For Native American people, 1972 through 1976 is commonly referred to as the "reign of terror". During these years, Native people were subjected to terrorism beyond comprehension. It is easy to see where this terrorism stemmed from by examining a statement made by William Janklow , the Deputy Attorney General of South Dakota during this time. "The only way to deal with the Indian problem in South Dakota," Janklow said, "is to put a gun to American Indian Movement leaders' heads and pull the trigger." These types of ideas were held by many of the law enforcement officials working on, or near, the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation during the 1970's.
The American Indian Movement (AIM) was established to bring hope to the people. These men & women banded together to fight for treaty & land rights, religious freedom, and cultural survival. The author of the book "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse", Peter Mattheissen, states in his book that the warrior spirit has restored identity and pride to thousands of defeated people and inspired attempts to resurrect the dying language and culture.
The reign of terror began in 1972, when Richard (Dick) Wilson was elected Tribal Chairman with less than 20% of the vote from the Native people (but 100% support of the U.S. government). Native Americans began suffering atrocities at the hands of Wilson, his GOON squad (meaning Guardians of the Oglala Nation), and the FBI. Dick Wilson immediately began to misappropriate funds from the U.S. government to arm, equip, and pay a private army, also known as his GOON squad. The FBI was well aware of the GOON squad, and even helped train these individuals to "keep peace" on the reservation. The Justice Department, along with the BIA and the FBI as well, were all too eager to support this serviceable Indian who requested them to attack AIM members and offered the services of his own GOONs to do the job. And, although Wilson was repeatedly threatened with impeachment by his own Tribal Council (there were more signatures on one petition to impeach Wilson than people that had voted for him in the first place!) he still maintained his position.
It was during this time, however, that many younger Indians, with the help of AIM and their elders, began returning to their tradition and culture. There was still hope, but then the FBI quadrupled their forces on and near the reservation and the reign of terror was in full swing. By 1975, western South Dakota had the highest ratio of agents to citizens in the United States, and between 1972 and 1976, over 200 Aim members were assaulted or murdered. According to statistics, the violent death rate, which was based on documented political deaths, on the Pine Ridge Reservation was 170 per 100,000 people. This far exceeds Detroit, which was considered the "murder capitol of the world" for it's violently high death rate, who's death toll, during 1974, was 20.2 people per 100,000.
In June of 1975, at the request of tradition leaders, AIM members arrived at the Pine Ridge Reservation to set up a spiritual camp on the Jumping Bull Ranch to help protect people from the murders and the beatings.
It was on June 26, of 1975, that two FBI agents, Ronald Williams and Jack Coler, followed a red pick up truck onto the Jumping Bull property claiming to be in pursuit of Jimmy Eagle, a boy who had stolen a pair of used cowboy boots. The red pick up truck stopped and the passengers got out. No one is clear as to who fired first, but at approximately 11:50 am the first record of the firefight erupting was heard over the radio at FBI headquarters. When AIM members heard the gunshots they thought that they were under attack by the GOONs. AIM members rushed to the top of the hill and began firing to protect their elders, women and children who were housed in the area. By 12:30 pm, police reinforcements were coming from all directions, together with BIA personnel, FBI, white vigilantes, and local onlookers, and at least 5 road blocks to secure the area. The only people to get harmed in this shoot out were agents Coler and Williams and AIM member Joe Stuntz. The murder of Joe Stuntz has never been investigated, yet the deaths of the two agents launched the largest manhunt in FBI history.
On Sept. 5, 1975, approximately 100 agents in full combat gear, covered by 4 attack helicopters, surrounded and occupied the Running and Crow Dog residences on Rosebud, engaging in arrests and warrantless searches of both properties. Though many people were originally targeted, only four were indicted, Bob Robideau, Dino Butler, Jimmy Eagle, and Leonard Peltier. Robideau and Butler were tried in Cedar Rapids, Iowa before Judge Edward McManus. The jury ruled self defense and both defendants were acquitted on all charges. Noting the lack of evidence and significant amount of FBI misconduct, jury foreman Bolin stated about the government, "I think if those guys would go back and look objectively at the evidence…I don't think that they could come to any different conclusion."
Early on in the investigation it became clear that Leonard Peltier was the FBI's main target; a July 7, 1975 Teletype received years after his trial revealed that the government had planned "to develop information to lock Peltier into the case." After losing the Butler/Robideau trial all charges against Jimmy Eagle were dropped so that the "full prosecutive weight of the federal government could be directed against Leonard Peltier."
Leonard Peltier, feeling he would not get a fair trial in the US, fled to Canada. In 1976 he was fraudulently extradited back by the knowing use of false and contradictory affidavits signed by Myrtle Poor Bear, a woman with a log history of mental illness. Poor Bear later recanted stating that she had been threatened and coerced by the FBI into signing them.
After reaching conclusions unfavorable to the prosecution, Judge McManus was arbitrarily replaced by Judge Paul Benson. Judge Benson had a record of personal investment in Indian lands and a well known dislike for Native people. At trial, the FBI put forward an argument, said to be based on "fact", that stated that Williams and Coler had been killed by shots fired by a .233 caliber AR15 rifle, although there was never any tangible evidence shown to support this "fact". The only evidence that they produced was a single shell casing that was found in the trunk of Coler's car. From this the FBI testified that it could link the casing to the gun that Peltier allegedly used on June 26th. Four years later, the October 2, 1975 Teletype was released stating that the .233 casing was not identifiable with the alleged murder weapon. The second piece of evidence that was highly relied on was a red and white van which was ostensibly linked to Peltier. A van which mysteriously appeared during his trial while evidence of the red pick up truck originally pursued onto the ranch was ignored and withheld from the jury. Even today the radio communication of that pursuit is still being withheld.
Lynn Crooks, in his closing argument, stated this:
"I think my argument can be summed up in a very brief paragraph…We have proved the cold blooded, brutal murder of two human beings…We have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Leonard Peltier was responsible for these senseless, brutal, cowardly murders…we proved that he went down to the bodies and executed these two young men at pointblank range. Ladies and gentlemen, that's murder in the first degree."
In 1981, Leonard Peltier's attorney filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit which resulted in the release of some 12,000 pages of documentation. Another 6,000 pages were withheld under the guise of "national security." The receiving of the October 2 Teletype regarding the ballistics information led to the filing of an appeal before Judge Benson in 1982. ""Since certain documents obtained also revealed what appear to have been improper pretrial meetings between the prosecution, FBI, and Benson, the judge was simultaneously asked to remove himself from further involvement in the proceedings." Both requests were denied.
A new appeal was filed with the Eighth Circuit and on April 4, 1984, the appeals court reversed Benson's decision and ordered and evidentiary hearing on the ballistics evidence. The hearing was held in Bismarck, North Dakota in late October 1984. Although the FBI admittedly perjured themselves and the prosecution failed to explain the conflict between the evidence and statements made during Peltier's trial, Judge Benson ruled that Peltier's conviction would stand.
Not surprised , the defense team went back to the Eighth Circuit and in "oral arguments heard before the court on October 15, 1985, prosecutor Lynn Crooks was forced to abandon his flamboyant assertions made at trial. Instead, as Crooks now admitted, the government didn't really know who shot those agents. This he was willing to concede that the murder case conjured up against the defendant no longer existed." Almost a full year later, the court decided "We recognize improper conduct on the part of some FBI agents, but we are reluctant to impute even further improperties to them."
The judicial system had, once again, left Peltier with a double life sentence for crimes the evidence could not support. On October 5, 1987, the Supreme Court refused to review the case.
Judge Gerald Heaney, the Circuit judge who wrote the 1986 decision, later wrote the President requesting that something be done about the Leonard Peltier case because he felt that the FBI had used improper tactics in securing Peltier's extradition from Canada and in trying the case.
November 9, 1992 marker the final appeal for Leonard Peltier. The following statement was taken directly from the oral argument transcript. During these arguments prosecutor Crooks stated again that "we don't know who shot the agents." When the court asked "What do you mean by 'know'?" this followed:
Crooks: we did not have any direct evidence that one individual, as opposed to another, pulled the trigger.
Judge: That seems to me as quite significant, for it's one thing to say we don't know, but if all you're saying is we do not have any direct evidence that it was Mr. Peltier who shot them, that's quite a different thing because your whole case is based on circumstance evidence.
Despite the clear invitation for the judge for the government to say it proved Peltier fired the fatal shots by circumstantial evidence, government council replied with this:
Crooks: we did not prove it, what we argued to the jury was quite simply that this man was a guilty participant in a murder.
He later explained the government's theory as such:
We tried the case with the facts available. Period. The facts available did not give us direct evidence as to who did the coup - de - grace. They simply didn't. It wasn't argued simply because there was no direct evidence upon which we could make a factual argument. We argued inferences, but that's the same thing as saying that we had direct evidence that Mr. Peltier was the one who squeezed off the final rounds.
In the October 1986 decision, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Crook's assertions concerning this aiding and abetting theory, writing "We could have resolved this issue without great difficulty if the government had represented the case against Peltier on the theory that he was an aider and abetter, but this is not the government's theory. Its theory, accepted by the jury and the judge, was that Peltier killed two FBI agents at pointblank range."
July 7, 1993 brought the most recent decision from the Eighth Circuit. Once again, a denial. This decision rests on the following standards:
Arguments of misconduct either have been litigated before or should or could have been and that the government tried the case on alternate theories of close up murder, close up aiding and abetting, or long range aiding and abetting, thus completely abandoning and ignoring the conclusion of their own Circuit in two previous appeals. The court , in essence, has asked us to forget the reign of terror, the illegal extradition, the mental torture and coercion of witnesses, the perjury of the FBI agents, the withholding of exculpatory evidence, the fabrication of a murder weapon, and the concession by the government prosecutor that there is no real evidence against Leonard Peltier.
The outcome states that Leonard Peltier was tried on an "either/or" theory, though research of the case proves that this is completely false. He continues to serve twice his life in prison and persists in providing for his people encouraging education, health, and economic reform. The constitution should apply to all citizens. Why then does it not apply to Leonard Peltier?
If you would like more information on the Leonard Peltier case and things you can do to help, then please contact:
The National Headquarters of the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee
P.O.Box 583
Lawrence, KS. 66044 USA
Recent happenings and ways you can get involved!