Still smarting from the acquittals of Robideau and Butler, the U.S. government acknowledges that it took steps to prevent a similar outcome when Peltier went to trial in March 1977. "To address problems that impacted the Cedar Rapids trial," the FBI wrote, "the government asked for and received a sequestered jury, a gag order for lawyers and a pretrial ruling that the FBI could not be placed in trial unless the information offered related to a witness in the case."
In short, the FBI was trying to launch a preemptive strike to prevent the jury from hearing the kind of damaging testimony about its own alleged efforts to undermine AIM and other similar organizations that had cropped up in the Cedar Rapids trial. The way the FBI saw it, the ruling was a way of preventing the jury from becoming distracted by what the agency saw as a smokescreen.
To Peltier's supporters, however, it was just one more way the government managed to tilt the playing field in its favor. As Harbury puts it, "The court, at Mr. Peltier's murder trial, did not permit the jury to learn of the FBI's pattern and practice of using false affidavits and of intimidating witnesses in recent related cases. The jury was thus unable to properly evaluate the prosecution witnesses' testimony."
"Equally disturbing are the numerous discrepancies regarding the key vehicle in the case. Agents Williams and Coler had radioed that they were chasing a red pickup truck, which they believed was transporting a suspect. The chase led to the Jumping Bull Ranch and the fatal shootout. At trial, however, the evidence had changed to describe a red and white van, quite a different vehicle, and which not coincidentally was more easily linked to Mr. Peltier," Harbury wrote.
What's more, Harbury wrote, "There was no witness testimony that Leonard Peltier actually shot the two FBI agents. There is no witness testimony that placed Mr. Peltier near the crime scene before the murders occurred. Those witnesses placing Peltier, Robideau and Butler near the crime scene after the killing were coerced and intimidated by the FBI."
Finally, Harbury writes, the government boosted its case by releasing only a fraction of the documents related to the case and its investigation, while withholding thousands more that she and other Peltier supporters contend could have been used by Peltier's defense team.
The government has insisted that the documents, many of which remain sealed to this day, contain sensitive national security information. But Harbury and others insist the government has less noble motives for withholding the documents, even today.
"Some 6,000 FBI documents are still being withheld in their entirety from Mr. Leonard Peltier, as are some 5,000 partial documents," Harbury wrote. "There is clearly no current reason to fear national security risks, or the disruption of ongoing investigations. Moreover, based on the critical nature of those documents which have been disclosed, such as the ballistic tests reports, it is reasonable to conclude that the remaining files would contain evidence that would help to establish Mr. Peltier's innocence. This situation violates his rights to access to the courts and to a fair trial."
On April 18, 1977, five weeks after his trial began, Leonard Peltier was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder. He was sentenced to serve two consecutive life sentences.
In most cases, that would have been the end of the story.
email
print
default
increase
decrease
