had exited his truck with his hands up were fired by an FBI sniper, but were not reported to investigators. In fact five elite FBI snipers denied firing shots. Neither did the OSP report hearing those shots before shooting LaVoy.

The OSP shooter who fired the first shot lied in the investigation, saying he saw the other OSP trooper run up into the trees out of fear for his life. Not so, the shooter knew that the trooper was taking his planned position opposite the KILL BOX. He also knew an FBI agent was hiding behind the black truck…preparing to jump out (to force) LaVoy off the highway, and they all knew that the truck would end up sitting on an angle pinned on a rock ledge under the snow. If the first shot did not kill LaVoy the intent was to force him to the left; the headlights on the truck (right) were on, the black truck made it appear smaller, and even the obvious (planned) space between the black truck and the snowbank, albeit too small to avoid a serious collision, was to pull LaVoy to the left.

The OSP trooper in the trees may not have know the intent and is why he aimed a taser at LaVoy, but the two shots by the FBI sniper, one of which went through the roof of the truck and almost hit Victoria and Ryan, were intended to draw return fire (begin a fire fight) wherein all the protesters would have been murdered. FBI snipers plan each shot (each shot has a purpose) and they do not miss their intended targets.

LaVoy had invited the OSP to follow him and meet at the Sheriffs. He was not running from the law: The OSP had not properly identified themselves, were not assigned to arrest him and the FBI never identified themselves. LaVoy knew that he and the other protesters had been fired upon from an unidentified roadblock (from a great distance), and again even while he had been holding his hands up. He knew their intent was to murder.

CONCLUSION: LaVoy Finicum would have been justified to shoot every one of them, including the OSP trooper with the taser gun and drawn pistol.

VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9sfuFGghY

See More

Like

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Joseph J. Scott
Remove

Joseph J. Scott All involved in doing this to GOD fearing family folks are cowards in my book!

Like · Reply · 2 · 23 hrs
Al Witthauer
Remove

Al Witthauer And nothing gets done about it

Like · Reply · 1 · 21 hrs
Cindy Wisner
Write a comment…

Red_SMith jpg_RS

Red Smith

Ten Facts That Point Out LaVoy Was Murdered

By Red Smith- The murder of LaVoy Finicum, a Constitutional activist, late last January has raised the ire of many across the nation. The initial narrative clung to by law enforcement officials, that they did not fire upon Mr. Finicum until he was believed to be reaching for a firearm, has been proven a categorical lie and left tattered in the bloody Eastern Oregon snowbank it originated in. Upon reviewing the hundreds of pages of documents made available by the Deschutes County Sheriff investigation team regarding the shooting, several facts have been made clear, confirmed and a few new ones exposed. The picture that is drawn is troubling to say the least and confirms the worst fears and suspicions of many Patriots since the beginning.

Also hundreds of emails (that will be detailed in further articles) from the Governor Kate Brown’s office draws a picture that extends into the White House itself. Drawing upon those documents and from sources present on the ground at the Occupation and those incarcerated with Ammon Bundy we will now draw you the most complete truthful catalog available of the stop and the command decisions leading up to the murder of LaVoy Finicum and it’s repercussions. We will begin with the traffic stop and botched execution of the members of the Bundy Convoy on that cold, desolate Eastern Oregon 395 Highway.

1st is the revelation of Oregon State Police Officers involved in the planning of the highway ambush that the road block was moved from Grant County, as originally planned by the FBI, to occur within Harney County specifically to insure Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer was not involved in the traffic stop. This was done according to the deposition of an Oregon State Police Officer because “I knew going into it there was a Sheriff in Grant County supporting the movement or the ideology behind what they were pushing…was a large amount of community members in Grant County, that supported their beliefs and had similar Constitutional beliefs, and to the point of the Grant County making it clear they are a U.N. Free Zone…” When asked if this is the reason the traffic stop was moved to Harney County that officer replied, “Absolutely”. The FBI originally intended to conduct the operation in Grant county as they believed, with Sheriff Palmer’s relationship with the Malhuer Activists and their trust of him, that the probability of a peaceful resolution was greater in Grant County than Harney County. This decision was overridden by Oregon State Police and the FBI Tactical specifically to reverse that probability. A reasonable person could easily conclude from that fact, that Oregon State Police and the FBI Tactical Team wanted to create the opportunity for violent confrontation.

2nd is the fact, corroborated by video evidence, that Law Enforcement Officials failed to identify themselves or provide credentials when asked by both LaVoy Finicum and Ryan Bundy. In the recently released Shawna Cox video (taken from inside the passenger compartment of Finicum’s truck) LaVoy and Ryan Bundy clearly ask the officers to step forward and identify themselves several times. Law Enforcement fail to do so with each and every request. In fact during depositions in the investigation report officers describe how they adorned “civilian type” clothing to avoid being detected by Patriot members whom Law Enforcement believed was conducting counter surveillance upon them. In testimony by Law Enforcement identified only as “Officer 4” it is revealed that “FBI” team members failed to truthfully identify themselves to even Oregon State Police Officers, and were identified by fictitious first names only. (Pg. 151-152)

3rd, also backed up by the Cox video, is LaVoy’s clear statements that he intended to travel further up Highway 395 to meet Sheriff Glenn Palmer, where he felt safe, and that the officers were welcome to follow him. This is of great importance because LaVoy was within his clear rights to do so unimpeded. The law states; “If you suspect that the person trying to pull you over is not a police officer (for example, he or she is driving an unmarked car), you do not have to immediately pull over. Instead, put your flashers on, indicate that you acknowledge the ‘officer’s” presence by waving at him, continue driving at the speed limit towards a busy, well-lit area, and call 911. Inform the 911 dispatcher that you are worried that someone posing as a police officer is trying to pull you over. Tell the dispatcher your current location and direction of travel as well as the make and model of your car. Do not get out of your car until the 911 dispatcher can confirm that person trying to pull you over is a real police officer. If the dispatcher cannot confirm that the person, carefully drive to a safe place such as your local police station and follow all of the dispatcher’s additional instructions.” Remember Law Enforcement failed to identify themselves, were in “civilian type” apparel, were driving unmarked vehicles and cell phone service to reach 911 was unavailable do to the location of the ambush.

4th, LaVoy Finicum’s vehicle and it’s occupants were fired upon by Law Enforcement at the initial traffic stop. According to Officer’s own testimony, Finicum’s vehicle was struck by a 40 mm grenade round. Ryan Payne, a fellow activist riding in the front passenger seat of LaVoy’s truck who exited the vehicle to identify the individuals conducting the stop, was struck in the left arm also by a 40 mm grenade. Confirming Shawna Cox’s testimony that the side mirror was struck by live fire, copper shards consistent with a bullet jacket was recovered from the remains of the side view mirror. Finicum did not flee the scene until after he and his passengers had been fired upon by unidentified individuals, in civilian clothing, driving unmarked vehicles.

5th, the roadblock established by the Oregon State Police was illegal as ruled by the United States Supreme Court as it did not allow an avenue of egress for the fleeing vehicle nor did it allow sufficient time or distance for a vehicle to come safely to a stop. The term for this type of road block according to the United States Supreme Court is a “Dead-mans Roadblock.” This is appropriately deemed a Dead-mans Roadblock because there was no alternative course of travel and the roadblock was placed at the end of a blind turn in which the driver could not see the roadblock with sufficient time to react and effect a stop before colliding with the components of the roadblock. A roadblock in and of itself is use of deadly force and in some cases unlawful seizure. The Justice Departments own policy on pursuits and roadblocks read; “Fixed roadblocks are extremely dangerous and are rarely justifiable.”, “…When the road is totally blocked, so that even a slow moving vehicle cannot go around—or through—safely, the degree of risk is heightened. When a complete blockage of the roadway is undertaken, officers should ensure that the oncoming suspect has a clear view of the roadblock, and has ample time to stop safely, should he or she decide to do so. This complete blockage usually represents a higher level of control, and could be constitutionally unreasonable unless properly managed.” As seen in the video, LaVoy clearly applied brakes and kept them on until his vehicle came to a stop 40’ past the point of intended impact with the vehicles used to block the roadway. His brake lights come on midway between the two sign posts and stayed on. He simply could not stop and averted a horrific impact which would have injured and killed the other occupants of the vehicle as well as the officials standing behind and around the trucks. This was a completely intentional, inappropriate use of deadly force. It was in conflict with the US Dept of Justice’s Restrictive policies for High Speed Police Pursuits.

6th Finicum’s vehicle began, once again, taking live fire this time from .223 rifle fire at the exact moment the vehicle crested the corner and approached the ambush. Finicum was never provided the opportunity to slow his vehicle before Law Enforcement began using deadly force, .223 rounds were found to have penetrated the windshield, hood and radiator prior to LaVoy ditching his vehicle into the snow bank. This is confirmed by the FBI drone surveillance video, the Cox cellphone video and officer’s testimony. In testimony the officer that discharged his weapon stated he felt justified in using deadly force due to “It was clear to me, the speed the truck was traveling…was traveling at a speed which I knew from my training and experience, it was…it became apparent to me based off my training and experience as a crash, you know, technician, and overall time as a police officer, I knew there was…it had crossed the threshold of being able to stop prior to…that’s when I felt the use of force was my only option…” In short, the officer discharged his weapon, exercising his intent to implement deadly force and justified that action, because in his training and expertise there was not enough time for the suspect vehicle to stop safely. This confirms point 5 that the roadblock was illegal and intended as an ambush.

7th, contrary to initial officer and FBI statements immediately following the execution, Law Enforcement did discharge their weapons prior to the point LaVoy was perceived to reach for a potential weapon. LaVoy Finicum and the occupants of the truck were fired upon for a 3rd time in a sustained manner, almost immediately upon LaVoy’s vehicle coming to rest in the snowbank. As the Cox video clearly depicts, upon impact Mr. Finicum exits the driver side door of his vehicle, his hands clearly, indisputably raised in the air in the universal sign of surrender and almost simultaneously a bullet strikes the door frame near Finicum’s head, followed mere moments by at least one, possibly two, rounds that shatter the drivers side passenger window next to LaVoy. It is at that point LaVoy walks away from his vehicle clearly yelling “shoot me”, “you’re gonna have to shoot me”. Shawna Cox and April Sharp have stated they believe LaVoy did this in an attempt to direct the officers murderous fire away from them and the vehicle. Sometime during this exchange another round, believed to be a larger, heavier .308 bullet, punched through the roof of the cab of the pick up and out a passenger window. It is thought that this was the round that wounded Ryan Bundy in the shoulder. Due to the caliber of the bullet an FBI HRT member is most likely responsible for the shot. With the severe steep angle of the shot, it is obvious that the shooter was in an extreme elevated position and gives credence to Victoria Sharp’s claims of snipers in the trees of the ambush zone.

8th, Law Enforcement had no expectation of the traffic stop to resolve in arrests. Officer testimony clearly states that the ultimate termination of the plan was to conclude, in what they believed to be three vehicles, being driven and pursued into the road block where a final resolution to the incident would be processed. Law Enforcement did not even have arrest warrants for the members of the convoy. Testimony of “Officer 4” and Oregon State Policeman “An had infor-basically knowledge they had um,…uh…an active, uh, arrest warrant for ’em….uh, not warrant, but uh,…um…information they could be detained.” This is confirmed by further numerous depositions of other officers that they were not aware of, advised of or ever viewed any actual arrest warrants or charges to be brought against the refuge occupiers. In point of fact the indictment against the members of the Bundy convoy was not filed until 9:29 the next morning. As well the search warrant for Finicum’s pick up was not issued until a full two days after the incident.

ambush19th, The roadblock was a prepared and pre-scouted ambush. Statements from Oregon State Police show that the location of the ambush that culminated in the execution of LaVoy Finicum was scouted days ahead of time. The location was selected specifically for the blind corner that terminated in the kill zone and the fact that there was no cellular communications possible. FBI operators were at the location two days prior to the stop preparing fighting positions, clearing underbrush and tree limbs for clear lines of sight and creating sniper positions by clearing snow away from tree bases. This can be attested to by the investigation and by a citizen who visited the scene the day after the murder and photographed the evidence of the preparations. The road block was not a procedural Law Enforcement road block, but a standard military style “L-Ambush”.

L-Shaped sm

10th, The orders for the authorization of this operation leads to the White House and “National Command Authority.” On more than one occasion Oregon Officers indicate that they were led to believe the operation was authorized by individuals outside of the direct FBI chain of command and came from higher up the political food chain. This is includes reference to the Attorney General of the United States Loretta Lynch and in two separate testimonies a “National Command Authority” is alluded to. Normally, “National Command Authority” is a military term referring to the President of the United States. However after cross referencing emails from Oregon Governor Kate Brown’s office regarding the occupation we believe “National Command Authority” in this case to be Valerie Jarrett. Jarrett is the Iranian born Senior Adviser, whose immediate family are acknowledged members of the Communist Party, to Barack Obama. She is as well a notorious United Nations Globalist. Jarrett’s involvement and possible authorization of the murder of LaVoy Finicum will become more clear and telling in a Shasta Lantern follow up article. That article will detail the actions of Governor Kate Brown, her emails pertaining to the Reserve Protesters and Brown’s senior staff, most notably Heidi Moawad head of Oregon public safety, recently identified, by our affiliate Agenda 21 Radio, as a close personal friend of Huma Abedin, long time senior staff member of Hillary Clinton with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The evidence herein presented is but a mere taste of the evidence and truth embedded within the investigation documents and the emails of Kate Brown yet to be reported on. Rest assured that truth will continue to be brought to the service through the tireless efforts of citizen journalists and patriot activists across the great nation. Where light shines, darkness cannot exist.

Share this story

Email

About author

Related articles

N.C. Railroad and Randolph megasite

Looking for something?

Read an article in a back issue? Can’t find it here? Contact us and we’ll get it in your hands! Click Here

Melina Bilodeau's photo.
Melina Bilodeau's photo.
Melina Bilodeau's photo.
Melina Bilodeau's photo.

Melina Bilodeau added 4 new photos.

The Heart of the Constitutional Battle

LaVoy Finicum

This is going to be the hardest “profile” that I have done to date. Not because of lack of things to say, but because I know it is going to be very emotional, not only for me but also for many people that read it.

I first became aware of LaVoy like many of us did, through his informative and personal videos letting us know about his passion for his family, his ranch, his country and for the Constitution that we are all trying to defend. I already had a great respect and appreciation for this all American Cowboy when I finally had he honor and pleasure of meeting him in person that first trip down to The Resource Center.

The first time I saw this rancher/cowboy was when he spoke at a press conference. He stood there calmly, full of heart and God. I am not exaggerating at all when I say this, you could see and feel the Lord’s spirit in this man. He spoke with integrity; each and every word had truth behind it. This man, with the tan cowboy hat, holster with the old fashioned belt, the kind that had bullets lining the worn tan leather (reminding me of the old westerns with Clint Eastwood I used to watch with my daddy), his glasses giving him that perfect grandpa look…spoke with such intelligence and conviction that you hung on every syllable let alone every word. He spoke in such a manner you wanted to learn from him, you didn’t want him to stop talking. When the press conference was over I found myself thinking about what it must have been like growing up in his house, learning from this gentle man with the quiet yet firm intelligence, unknowingly, in a way, I was about to learn, due to circumstances that I wish never happened, by reading stories from children.

The next time I saw LaVoy was when we all went to observe some events taking place off the Resource Center grounds. Once again, LaVoy spoke to the press and the patriots that had gathered with care and emotion about what was happening, this man FELT for the people of this county, FELT their fear, their heartache, their injustices. He ached and longed to help them break free of all of this.

You see one thing that people seem to forget about all of the men and women that were there, especially about LaVoy, they were NOT anti-government, they were just wanting a constitutional government. LaVoy ALWAYS said, and with much passion…that we need the federal government, but we need it in the way it was structured and intended by our founding fathers. That it WORKS that way. He loved our country and he loved the Lord. Those two things went hand in hand for him and they do for many others and myself. “One nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all” Remember that?

When I finally got to sit down with LaVoy, it was in a little office shortly before I had to leave. We spent some time talking some small talk about our families and his ranch, the work he did with troubled foster children, which is amazing! It led to some talk about some things that I was going through with a troubled stepdaughter. He was so helpful and kind, telling me she needed love and prayer. God put me in her life for a reason.
We continued to talk about my reason for visiting the Resource Center, to see for myself what was going on and dispel all the false reports. I explained to LaVoy that my own dad had said some very hurtful things to me when he found out that I was coming, that if I got arrested or whatever, that I would be getting what was coming to me…that he was disgusted and disappointed in me. I explained to him that I thought my dad would have been supportive because he is so protective of his 2nd amendment rights. LaVoy told me that was a shame because my dad had a daughter he could be very proud of and that he should be. We prayed a short prayer together and took a picture together. He had to get going and so did I, but I really didn’t want to, I wanted to stay and talk to this rancher/cowboy for hours and hours.
I gave him a hug and told him that I would be back for a visit in a few days. He said he looked forward to it…and you know what? He wasn’t just saying that. He really was. He loved people. We spoke a few times in-between even if just to say hello.

When I returned with Matt 4 days later, the Center was buzzing with the excitement of all the ranchers coming. I caught up with LaVoy at the chow hall. He smiled and came right over and gave me a hug. I introduced him to my husband and Merlin, a little pomchi we had adopted from an abusive situation. Merlin had growled at every single male that tried to pet him when I was holding him, but no way…not LaVoy, he reached right out and started petting Merlin, not one little growl. Merlin even knew this man would never hurt him (not that any of the others would) and had a gentle and loving spirit, that he was VERY special. We caught up for a little bit, and I showed him the scarf that my stepdaughter had made for him as well. He wanted to put it on right away, well…we had a bit of trouble and a bit of a laugh at trying to get the scarf over his hat. After a bit of a struggle we got it there and in it’s proper place around his neck. I wonder where that scarf is now? We sat at the little bench there among the supplies while LaVoy and Matt talked about his ranch back home and what he had been doing the past few days. He was excited that his wife was out for a visit; you could see the love for her in his face and eyes! (I had the pleasure of meeting her briefly later in the day. They are such a wonderful couple. They “fit” well. God does so wonderful when we let Him!!!) He got up from his seat and said “Well, I have a lot to do before the meeting so I will see you later, if not make sure you come and say good-bye before you leave.” I promised to do so. Another hug, a handshake, Merlin got another pet, looking a little disappointed I might say, and he went off to take care of business…the business of another step towards freedom.

LaVoy understands what these ranchers are going through, the BLM interfered with his ranching as well…he related to them, and they trust him. You can see the camaraderie between them during the signing, the trust when he told them that they would stand beside them the whole step of the way.

I looked for LaVoy before we went to leave the next day, but my guess is he was off spending some much needed time with his lovely bride. So when we got to where I had a good signal I sent him a message apologizing promising to visit again soon. He replied…little did I know that is the last time I would “speak” with this warrior for God, the Constitution, and We the People.

As I heard the news from my friend Pete, and watched him being arrested, not knowing exactly who was shot yet…my heart was sinking. Later on when I found out Ryan Bundy was shot in the shoulder but alive I breathed a sigh of thanks and relief. I prayed. Then I heard, and I sat, and I cried…my husband had tears…my stepdaughter, who had never met any of them started to…I looked at Matt and asked, “Did they really say LaVoy?” They didn’t say LaVoy!!! Yes…they did. I looked up, and asked why? I just shook my head and walked up the stairs. I looked at my bible and asked again why? Through my tears and through my heartache, I heard the Lord say quietly, I needed my angel home; his work on earth is done, in his death more will be.

I got mad; it isn’t fair…it isn’t right! As I heard the lies being told, that I knew were lies, charging the police/agents/mercs…whoever they were…having a hidden gun…all of these things that the king of lies planted out there, I got disgusted and determined with a quiet anger at the injustice of this. The execution of a good Christian, loving, lawful, man…and them trying to somehow justify it. This is what the Lord was whispering to my heart…others were outraged, others were mad…things would happen. In his death more will be done.

I know he has touched many with his life, sadly, like many great men, he will touch many more with his death. Carry on his message, his love for the Lord, his country, family, the fresh air, the Constitution and the freedom it brings.

These things will honor him and his family. These things will keep him alive for generations to come, these things are what he lived for and died for…he also died for us. A friend of mine and I were talking as I was writing this, I was going to quote her but I can’t remember exactly what she said, but it was perfect. LaVoy lived a lot like Jesus, he was gentle and kind, he was a teacher, he taught the truth and what he believed with patience and love and he was executed for that. Thank you Sandra, you captured that beautifully!

I know a lot of people didn’t get the chance to meet this beautiful soul, I will be forever grateful that I did. Not only did he teach me, help me, and guide me through his videos, but personally in my everyday life by our little talks.
That day, January 26, 2016, we lost a hero; his family lost so much more…I ache for them. I lost someone that I am EXTREMELY proud to call my friend, and though he is no longer here with us my heart carries the brand of one cowboy named LaVoy Finicum…we will meet again my friend. Thank you.

The Cowboy’s Last Ride

     Off in the distance, you can see a man upon a horse. He’s carrying an American flag. The early morning sunrise is sending a glint of sparkle off his pistol, hanging from his side. He rides the horse back and forth across the ridge, holding the flag with purpose… First morning of the occupation…

Enters on stage, a quiet man, with a confident gate… His hat is the first thing that you notice. To him, it’s just another extension of his body. To the world, it’s a label. Some would say, “Cowboy.” some would say, “hill billy.” To him, it says, “Rancher, Patriot, father, husband, grandfather, HISTORY.”

We have heard of the others, but we are just now meeting this Cowboy. He smiles as he approaches. He smiles as he leaves. When his mouth isn’t smiling, his eyes are. He speaks softly, confidently and shows his education. And he is, indeed, educated. We begin to pay close attention to this Cowboy. His demeanor wins him respect. We come to look forward to his updates. We know that when he speaks, truth comes from his mouth, and from his heart.

He becomes the nations Cowboy. He gives us hope. He speaks with such passion that you can’t help but feel as though is he including every single person listening, near or far. He makes you truly believe that you can make a difference. He challenges all to take hold of the things that you believe in.

And so, like every great Cowboy, it is his destiny to ride off into the sunset. To leave us wondering what to do now. As he sits around a campfire in the company of angels, we are left here. Here in a world full of confusion and anger. He leaves a family, a wife, a ranch. He leaves dear friends, new and old, some he knew, and most he never met. He leaves a nation wanting to lash out at his senseless death.

I have watched the video. I am sickened by the image of this man, this Patriot, this legend, being mowed down in the snow. I am sickened at the thought that these men who are responsible for this, took an OATH to protect this man, to protect us all. I’m angry, and I’m confused. And I feel helpless. But mostly, I’m just sickened.

Our country is in distress. Along the way, we have lost the greatness, the dignity and the unity that once made this the most coveted nation in the world. We demonize and mock men and women who stand against the very government that we constantly bitch about. Most of us do not have the courage to leave our homes, our families, our jobs to go stand against tyranny being committed against someone we barely know. Yet, this Cowboy, and this group of Patriots did. And for that, he paid the ultimate price.

He lived John 15:13, Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Can you imagine? Can you, in your busy day to day life, imagine leaving your home to go help someone you hardly know? This Cowboy couldn’t imagine NOT doing that. As he couldn’t imagine turning away any of the dozens and dozens of troubled teens that crossed his threshold.

So, this Cowboy, this man, this Patriot, has taken his last ride. He has carried his last burden and laid them at the feet of his Savior. He’s finally home. Where the grass is always plentiful, the cows are always fat, and the Constitution is always respected and protected. He wears a different hat now. Not a brown Stetson with dust on the rim… But a crown, shiny and beautiful and full of jewels.

And here, the country is divided. The dust has not settled. And I pray that it never does. We can NOT let this man go down quietly. WE THE PEOPLE need to not only remember, but make sure that everyone else remembers, as well…..

So, ride on, LaVoy. Your work here is done. It’s time for someone else to pick up the fight. Enjoy your new label, CHILD OF GOD… you have earned it…….

Like

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Kenny Daniel
Remove

Kenny DanielWhose words did he use? We want to know who told him what happened. Who first came up with the lie?

Like · Reply · 2 · 23 hrs
Rusty Baughman
Remove

Rusty BaughmanHe is in such double jeopardy now, livin in the twilight zone I think he’s gonna disappear.

Rusty Baughman
Remove

Rusty BaughmanHis “beacon’s been moved under moon and stars”.

Todd Phillips
Remove

Todd PhillipsMark McConnell was part of the set up..

Niki Curnow
Remove

Niki CurnowI knew he was a liar to begin with!!

Like · Reply · 1 · 23 hrs
Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Drag Link/Photos/Video HereDrop LinkDrop Photo/VideoDrop Photos
What’s on your mind?
Who are you with?

Remove

Remove

 

Remove

News Feed

IN the last 30-45 day’s I’ve had to be alot more aware of TROLLS; I”m not done cleansing but here’s a list of those I’ve rid myself of… perhaps this will save you some time too! You CAN block them BEFORE they show up!

Donna Hammond's photo.

Angry

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Chuck Handcock
Remove

Chuck Handcock Thanx for the heads up.

Mary Moss
Remove

Mary Moss Remember to put this public view on your timeline , so everyone who comes to your page for info can see and you don’t have to add anyone else.

Eva Casarez
Remove

Eva Casarez Yes cause I haven’t seen them posting. Have check again.

Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Daniel A. Erskine
Remove

Daniel A. Erskine Please note! The more these people get blocked, the more they will be seen as a problem to Facebook.

Eva Casarez
Remove

Eva Casarez Don’t know any of them !!!!

Marie Mills
Remove

Marie Mills Great job! Way to work together! You let me know if you ever need help Donna Hammond! I have a PHD in trolls and narcissistic psychopaths from experience and a dual degree in Psych. I have volunteered as an admin in DV n Narcissistic abuse groups for tSee More

Theresa Chieng
Remove

Theresa Chieng Thanks Donna

Like · Reply · 1 · 45 mins
Brenna Fischer
Remove

Brenna Fischer Sad to see a familiar name on there and know i had to block the same person when we have known each other since we were kids

Tammy Wagner
Remove

Tammy Wagner unsure emoticon

Cindy Wisner
Write a reply…
Bob Wells
Remove

Bob Wells Thank you so much…I have had some weird encounters…someone messaging me from France…but couldn’t friend them…I played for a while…you want to trust but there are crooks that are hirelings who will do anything for a buck and deception seems cruelly and morbidly funny to them.

John Shields
Remove

John Shields sharing

Racquel Schipman
Remove

Racquel Schipman This one was on the Montana page , I was able to link her back to her self employed business . Seriously would have never thought people would have nothing better to do with their time .

Racquel Schipman's photo.
Linda Schultz
Remove

Linda Schultz Seen, saved, thanks

Kimberly Lynn Osborne
Remove

Kimberly Lynn Osborne I got like 10 Fake facebook requests today already

Patricia Gaughan Rocha
Remove

Patricia Gaughan Rocha I had 2 so far today….

Like · Reply · 1 · 23 mins
Kimberly Lynn Osborne
Remove

Kimberly Lynn Osborne I’ve posted about this same thing before on my page..the influx of fake profiles have seemed to increased a lot the last 6 months..I’m concerned because its generally very obvious these are not americans because of the way they spell there words and sentences

PhiladelFia Collins
Remove

PhiladelFia Collins Thanks, Donna. You are still the only person I have added. I’ll share this.

Unlike · Reply · 1 · 9 mins

Remove

Noel Barber
Remove

Noel Barber Thanks.

Unlike · Reply · 1 · 5 mins

Remove

Cindy Wisner
Remove

Cindy Wisner what kind of thrill can they get from trollin’ i’ll never understand

Unlike · Reply · 1 · 3 mins
Rex Miller
Remove

Rex Miller Yep, these pieces of crap r becoming rampant .

Remove

Ferris Price
Remove

Ferris Price Trolls and molls thats why its best to really know who you are “friending”. If none of my friends know you then i dont want to know you

Unlike · Reply · 1 · 3 mins

Remove

Jeff Lozar
Remove
Steve Baiocchi
Remove

Steve Baiocchi Dont blame you for cleaning house. Just did that here. Time to clean clean the main quarters on Pennsylvania Av.

Remove

Dave Walker
Remove

Dave Walker Is aimee marie a troll? She hasnt shown me that yet.

Remove

Cindy Wisner
Write a comment…

Ultimate fail

Johnny Martinez's photo.

Johnny Martinez with Thara Tenney and 13 others.

LaVoy, you may have joined our Father in Heaven, but your Patriotic efforts will move forward and your glorious words are echoing across the entire nation! JUSTICE FOR LAVOY

MAY I PLZ USE THIS FOR A BOOK I’M WRITING, THX CINDY I heart emoticon YA’LL

The BLM had this looking like a pigsty until Duane cleaned it up to the proper condition that the BLM had should have had it in the first place. This is a historic bldg and this is where the BLM kept a lot of their garbage in. There was more upkeep and cleanup done at the refuge by the occupiers then the BLM had ever done out there.
The fed government is not good stewards of our land

Jan 18 Cleaning Out The Barn
Taking care of historic buildings at the Harney County Refuge To use this video for any purpose you must contact LaVoy Finicum’s wife, Jeanette Finicum, for …
youtube.com
DO U KNOW THE NAME OF THE LADY THAT COOKED & CLEANED, THX
Chat Conversation End

 

An emotionally gripping video – including a comparison of the words of government agents with their evil deeds during the assault on the truck…
youtube.com

31 mins ·

AddThis Sharing

·

Wow another Waco RUBY RIDGE FBI overstepping their authority taking aggression on peace full people exercising authority over States rights making the state police turn on its own citizens entrapment at every level. Levoy was assassinated with his hands up while the FBI made conditions right to cause a reaction. They drew first blood they fired first without the knowledge of the local boys. This is exactly what our MILITIA s are supposed to do but none of them have the balls to do it especially the oathkeepers they work for who pays them the most contractors for hire. With Jonnell CrowleyRichard Richard Edward Whitehead John H. Bundy III John Labas Jr. Jenna Kait Challice Finicum Finch Jeanette Finicum Neil Finicum Tean Finicum Angie Huntington Bundy Arden Bundy Bonnie Bundy Backus Carol Bundy Emili Bundy Shawna Cox Lies lies and more lies our own government committing treason on its own citizens this is bullshit. Where’s are the big mouthed constitution lawyer wake up ass holes this is exactly why justice Scalia was murdered the only judges with the balls to take on Washington tyranny. God help our country we no longer are a free country

See More

Investigators found that the shots that killed militant LaVoy Finicum were justified and
opb.org|By Amanda Peacher

Angry

 

Like

 

Love

 

Haha

 

Wow

 

Sad

 

Angry

Comment

Comments
Jonnell Labas
Remove

Jonnell Labas Lies lies and more lies our own government committing treason on its own citizens this is bullshit. Where’s are the big mouthed constitution lawyer wake up ass holes this is exactly why justice Scalia was murdered the only judges with the balls to take on Washington tyranny. God help our country we no longer are a free country

Like · Reply · 3 · 26 mins
Dorene Standish
Remove

Dorene Standish Thanking him for his pride in America and our Constitution. So sad America is so blind. Thanks to one Sheriff in Utah and Sheriff of Grant County some law enforcement understand the oath they took. I am sure there are others, but understand the coruption and don’t want to loose their jobs or serve time for murder?

Like · Reply · 2 · 22 mins
Maeva Clark
Remove

Maeva Clark Good grief. Legalized justified murder. Who are the real criminals here. Pitiful pitiful pitiful

Like · Reply · 1 · 14 mins
Sharon Zaabadick
Remove

Sharon Zaabadick Theyve got no choice to say that LaVoy was wrong. That he wasn’t correct in his judgement. Of course, we’d all be wrong again the FBI. They can’t do NO wrong!!

Mack Sorensen
Remove

Mack Sorensen Did anyone think that they would say anything but that it was justified. LaVoy is dead killed for no reason. There is not one government official who will say that it was not justified. If they did it would bring all holy hell down on all of them. Instead they will say it was justified and most Americans will believe it. They will believe a government official rather than their own eyes, It was not justified they did not need to shoot at the truck or even stop it. It was planned. Federal agents firing shots at an American citizen then covering it up. State Police killing the man, If it had been local Sheriffs there would have been a different outcome. Most people in America will not believe that.

Remove

Cindy Wisner
Cindy Wisner

heart emoticon

MAR5

Sat 10 AM · Kansas City, MO, United States
14 people interested · 9 people going
AND HE WAS NOT BURIED IN A CONCRETE BOX AFTER HIS MURDER JANUARY 28, 2016
MADE HISTORY IN 2016
MIKE Ladines was tagged in Marie McFadden‘s photo.
Photos of Marie McFadden and Mike Ladines
  • 'I post what I'm doing not to say "look at me" but to say "look what you can do". It's my hope and the hope of everyone I'm involved with to encourage others to do what we're doing in their own communities. #LFA #III%'
    John Smith

    8510

  • 'I am free because I say I am. It's time to be BOLD & FEARLESS in our resolve.  Long live the Republic!'
    John Smith

    849

You like What to do When Government Commits Treason!

be wise in actions but seek peace, but how, LaVoy was doing that

What to do When Government Commits Treason!
callmegav.com
The Peaceful man rises… Article 3:3 of the Constitution, the government of the United States  levying war against it’s people!
Public

LaVoy’s son Evan talking to radio station in Arizona today

LaVoy Finicum’s son Evan called Dingo on the 96.3 Real Country morning Revolution

In an enhanced video of the LaVoy Finicum shooting, it becomes much clearer that he was shot by one of the agents on the scene, but then after dropping his hands to where it appears he was shot, he then points to the agent that shot him just before he was shot a second time and finally with a third shot from behind.

Call of Duty Goddess posted this enhanced video with emotional commentary and you can see exactly what takes place.

Some are reporting that he was reaching for his weapon. However, pictures, such as the one below, show him with a pistol on his right thigh, while others show him with a shoulder holster. The FBI is claiming that he was reaching for a loaded 9mm handgun in the pocket of his jacket.

However, it makes no sense to know you are surrounded, get out of the vehicle and think you are going to take anyone out in a situation like that. The explanation of Call of Duty Goddess seems extremely plausible as you can see the one agent fire and then retreat.

Then Finicum drops his hands momentarily. If he was going for a gun, would he not be justified in doing so? He was shot unlawfully. However, it would seem more realistic that he was naturally responding to being shot.

What’s even more telling is that he clearly points to the agent that shot him before the agent in front of him shoots him.

Finally, upon turning, possibly hearing the man behind him, he is struck from behind, which takes him down.

Even after he is down you can see the red dots that are painted on his head and body just in case he moved.

FBI special agent Greg Bretzing refused to tell the media how many times Finicum was shot, though it was widely reported at first that there were only three shots.

Upon having time to look further at the video, the agents are clearly shooting at the truck as well, just as Victoria Sharp said. You can see the snow puff up as the bullets hit the vehicle. How many shots were taken, I can’t tell, but according to Sharp there were over one hundred.

I still think we need something closer than a drone video to determine conclusively what took place.

However, since the FBI has felt the need to release the “unedited” version of the video from the drone, there should not be a problem with releasing the dashcam videos, audio and any body cam video from agents. This will help the people to determine whether or not the shooting was justified. I’m not holding my breath for those videos and audio to be released, but they should be if there is nothing to hide.

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Advertisements

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

%d bloggers like this: