Posted on 11/04/2006 12:16:33 PM PST by happinesswithoutpeace
As the Justice Department’s chief civil rights prosecutor, Deval Patrick made the controversial decision not to criminally prosecute an FBI sniper who shot and killed an unarmed woman as she held her infant daughter in her arms during a 1992 standoff in Ruby Ridge, Idaho.
The incident, in which U.S. Marshall William F. Degan of Quincy and the wife and son of white separatist Randy Weaver were killed during an 11-day standoff, is cited by experts as the spark that started the anti-government militia movement that exploded after the standoff in Waco, Texas, less than a year later. 1994, Patrick, the Democratic candidate for governor who was then assistant attorney general, concluded there was insufficient basis to prosecute FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi for shooting and killing 43-year-old Vicki Weaver. Horiuchi had testified that he opened fire on the woman’s husband and his friend, Kevin Harris, when he thought they were about to fire on an FBI helicopter.
Patrick made the recommendation despite a report by a task force assembled by Patrick’s boss, Attorney General Janet Reno, that found numerous problems with the FBI’s handling of the standoff, and called the protocol used by the FBI’s Hostage Rescue unconstitutional under the circumstances. The report referred the case to Patrick’s department to decide whether to charge Horiuchi. Aides to Patrick said he was unavailable for comment because he was preparing for last night’s debate. Former Justice Department spokesman Myron Marlin called the incident “a tragic one that occurred during the final months of the first Bush administration.”
“The Justice Department believed the critical element of willfulness necessary for a criminal civil rights prosecution could not be established beyond a reasonable doubt,” Marlin said in a statement to the Herald yesterday. “Such willfulness, or knowing, intentional use of unreasonable force could not be made out against the FBI agent.”
Patrick’s assessment, he noted, was“reaffirmed by a separate criminal investigative team.”
In 1995, however, a Senate subcommittee headed by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) found “simply no justification” for the shot Horiuchi took that killed Vicki Weaver and “missed the 10-month-old baby in her arms by less than two feet.”
“Horiuchi should have known that as he fired blind through the cabin door, he was shooting into an area which could well have contained Vicki Weaver and her two younger daughters,” states the report, which took no position on whether Horiuchi should have been prosecuted.
The decision not to prosecute was ripped by both conservative and liberal groups. “It was obscene,” said author James Bovard, an outspoken critic of federal officials’ handling of the case. “There was no need for the excessive force the FBI used in gunning down a mother holding her baby. ACLU Legislative Counsel Timothy Edgar said the incident was “the result of overzealous - and unchecked - federal power.”
Of course they will, conveniently omitting the fact that he was acquitted of that charge AND all the others against him, as no one could determine WHEN the additional 1/4" was cut off the shotgun. Most suspect it was removed AFTER the sale and delivery to the BATFag buyer, as their hook to get his "cooperation" as a snitch.
Rumor???
That's a known fact
LOL. You should have said "Uranus"
The dog was shot by the U.S. Marshals who were on the property illegally to start with. Then the younger boy was killed by a marshal, as well, and one of the marshals was shot by the family friend, whose name I forget at the moment. He was ALSO acquitted at trial for murdering the marshal.
When I read of these events I am reminded of Clancy's book "The Cardinal of the Kremlin."
Have you ever read that?
A general believes his motherland is run by a corrupt government that must be fought.....good story.
It's a shame about your friends in the Pentagon, which is a whole different kettle of fish than Ruby Ridge. The FACT is that Sammy Weaver and the dog were shot in the back by federal marshals, on the property without a warrant. Even the dog, as the autopsy showed, was shot in the back, the bullet going in through his butt. He had been called back by young Weaver and they were headed back up the hill when the MARSHALS started shooting. Harris, you recall, was ACQUITTED of killing the Marshal, as he was shooting in self-defense. Your mindless defense of these TRESPASSERS and KILLERS does not speak well of you at all.
For complete details, see post #62
Read and remembered, thanks!
I believe that govt helps shape national character and offers a framework through which a country develope its traditions, laws, etc.
When I read of these events I am reminded of Clancy's book "The Cardinal of the Kremlin."
Have you ever read that?
A general believes his motherland is run by a corrupt government that must be fought.....good story.
Haven't read it, but our govt is vastly different than the former USSR in nearly every respect.
The most troubling aspect in which we're becoming less and less different than they were is an over-reliance on a large centralized regulatory bureaucracy.
We will never be like they were. It isn't in the American character.
In the case of the Constitutional Republic, as given and envisioned by our Founders, you are incorrect. The INDIVIDUAL is who shapes national character and develops traditions. Government is ONLY there to protect the equal rights of all individual Americans and to do ONLY that which is prescribed and authorized by the constitution. Nothing more.
You need look no further than Europe to see the result of the type of government you are describing. Something which is abhorrent to the true American spirit.
I was referencing gov't in general -- all governments. I believe they do help shape national character, just as natural resources, geographic location/size size and history do. One way is by the amount of freedom they allow. So, if the American character isn't actively/aggressively shaped by govt -- then it is allowed to flourish under the freedoms provided by the Constitution.
I listened to the testimony of several members of the HRT to the Senate sub-committee investigating the incident. One of the snipers said something to this affect. "I heard the shot, I heard it hit Randy Weaver, and I heard the sound of the breath being knocked out of him"....
The reason they claimed they shot Randy and Vicki was.... "we thought they were about to shoot at the helicopter flying over the cabin"
Do you honestly think they could have heard the bullet strike Randy and the air leaving his body if there was a helicopter directly overhead?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.