FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum"
[ Last | Latest Posts | Latest Articles | Self Search | Add Bookmark | Post | Abuse | Help! ]

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.

Department of Justice Ruby Ridge Report

Government Miscellaneous
Source: USDOJ
Published: ~1995 Author: DOJ
Posted on 10/04/1999 17:31:52 PDT by djf

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RUBY RIDGE REPORT

Department of Justice Ruby Ridge Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Webmaster note: Throughout the document, you will see items [G,J]. This is something called the Garrity rule, and basically means they don't want to tell us.


Back to Table of contents
Forward to next section



Took me about 16 hours to index this report, it's all here. Yes, indeed, Randy Weaver was given the wrong date to appear...


1 Posted on 10/04/1999 17:31:52 PDT by djf
[ Reply | Top | Last ]

To: djf

Thankyou. I appreciate your efforts.

2 Posted on 10/04/1999 17:46:47 PDT by rack42
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

From Section III C:

1. If any adult male is observed with a weapon prior to the announcement, deadly force can and should be employed, if the shot can be taken without endangering any children.

According to the Dateline segment on Waco (shown about 3 wks ago), this was changed from the original ROE, by Commander Richard Rogers (also site cdr at Waco (and Ruby Ridge)), from "can shoot" to the "can and should".

3 Posted on 10/04/1999 17:49:10 PDT by katze
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

Took me about 16 hours to index this report, it's all here. Yes, indeed, Randy Weaver was given the wrong date to appear...

1 Posted on 10/04/1999 17:31:52 PDT by djf

I don't doubt it took that much time, and here is my thanks for your successful efforts.

4 Posted on 10/04/1999 17:50:51 PDT by katze
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

Lon? You out there, man? Do you see us?

During the Boer War, unofficially, the British Army had Rule 303. Translation: Shoot the troublemakers with the .303 British service rifle. The assasins within our government have derived their Rule 308.

I pray that law enforcement officers and officials will take time to read the Constitution before the end of the year. We will. The pepople will enforce the rule of law over Rule 308.

5 Posted on 10/04/1999 17:50:58 PDT by SevenDaysInMay
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

Thanks, great bookmark

6 Posted on 10/04/1999 18:02:02 PDT by flanew
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: katze

1. If any adult male is observed with a weapon prior to the announcement, deadly force can and should be employed, if the shot can be taken without endangering any children.

That's murder, pure and simple. Murder committed by the person who ordered it, and for the person who "followed orders". There is no legal defense for following illegal orders.

7 Posted on 10/04/1999 18:06:42 PDT by 300winmag
[ Reply | To 3 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

" As the result of our investigation, we have made seven broad recommendations. First, we recommend that all federal law enforcement officers be governed by a standard deadly force policy and that the Department of Justice be responsible for developing such a policy. in addition to specifying clearly the circumstances in which deadly force may be used, the policy should define the occasions in which special Rules of Engagement may be implemented and the process by which such rules should be approved. "

I've been told (the "new" recommendations were not released to the public)that the neew standard deadly force policy is exactly the same as the old policy. Something about "when you shoot, you shoot to kill".

As you might have suspected, there is some question whether when Lon shot Weaver and White, he was actually shooting to kill.

8 Posted on 10/04/1999 18:24:29 PDT by Ada Coddington (ACoddington@Compuserve.com)
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: SevenDaysInMay

" Lon? You out there, man? Do you see us?"

In a different era, Lon's co-workers would have invited him to go hunting with them.

9 Posted on 10/04/1999 18:27:50 PDT by Ada Coddington (ACoddington@Compuserve.com)
[ Reply | To 5 | Top | Last ]


To: SevenDaysInMay

Good handle. One of the best flicks ever made.

10 Posted on 10/04/1999 19:10:27 PDT by djf
[ Reply | To 5 | Top | Last ]


To: rack42

I can't read any more. This government is sick.

11 Posted on 10/04/1999 19:11:47 PDT by Nicholas James
[ Reply | To 2 | Top | Last ]


To: Ada Coddington

"We have concluded that the special Rules of Engagement in force at Ruby Ridge violated the Constitution of the United States. We also found that the poorly drafted and ambiguous rules created confusion among those who were obliged to make instantaneous, life and death decisions while attempting to obey the requirements of the rules. In hostage/barricade situations, law enforcement officers need a clear definition of the conditions under which deadly force may be employed. It is critical that law enforcement personnel have a common and clear understanding of the rules governing their conduct. Moreover, when special rules of engagement are necessary, established review and authorization procedures must be in place."

I'm not as angry about that part as I am about the part where "an unarmed mother nursing her infant literally had her jaw shot off and her head exploded by a high velocity bullet fired by a trained professional assassin"

12 Posted on 10/04/1999 19:23:37 PDT by djf
[ Reply | To 8 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

You did Good! At standard lawyer fees of $250.00/ hr.=$4000.00, not a bad days work. Thanks again.

13 Posted on 10/04/1999 19:33:04 PDT by constitution (HELP!!!SAVE ME!!!)
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

Excellent work!! Big Bump Kudos!

14 Posted on 10/04/1999 19:37:07 PDT by Registered (registered@aol.com)
[ Reply | To 12 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

Thank you for the dedicated effort that it took to compile this post.

I read the significant findings under the introduction heading. I found it to be a load of bull excrement. Is the rest of their report full of the similar lies?

15 Posted on 10/04/1999 19:40:46 PDT by Critter (jim1@javanet.com)
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: 300winmag

I hope that every police state assasin will occasionally think that when they see a glint of sunlight, it may have been reflected from the objective lense of a citizen's rifle scope. Thousands of gunnies taught well. Semper Fi. +

16 Posted on 10/04/1999 20:35:59 PDT by SevenDaysInMay
[ Reply | To 7 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

" I'm not as angry about that part as I am about the part where "an unarmed mother nursing her infant literally had her jaw shot off and her head exploded by a high velocity bullet fired by a trained professional assassin""

That section obliquely refers to the killing of Mrs. Weaver. What it is saying is that the shots at Randy Weaver and White were not intended to kill (a violation of existing FBI guidelines) but were intended to get Mrs. Weaver out in the open where Horiuchi could kill his intended target.

17 Posted on 10/05/1999 03:22:38 PDT by Ada Coddington (ACoddington@Compuserve.com)
[ Reply | To 12 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

bump for a later read....

18 Posted on 10/05/1999 09:52:04 PDT by technochick99 (jxb123@aol.com)
[ Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: djf

bump

19 Posted on 06/06/2001 14:47:04 PDT by Born in a Rage
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]

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.

[ Top | Latest Posts | Latest Articles | Self Search | Add Bookmark | Post | Abuse | Help! ]

FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC