Peak Forestry
Peak Forestry

So what really happened in Malheur?

Since the government THINKS they have the power to stop information, I am sharing it to prove them absolutely wrong. A man was murdered while non-violently protesting our overbearring government. We must come together and change our system to never allow this to happen again.

 

Prossecute the Oregon State Police Officers who shot LaVoy Finicum in the back.

 

Reposted from the blog of Gary Hunt @ http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/

 

Free Speech and Assembly v. Conspiracy

tape in jail
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
August 24, 2016

The Preamble to the Constitution begins with “We the People”.  The reason for such an introduction is perhaps a bit more intricate than most understand it to be.  There are two reasons for this introduction.  The first being that the Articles of Confederation and the government created by it, were created by the states.  It was a “perpetual union“, and could not dissolve itself.  However, going to the ultimate source, the People, they had every right to reject that government for one created by themselves.  The right is clearly spelled out in the Declaration of Independence, to wit:

That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these endsit is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

The People’s authority then is embodied in the document that had, just a decade earlier, justified separation from British rule.  It was called into play, once again, since strife and turmoil were beginning to undermine the relationship between the states under the Articles of Confederation — a government created simply to unify the fight for Independence.

The second reason is based upon who was to approve the Constitution.  Most of the states had created new governments, via their respective constitutions.  However, the constitutions, in most states, were created and approved by the legislative body.  Each had an amendment provision, though that provision allowed the successive legislatures to change the constitution through legislative enactment.  This meant that the constitutions were an ineffective safeguard against usurpation.  By the time of the Philadelphia Convention, most states had resorted back to the people for both ratification and amendment to their constitutions.  This concept had permeated the legislative bodies, including that Convention — and the authority of the People, though through conventions, the sole source of authority.  The government could not remove the constraints placed upon it by the Constitution.

 

 

Will Kullman (Nighthawk) #2

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
December 30, 2016

I have been contacted by a number of people who were contacted by Kullman, after the “Burns Chronicles No 51 – William “Will” Kullman (Night Hawk)“went out. His line to them is that I (Hunt) am a BATF agent. Heck, that accusation goes back to 1993, and in all of that time, nobody has been able to provide any substance to that accusation. That just shows how cheap talk is.

I have also been provided a copy of a text conversation from back in September, about the time the Portland Trial, Ammon Bundy, et al, began. So, we will begin with that text conversation. I have indicated Kullman’s comments with K and the other participant as S. This discussion took place before and during the trial that began on September 7, 2016.

SEP 4 AT 10:08 PM

K:  I’m going to Portland for the Bundy trials. Will you be there

SEP 21 AT 5:46 PM

S:  Dude… People are freaking out your like McConnell… is this true?

K:  Excuse me?

S:  Ya. Everyone is telling me you were buddy buddy with him and you mysteriously left last week after they showed your picture. I’m not saying it that’s not me… it paranoia all over again… someone said you are testifying for the prosecution. Blah blah blah… figured you would want to know

K:  First and foremost before the Bundys before the trials before any of this Mark and I Marine brothers just like John Ritzheimer and our bond is before everything else. Period. I have no idea what you mean by showing my picture I left on Thursday afternoon because I had trial myself here in Washington Friday morning for my son in custody. I’m not testifying for anybody and I risked a lot going to the courthouse, and because I was in Portland for a week and didn’t see my son before my trial I end up losing custody of my son so I sacrificed to be there don’t lump me in with Jason Blomgren just because he squealed like a pig.

Note that he mentions Ritzheimer, claiming that their “bond is before everything else.” This was brought up in ” Burns Chronicles No 51 – William “Will” Kullman (Night Hawk)“, when Kullman told Peltier to tell Ritzheimer, “Semper Fi!”

Now, we will jump to the end of the next discussion, which took place on Facebook. The initial discussion began on the day that LaVoy Finicum was murdered, January 26, and concluded on the next day. The conversation picks up again on December 28, 2016. It is this last portion that we will begin with. This is the day that the first Kullman article was published.

8:23 pm [December 28, 2016]

Friend:  Not sure what is going on but you are being tagged in the Patriot community as an informant against the refuge guys.  Outpost of Freedom has evidence and has written an article against you.  What the hell is going on?  I trusted you

8:37 pm

Kullman:  I’m not sure.  I was just told of it.  And haven’t finished reading the article myself

I don’t know how they would come to that conclusion, I’m one of the biggest patriots in this state and make it known because I’m proud of who I am.

8:39 pm

Friend:  I’ve been hit up by the armchair warriors stalking my page that keep pming me telling me how terrible I am that we are “friends” on fb…but I can’t find your name on my list.  Strange.  Gary Hunt called you for your input but you hung up on him.  What the hell is going on?

Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 52 – Will Kullman (Nighthawk) #2’ »

Tags: Ammon BundyBurns OregoncopsFBIhammondHarney CountyHonorinformantsMoral Valuespatriots
Category: Articles  |  1 Comment

Burns Chronicles No 51 – William “Will” Kullman (Night Hawk)

December 28, 2016, 1:25 pm

Burns Chronicles No 51
William “Will” Kullman (Night Hawk)

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
December 28, 2016

Jon Ritzheimer had put out a call for more people to come to the Refuge, shortly after the occupation on January 2, 2016.  Many people who supported the effort being made by Ammon Bundy and the others resent that message.

On January 3, Will Kullman contacted Maureen Peltier (SSG Moe).  Peltier was one of those who had passed the message on.  His first contact with Peltier shows that he was from Lake Stevens, Washington and that he was Founder of “Kullman Combat Organization”.  Some of the text messages indicate his desire to help:

“I wanna come down to Oregon to help.  What do I need to bring and when is the best time to come?”

Is there an armed militia that is doing security like we did at Sugar Pine and Bundy?  Just wondering if I should bring a weapon.

He then stated that he “had a team ready to go…”  And, then asked for a contact for when he got there.  However, when he arrived in Burns, he was alone.

He knew that Ritzheimer was a Marine, so he sent the message:

“I will be there to help him.  Tell him a fellow Marine is on his way to help him.  Tell him I said “Semper Fi.”

On January 6, as he entered Harney County, he relayed messages through Peltier, announcing his approaching the Refuge.  At 8:33 PM, he was driving in fog about 16 miles out from the Refuge.  Then, at 10:56 pm, he reported to Peltier that he had arrived and that he “just met up with Ryan.”  (Not sure if it was Payne or Bundy, as both were present at the time.)

“Semper fi”, short for “semper fidelis”, is the Marine Corps motto, Always faithful — that Marines will always be faithful to the Corps and other Marines.  Both Ritzheimer and Kullman were Marines, though Kullman was more than willing to turn against his fellow Marine.

January 7, the day after Kullman arrived, he texted:

“You know there’s only maximum 40 of us here…  Not as many as before.  Get the word out.  They are cutting power to the Refuge.”

Peltier questioned his going public with that sort of information and told Kullman that such information should only come out from the leadership.  Peltier was beginning to have questions about Kullman’s assertiveness and assuming the authority to speak for the Refuge.

Burns Chronicles No 50 – Informants – What to do About Them #2

December 25, 2016, 7:07 pm

Burns Chronicles No 50
Informants – What to do About Them #2

Mark McConnell
Merry Christmas, Mark

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
December 25, 2016
Merry Christmas, Mark McConnell

The matter of informants, and the government’s efforts to protect the names of those who have snuck into our midst is a denial of justice and to some degree, the Sixth Amendment right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”

Now, we can look at what the government wants us to believe. We can also look at what common sense dictates that the Framers of the Constitution meant. Just because a person doesn’t take the stand in court, when that person has provided information to the government, upon which the government builds its case, he has witnessed against the accused. The defendants, then, had every right to confront that “witness”, as he is privy to what he saw, what he heard, and what he said to the government. He is as much a part of the case against the defendant as the person who takes the stand, takes an oath, and testifies. Quite often, he is the justification for a search or arrest warrant to be issued, or a criminal indictment to be brought, before the court.

However, when that ‘witness’ is hidden from the defendant, the defendant is denied information that may aid him in a proper and fair defense. In some cases, their testimony might provide exculpatory evidence, testimony that might prove his innocence, that would undermine the contrived case made by the government.

With the recent trial of Ammon Bundy, et al, we can begin to put together a picture of the injustice and the dishonesty of the government’s pretext for hiding such “witnesses.”

We will begin with a partial trial transcript of the trial on October 17, 2016:

THE COURT:

I would like to start first with Ms. Harris’s motion with respect to the identity of a witness. [Some of] the defendants have subpoenaed, it’s Docket No. 1443, And it is really a subset of the larger issue raised both by Ryan Bundy in previous filings and by Ammon Bundy in his motion to compel 1423. Before, I received Ms. Harris’ filing, which I only received this morning about 7:00 a.m. it showed up in my system, I had emailed to the parties my preliminary conclusions having reviewed, in camera, the unredacted reports related to the so-called CHSs confidential human sources, 15 different individuals, 112 reports, and I conveyed in that email to the parties that I have compared the redacted to the nonredacted reports and according to the applicable standard, did not find any basis to disclose the identity of those 15 confidential human sources. I observed to the parties that as I compared the redactions from the unredacted material, I really didn’t find any substantive significance. The redactions primarily looked to me as necessary to protect the identity of the informant, and so with respect to that general review, I conveyed to the parties my intention was to deny the motion generally.

Then came in Ms. Harris’s motion on behalf of Ms. Cox with respect to a very particular one of those 15 confidential human sources, identified in her motion as number two, as to whom I have the redacted and unredacted materials. That was one person’s records I went through.

The motion indicates that the defendants have found the actual CH#2 who was known to the — who went by an alias, according to this motion, of John Killman. K-I-L-L-M-A-N. And so the motion goes on to argue why it’s relevant, first of all, for the defendants to call this person whose alias is John Killman and to introduce evidence from his personal knowledge of observations he made at the refuge.

And I presume defendants already know his true name in that they — Ms. Harris tells me in this filing that he’s been subpoenaed in his, is physically present, and needs to testify first thing because of other issues in his life.

We can see that the identification of the informants is a primary concern of Judge Anna Brown. Next to speak is one of the Government attorneys.

Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 50 – Informants – What to do About Them #2’ »

Tags: Ammon BundyBurns OregonConstitutioncourtsFBIgovernmentHarney CountyinformantsjurylawMoral Valuessupreme Court
Category: Articles  |  9 Comments

Burns Chronicles No 49 – Thomas S. Dyman (Tom Dyman)

December 22, 2016, 8:24 pm

Burns Chronicles No 49
Thomas S. Dyman (Tom Dyman)

Tom Dyman at 2011 hearing

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
December 22, 2016

Thomas S. Dyman was considered for a Second Tier position in Operation Mutual Defense (OMD).  The structure of OMD had three tiers.  The First Tier is the Advisory Board.  The Second Tier is those who could assist in research; webpage management, specialty skills, or other capabilities that would work with the Advisory Board.  The Third Tier would be those recruited by the Second tier to assist them, though they would not be under the Advisory Board.

Being recommended by Ryan Payne, he had to fill out an application.  In the application, he admits that he had a criminal record and refers to a background check.  OMD never received the background check.

A search resulted in finding at least one criminal charge against Dyman.  He was arrested in 2011 for having taken his children from his first wife, back in 1995.  The children had become adults, and apparently the charges were dropped.

Dyman now lives in Williston, North Dakota and has a contracting business, Dyman Construction, LLC.

Dyman’s application was submitted to OMD on November 1, 2015, though the application is signed and dated on 10/29/16.  We have to wonder what his intentions were in responding to Payne’s request, since his first report as an informant (CS) was dated November 3, 2015.

That report was dated November 3, 2015 and began with a copy of an article on the Hammonds that had been posted on bundyranchblogspot.  Then, he began reporting on Payne’s plans.

xxxx Payne told multiple CHS’s that he and Ammon Bundy were meeting on the morning of 11/4/2015 and driving to Oregon to meet directly with the Hammonds.  The purpose of the trip was to convince the Hammonds to take a stand against the federal government, and accept OMD and militia-related assistance in preventing their incarceration. Payne indicated he and Ammon Bundy were traveling largely at the insistence of Cliven Bundy, who has been pushing Payne to take additional militia-related actions like the one he led in Bunkerville in 2014. Payne and Ammon Bundy also plan on meeting with the local Sheriff in an attempt to convince him to support their resistance and aid in the effort. They may meet with other local officials, such as County Commissioners as well.

Payne stated that he felt obligated to act in defense of the Hammonds even if they do not request OMD’s assistance. Payne compared the situation to preventing a suicidal man from killing himself. Payne has suggested that if the Hammonds refuse to make a stand at their ranch, OMD should lead a “dynamic action” against the facility receiving them (presumably a prison or U.S. Marshals Service facility) to make it impossible for the Hammonds to turn themselves in.

It should be noted that OMD has recorded all of its Advisory Board meetings where the Hammond situation has been discussed. Payne xxxx and Ammon Bundy intend to record their meeting with the Hammonds, as well as an OMD meeting regarding the matter on Thursday November 5.

Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 49 – Thomas S. Dyman (Tom Dyman)’ »

Tags: Ammon BundyBundyBurns OregondemonizationFBIgovernmentHarney CountyHonorinformantsMoral Valuespatriots
Category: Articles  |  4 Comments

Burns Chronicles No 48 – Robert “Rob” Seever (R.W. Seaver) #2

December 20, 2016, 4:10 pm

Burns Chronicles No 48
Robert “Rob” Seever (R.W. Seaver) #2

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
December 20, 2016

Rob Seever was the name and spelling that I was given in my first article on Seever. I was told, at the time, that he had helped to expose a law enforcement officer in Washington or Oregon. I had the wrong spelling of Seaver’s name, no name of the officer, and unsure of the location, I was unable to substantiate that claim.

However, my first article led to contact by two people with information applicable to Robert W. Seaver. So, we will first discuss Seaver’s activities dating back, at least, to 2009.

The Willamette Weekly published an article on October 13, 2009. The article is titled, “The Ice Man Weepeth – A Portland cop denies a new video’s accusations of Nazism“. The allegations made against Central Precinct Captain Mark Kruger by Seaver are lengthy, and include dressing in Nazi uniforms, posting a plaque above the II-205 honoring five World War II German soldiers, and other claims demonizing Kruger.

From that article, “Seaver, a former legal aide with the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office, claims he first came forward against Kruger six years ago to make amends for his own racist past.”

Seaver also posted a YouTube video he had made to demonize Kruger. The video was removed by YouTube after complaints of violations were submitted.

There is a note at the end of the article that provides even more insight into the character of Robert Seaver. I haven’t researched the accuracy, though I would suppose that the Willamette Weekly would not have published it – if they hadn’t verified that accuracy.

FACT:

In the late 1980s, Seaver fell in love with Diane Downs, who was serving a life sentence for shooting her three children in 1983, killing one. Seaver plotted to spring Downs from prison, then testified against her in 1990.

So, we can see that Seaver will go after someone he disagrees with “tooth and nail”. That appears to be the case in his targeting of Corey Lequieu, in that Seaver didn’t agree with what Ammon Bundy and the others were doing by occupying government property.

Burns Chronicles No 47 – Robert “Rob” Seever

December 19, 2016, 3:38 pm

Burns Chronicles No 47
Robert “Rob” Seever

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
December 19, 2016

Rob Seever joined a start up militia in Fallon, Nevada, started by Corey Lequieu in January 2015.  He had been a reserve deputy in Yamhill County and a clerk of a District Attorney in Washington, before moving to Nevada.  He met Lequieu through Modern Militia Movement (MMM).  Lequieu and Seever became close friends over the following months.

Lequieu had been active with Operation Mutual Aid (OMA), an organization created by Jerry Bruckhart and Ryan Payne.  Many of those who participated in discussions appended “OMA” to their Facebook names and otherwise express their commitment to what OMA stood for.

Among those OMA supporters were Robert Beecher (the Demonization of Robert Beecher) and Kevin “KC” Massey (Update #1 on K. C. Massey).  The government targeted both of them, and both are currently serving prison terms.  It seems that the OMA membership list may have become a hit list for the FBI.

When I first spoke with Lequieu, he said that if Seever were an informant, he would have turned “after he came home from Burns, in December 2015”.  However, after I provided Lequieu some of the information from the 1023 forms (CHS Reporting Documents), he realized that Seever had started informing much earlier.  Seever’s first report was filed on November 22, 2015.  He begins his first report with the text of a message that he sent to Ammon Bundy:

“Thanks for the update.  I have been following what is going on with the Hammond’s and it is truly awful. I am a native Oregonian and a former reserve deputy (Yamhill County, OR); I am also a member of the OathKeepers. I will be contacting Sheriff Ward tomorrow and if necessary I am more than willing to travel to Burns. Enough is enough. Just give me the word and I’ll be there.

I appreciate your helping the Hammond’s and this is something I definitely want to be a part of if any help is needed. You are welcome to contact me at anytime.

God bless you,”

He follows that with:

I provided my name, address, and phone number.

xxxx I responded in this manner to Ammon Bundy due to our conversation about my being sent in to a situation, where Brian Rapolla would likely be present.

Brian Rapolla may possibly be Brandon Rapolla, OathKeepers.  No explanation as to why he might be concerned about Rapolla’s presence.

His next report was filed on December 14, 2015.  It indicates that he “has reported reliably in the past”, which would probably include more informing prior to the November 22 report.

CHS, who has reported reliably in the pastadvised that Cory Lequieu told CHS that he would be taking his AR-15 with him when he goes to Oregon in support of the Hammonds.

Corey Lequieu is a convicted felon and Seever was fully aware of that fact.

Burns Chronicles No 45 – Mark McConnell #2

November 29, 2016, 11:05 pm

Burns Chronicles No 45
Mark McConnell #2

mm-on-border-2016-2

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 30, 2016

I have obtained some additional information on Mark McConnell that will be of interest to all.  After my last article, “Mark McConnell“, it seems that McConnell kept saying that the information was readily available.  He never really addressed whether he was an informant, or not.  He simply sidestepped the issue of the role he played.

So, let’s separate the issues between what he said and whether he was an informant.  To do so, we simply look to the Court record and see what transpired, on two separate occasions, during the trial of the United States of America v. Ammon Bundy, et al.  The verdict was not guilty on all but one count.

From the rough draft transcripts of the trial, September 21, 2016.  Mr. Gabriel is one of the prosecuting attorneys.  Beckert is an Oregon State Police officer.  Mr. Mumford was Ammon Bundy’s attorney.  Yu will not that the government prosecuting attorney intentionally outed McConnell as a government informant.  I will leave the reader to speculate as to why they would do this.

GABRIEL: Your Honor, Jeremiah Beckert from the Oregon State Police. He will testify to the stop of the Jeep that Ammon Bundy and Mark McConnell and Brian Cavalier were traveling in.

* * *

Mr. Gabriel: So I want to direct your attention to the evening of January 26th of this year, 2016.

A.  Okay.

Q.  Were you a part of a traffic stop on a brown Jeep?

A.  Yes, I was.

Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 45 – Mark McConnell #2’ »

Tags: Ammon BundyBundyBurns OregoncopscourtsFBIgovernmentHarney CountyHonorinformantsjuryMark McConnellMoral Valuespatriots
Category: Articles  |  Comment

Burns Chronicles No 44 – Mark McConnell

November 25, 2016, 9:10 am

Burns Chronicles No 44
Mark McConnell

mm-wo-cap

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 25, 2016

I first interviewed Mark McConnell back in August 2015 That interview was in regard to Parris Frazier and his effort to steal cartel drugs and sell them (Arizona Misfits – A Bad Operation Gone Worse).  McConnell seemed to have an extraordinary knowledge of some of the facts surrounding that incident, which was quite useful in researching for that story.  It never occurred to me, at the time, that this knowledge would have been extremely beneficial to law enforcement, leading up to the bust.

The Criminal Complaint that lead to the arrest of Frazier and his cohorts began with the government putting an undercover employee (UCE) in a position provide access to Frazier to make the government’s plans to set Frazier up for the bust.  This scenario omits what led up to the bringing in the UCE, so there was a substantial part of the story that was missing.  It is quite possible that they chose not to mention a confidential human source (CHS) that provided the background that led to the setup of Frazier.  Or, possibly, any such report was filed on form 302, an “Investigation Report”.

Let’s move forward to the events that occurred in Burns, Oregon, this past January.  During the trial, the government, for whatever reason, outed McConnell as a CHS.  In every other instance of a CHS being involved in spying on the occupiers, this would include nine who were at the Refuge and six who were not, the government has taken pains to conceal their identity.

This would lead one to conclude that they just wanted to wipe their hands clean of any association with Mark McConnell — to make him an outcast in both the government and patriot sides.  What other reason could exist for intentionally expose just this single informant?  Could it be his arrogance and air of superiority in dealing with his handler?

Many had determined that McConnell was an informant, early on.  However, in an effort to find verification, I have interviewed McConnell 3 more times since LaVoy Finicum was murdered on January 26.  The first was on January 30, as he was driving back to Arizona after having his vehicle returned to him.  My purpose was simply to find out what happened from the first stop to his release, that evening.

That interview was much different from the video that was posted on YouTube where he talked about LaVoy rushing the Oregon State Police (OSP) officers.  He had learned his lesson and wouldn’t claim that he saw Ryan get out of the LaVoy’s truck, only what Ryan told him, when they were placed on the ground together.  And, he made clear that all he would say was what he saw, or heard.  This interview was straightforward.  The details he gave were consistent with what has subsequently been confirmed by others.

My next interview, on May 16, was an effort to find something that would support the accusations that he was an informant.  Now, obviously, getting such a “confession” is nearly impossible.  However, often clues come out that would support such a conclusion.  McConnell said that there was a meeting on the Saturday, before the shooting, Brandon Curtiss, McConnell, Booda (Brian Cavalier) and Ammon had a meeting and Curtiss and McConnell explained that was over three hundred FBI agents in the area.  Then, the night before the shooting, he had tried to talk the people out of going to the meeting at John Day.  However, he was willing to drive to John Day and make sure that Ammon was in his Jeep.

On October 10, after McConnell was outed as an informant, I spoke with him, again.  The only interesting point in this interview was the McConnell said that the occupation was a “criminal enterprise”.  A rather interesting statement from one who participated to the extent that he did.  This would raise a question of motivation as to why he participated in such an enterprise, at least as an accessory, unless he had a reason, and immunity, to do so.  Here is what he told me (from my notes of the conversation):

He spent three nights at the Refuge, the second trip.  He could not find a motel room.  He did not agree with the occupation.  He called it lies and bullshit.  He also claimed that Payne and Joker J (Jason Blomgren) had given me [Hunt] money to secure supplies, listing pipes and pipe caps, stating, “That’s not what the statements I have found said.

Burns Chronicles No 43 – Terri Linnell (Mama Bear) #2

November 22, 2016, 4:46 pm

Burns Chronicles No 43
Terri Linnell (Mama Bear) #2

terri-2-reports
These are side-by-side thumbnails of the un-redacted and redacted versions of the same report.

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 22, 2016

My initial article on informants was “Terri Linnell (Mama Bear)“.  That article was written because Terri had contacted me prior to testifying in the Portland trial of the first seven defendants.  The article was based solely on information provided to me, not what was reported to the government.  In my subsequent articles, I have since obtained redacted versions of the “CHS Reporting Documents”, and am now able to provide insight into what Terri reported.

What Terri reported during her role as an informant has not been made public, though some have expressed a concern as to what she said and what might be damaging to the defendants.  As Terri claimed in her statement in the above linked article, her job was, primarily, to keep and eye on six people —  Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, Jon Ritzheimer, Blaine Cooper, Ryan Payne, Pete Santilli, and Joe O’Shaughnessy.  So, from those reports that have exemplified the role of informants, following is the role that Terri played.

It must be understood that all of these reports were based upon telephone conversations, as described by the case agent.  They are not necessarily the words spoken by the informant, rather the interpretation by the case agent.

The first report is dated January 14, 2016.  “(omitted)” indicates omitted by me for privacy of individual.  “XXXX” indicates redacted portion.

XXXX CHS advised TIM DAVIS’ phone, bearing telephone number (541) (omitted), is being used by multiple people at MNWR due to the poor cell phone reception in the area.

CHS stated that everyone at MNWR has a job to do and supplies including gas, food, and water are unlimited. CHS advised that even if the electricity was shut off, everyone would be fine.

CHS has seen at least 30 individuals at MNWR and approximately six are women. XXXX An embedded media representative from Direct TV is also present at MNWR.

An individual known as “JUDGE,” who is sovereign in nature, has two people with him: FNU LNU, and MARSHALL LNU. CHS believes JUDGE is the major influence behind BUNDY’s continued occupation on MNWR. JUDGE stayed the night on the refuge for the first time on January 13, 2016.

CHS stated that there is a rumor going around that the Fire Marshal in Burns, Oregon, resigned because he caught two FBI agents, who were posing as militia members, breaking into the National Guard Armory (NFI).

CHS advised there is a BBQ dinner on January 14, 2016, in the kitchen area at MNWR.

Her next report was on January 19, 2016.  In the file I obtained, there is only one un-redacted report.  However, there is also a redacted version of that report.  The following is the un-redacted report, with all of the pertinent information in place.

Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 43 – Terri Linnell (Mama Bear) #2’ »

Tags: Burns OregoncourtsdemonizationFBIgovernmentinformantsMoral Valuespatriots
Category: Articles  |  4 Comments

Burns Chronicles No 42 – Fabio Minoggio (John Killman)

November 20, 2016, 7:21 pm

Burns Chronicles No 42
Fabio Minoggio (John Killman)

facebook-head-shot

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 20, 2016

John Killman”

For the sake of this article, I will use the name that those at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (MNWR) knew him by, John Killman.  However, his real name is Fabio Minoggio, from Switzerland, and currently living in Las Vegas, Nevada, or northwestern Arizona.

There is little information in his Fabio Minoggio Facebook page, though it appears that he was born in Pallanza, Italy.  He claims to still live in Locarno, Switzerland.  He may have been born January 1, 1971, as implied by a date shown on the John Killman Facebook page.

At this point, we only have what he said to the defense attorneys, when asked why he went to the refuge.  He told them, “I am in this because of my love of gun safety,” according to the lawyers’ notes.  He also said he didn’t want to miss a “moment in history.*” This claim doesn’t bear fruit, since, while on the witness stand, in response to a question about expenses, he said “I was going into harm’s way, so I had to buy ballistic vests”.  From whom did he sense a threat?

The Prosecution has refused to identify him as an informant.  The judge then told the FBI that if he lied on the stand, they had an obligation to point out any such lies.

Whether he contacted the FBI and volunteered, or was contacted by the FBI, we may never know.  I have tried calling Minoggio, but he “is not accepting calls at this time”, in a recorded message at the number that was initially used to contact him to testify.

How he was found and subpoenaed to testify is another interesting aspect of this story.  After Jeff Banta testified about a guy with a French accent had come to the Refuge and started training people in various military activity, such as team combat, team movements as a group, evacuating friendlies from a car, hand-to-hand combat, and firearms safety.  He had that French accent and was sort of an anomaly, compared to the others who had come to the Refuge.

This began raising questions.  The government, in discovery, had provided 129 “CHS Reporting Document” reports, constituting 230 pages, though they were so heavily redacted that there was no way to identify, without a bit of sleuthing, just who the informant making the reports were.  However, among those who had met “Killman”, someone had obtained his phone number.

At this point, Neil Wampler’s attorney, Lisa Maxfield and Shawna Cox’s standby attorney, Tiffany Harris, began pursuing an intensive search for the illusive John Killman.  A reverse look-up of the phone number showed the phone registered to Fabio Minoggio.  Once others confirmed that Minoggio’s Facebook picture (above) was Killman, it was a matter of finding him and getting him on the stand, having no idea what his testimony might be.  It was a long shot, but having ferreted out an informant just might be sufficient to persuade the jury that things were not just as the Prosecution had claimed.

What made the effort worthwhile is the fact that the Prosecution had already shown a short video Burns-Pieter_video_2016-01-24–16-31-39.mp4 at least four times, during their presentation to the jury.  That video, though only 29 seconds long, was, in the eyes of the jury, suggestive of the violent intent of the occupiers.  If the video could be considered in the proper light, perhaps that would be a major point of consideration by the jury.

Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 42 – Fabio Minoggio (John Killman)’ »

Tags: Burns OregoncourtsdemonizationFBIgovernmentHonorinformantsjurylawMoral Values
Category: Articles  |  Comment

Burns Chronicles No 41 – Dennis Dickenson (Dennis Jones)

November 16, 2016, 6:51 pm

Burns Chronicles No 41
Dennis Dickenson (Dennis Jones)

dennis-dickenson
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
October 16, 2016

On October 11, 2015, the initial Operation Mutual Defense (OMD) Advisory Board (AB) held their first meeting. Each meeting had an agenda and the AB members agreed to record the telephonic meetings, for the record. The recordings were then place in a Dropbox folder, accessible only to the AB members. There was also a private mail-list group set up, again restricted only to AB members.

The AB was comprised of five members. The only member that was known only by one other member, Ryan Payne, was a retired military officer named Dennis Roy Dickenson. Dickenson had endeared himself to Ryan when he was going to fly up to Montana on April 10, 2014. The meeting never occurred, as Ryan had left for the Bundy Ranch on April 7.

Mr. Dickenson had provided his DD-214, as was required of all members of the AB who claimed prior military service. Of his 21 years of service he was in “intelligence” for over 19 years, and left the service, honorably, as a Marine Lt. Colonel.

Under the agreement of all of the SB members, I had set up the Dropbox account and the mail-list group. The Dropbox is rather simple where only designated people have access and large files can be transferred up and down in the background. The mail-list group access panel is limited to designated individuals.

Dickenson volunteered to be secretary to the AB, and was designated, just in case I was inaccessible, to have access to the webpage and the mail list group. He was given the access passwords.

We held weekly meetings and special meetings, when necessary. In every case, agendas and recordings were made available to all members of the AB. In the first recorded meeting, on October 11, 2015, Dickenson, when asked about minutes of meetings, stated that since we had the recordings, he saw that there was no need for written minutes. However, as we shall see, Dickenson did make minutes of the meetings, and promptly turned them over to FBI Special Agent Mark D. Seyler, as well as recordings, emails, and other information regarding Dickenson’s vocation as a spy.

Drafted By: Mark D. Seyler
Case ID:  xxxx
Collected From:  xxxx
Receipt Given?: No
Holding Office: SALT LAKE CITY

Details:

As noted in several FD-1023 CHS reports, since October 1, 2015, xxxx has provided the case Agent with several files associated with the Operation Mutual Defense(OMD) Advisory Board. These files have been transferred between OMD Advisory Board members via email as well as a shared Dropbox.com account. On November 7, 2015, the case Agent saved several of these documents to a single DVD for storage as evidence in the captioned case file. Included on this DVD are recordings of OMD Advisory Board meetings from October 11 to November 5, 2015, meeting agendas, task lists, and other documents.

Item Type                Description
18 Digital DVD Containing OMD Advisory Board files provided by CHS
Collected On: 11/07/2015
Seizing Individual: Mark D. Seyler
Located By: Mark D. Seyler
Location Area: Shared E-Mail Acct
Specific Location: Shared E-Mail Acct
Device Type: Compact Disc/Digital Video
Disc(CDs/DVDs)

Number of Devices Collected: 1

In hindsight, reviewing the recordings from that first meeting, Dickenson, when someone mentioned “we”, or any indication that something someone was talking about implied other participants, he always asked who the other participants were. He also sought detail on every subject, in every meeting. Now, this could be attributed to a desire to fully participate, and it could be a desire to gain information.

The FBI uses form “FD-1023”, also known as “CHS Reporting Document”, for agents assigned to an informant to provide information, based upon their communication, face to face, via text or email, by phone, or even secret messages, to be placed into the record. “CHS”, of course, refers to “Confidential Human Source”. The following information is from those 1023 forms. They are marked, at the bottom left corner, “Dissemination Limited by Court Order”.  So, let me make this perfectly clear — I have no intention of “disseminating” the documents, nor am I bound by any “Court Order”.  I am writing about a Public Trial, which was held in September and October 2016.  Had I access to these documents during that trial, I would have written the same article that I am writing now.

A Public Trial, as intended by the Founders, was guaranteed so that we could judge both the alleged crimes of the accused and the role of the government.  This article, and subsequent articles on the subject of informants, is about the role of the government.

Given the background, above, we can clearly see that the government has no intention of spying on the people that created that government. This reeks of George Orwell’s “1984”, to the greatest degree possible. The government had no reason to believe that OMD or the AB had any intention of doing anything illegal. The purpose of OMD was to evaluate situations, and if the situation had merit, as determined by the AB, then a call out would be made to the followers of OMD. If any illegal activity was discussed, it was discussed only to the extent of whether something would be illegal, or not. However a call out would be consistent with the rights preserved by the First Amendment; Speech, Assembly, and Redress of Grievances. In some of the matters brought before the AB it was determined that there was no lawful standing to pursue a situation, ending discussion on that matter.

Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 41 – Dennis Dickenson (Dennis Jones)’ »

Tags: Burns OregondemonizationFBIgovernmentHonorinformantslawMilitaryMoral ValuesOMDpatriots
Category: Articles  |  2 Comments

Burns Chronicles No 40 – Allen Varner – Wolf

November 15, 2016, 6:39 pm

Burns Chronicles No 40
Allen Varner (Wolf)

av4

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
November 15, 2016

When I wrote “What is Brandon Curtiss?“, I had nothing but gratitude for Wolf.  He had stepped up when I was faced with Brandon Curtiss and his goons.  His involvement allowed me to continue packing in order to leave Burns.  The above picture was taken during this event.

There were some unanswered questions from an earlier incident.  When the shootout occurred at Camp Lone Star, back on August 29, 2014, Varner was with Kevin “KC” Massey and John Foerster, on the Texas Border near Brownsville, when a Border Patrol (BP) Agent fired in the direction of Foerster.  (See “The Arrest of K. C. Massey“.)  Now questions arose as to Foerster’s role, but Varner appeared to be without sin.  Varner, however, was the first to offer his pistol, in his belt under his shirt, to the BP agent, which led to Massey then turning his pistol over to BP.  In hindsight, there were other questionable actions by Varner, though unrelated to the topic at hand.

Varner was quite cooperative in my interview with him and provided some information that only he had, which indicated that much of what BP did, out of sight of Massey, was not consistent with the testimony they offered in court.  This could be interpreted as an attempt to ingratiate himself to Massey and myself.

According to Massey, Varner left Camp Lone Star within a couple of days of the shooting.  He did not return until two days before Massey’s arrest.  Was he there to report when Massey was going to spend the night in the motel room?  Only someone at Camp Lone Star would have that information.  At that critical time, Varner was at Camp Lone Star.

Now, often people have suspicion that someone could be an informant.  I may have reason to believe someone is an informant.  However, I will not write that someone is an informant unless I can prove that someone is an informant.  So, ironically, the person that helped me while I was in Burns is, well, an informant.

Let’s get to the heart of the matter.  To do so, I will be referring to FBI documents that I have obtained.  They are marked, at the bottom left corner, “Dissemination Limited by Court Order”.  So, let me make this perfectly clear — I have no intention of “disseminating” the documents, nor am I bound by any “Court Order”.  I am writing about a Public Trial, which was held in September and October 2016.  Had I access to these documents during that trial, I would have written the same article that I am writing now.

A Public Trial, as intended by the Founders, was guaranteed so that we could judge both the alleged crimes of the accused and the role of the government.  This article, and subsequent articles on the subject of informants, is about the role of the government.

Informants are nothing less than spies, albeit, they are not spies set against foreign enemies or other countries.  No, they are spies sent by the agents of the government to act against their own people.  Whether they are paid, as was the case explained in my article “Terri Linnell (Mama Bear)“, to avoid prosecution for a crime they may have committed, or simply because they disagree with the politics of whomever they are informing against, they are nothing less than those contemptible creatures who, in most situations, face death if caught practicing their trade.  The only exception would be when they realize that they are on the wrong side, and willingly change to the right side.  This is addressed in another article, “Informants – What to do About Them“.

Using form “FD-1023”, also known as “CHS Reporting Document”, agents assigned to an informant provides information, based upon their communication, face to face, via text or email, by phone, or even secret messages, to place this information into the record.

Unfortunately, some of the records I have obtained are so severely redacted that nothing but the pre-printed form information is visible.  However, often what the informant reported can be compared to information obtained in speaking with victims of the informant, or the information reported may become available in other public forums.  Often, such information is “exculpatory” in nature, meaning that it tends to provide evidence that the accused may not be guilty of the crime with which he has been charged.  So, I will provide some of the text from the reports and offer a perspective regarding both aspects.  The entire body of information will not be provided in this article.  A sampling should be sufficient to provide the reader with understanding of just how these spies operate, and how they may set their own trap.  The spies will identify themselves as “CHS” (Confidential Human Source).

We will begin with January 4, 2016, two days after the occupation of the Refuge and the first identifiable report from Varner.

There are 25-30 people on the property to include 5 women who are assisting in cooking, etc.  Most individuals are carrying side arms and CHS has not seen any Iongrifles, but knows they are there. CHS has not yet seen any explosives and one militia member is in the watch tower approximately 100 feet in the air. The militia will be conducting patrols at night.  CHS will obtain license plates later this evening and saw one militia member driving a white 4X4 truck bearing US Government plate number I487752 presumed to belong to the refuge. The militia is expecting the FBI to arrive and know that they are being called trespassers and not domestic terrorists.

CHS observed the following vehicles:

                [Note: first two vehicle descriptions and plate #s not included for the privacy of the owners]:

3) Jason Patrick, White Male, mid 40’s, 5’10″, 230 lbs, beard, mustache, seen driving the white 4X4 truck bearing US Government plate I487752.

So, we can see that this informant, along with others, provided a snapshot, updated frequently, of what was going on and who was present at the Refuge

Burns Chronicles No 32 – Terri Linnell (Mama Bear)

October 12, 2016, 1:05 pm

Burns Chronicles No 32
Terri Linnell (Mama Bear)

terrilinnell

Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
October 12, 2016

{October 6, 2015}

On Friday, September 30, 2016, I received a phone call from someone I had spoken with before.  This call, however, brought to light the extent of the government’s efforts, often misguided, to do what the country used only to do to foreign nations and enemies.  Now, it has become a modern practice of government to pay people to infiltrate and inform.  It works even better when infiltration is not necessary, as that person is already considered a member of the community that is the target of the spying.  Now, that is a rather harsh word, but the tactics of government can be considered nothing less than any other form of spying, throughout the ages.

Nowadays, they have access to almost all electronic media, where the can grab phone conversations, emails, Facebook pages, and any other internet communications.  They have parabolic microphones that can listen to conversations from over 100 yards away.  They have bugs, electronic listening devices that require no wiring and have a battery life of days, weeks, or even months.

They still, however, want someone who can testify, when necessary, and gather information that is not random, as with other methods, but can be directed, by asking questions.  And, this is about one of those human resources, aka “CI” or confidential informant.

That phone call and some email correspondence eventually resulted in a  quasi-affidavit as to the role that this person played in the recent events of Burns, Oregon.

Now, don’t jump to conclusions.  It is rather ironic that the government subsidized a patriot’s trip to Burns to cook for the very people that were to be spied upon.  All expenses were paid, and at the conclusion; a cash windfall was also provided.

But, let’s hear the story from the other party in that phone call. 

 

 

So what really happened in Malheur last year? 
Reposted from the blog of Gary Hunt found @ http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1425#more-1425

On February 18, 2016, the Tri-County Major Incident Team released a report prepared, primarily, by the Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office. The publicly available version consists of 360 pages, though the page numbering indicates that the entire report consists of at least 714 pages. The officers involved are identified by assigned numbers, to protect their identity. There are heavy redactions of experience of officers and substantial portions of their interviews. References shown thus, {nn}, indicate PDF page numbers from the above linked document.

This article will point out discrepancies, disparities, and other portions that raise a question as to the objectivity of the published version of the report. The document explains that when they do the interviews, they can use the names of the other officers or personnel, though those names will be replaced by numbers in the documentation. So, when they speak of “Office #1”, we have no idea who he is, but the numbers remain constant for the various players, throughout. There will be a distinction between “Officer #4” “DCSO 4”, the latter being on the investigation team, the former being an officer involved from Oregon State Police (OSP). Italics will be used for direct quotes from the report.

The Cast – All Oregon State Police Officers and present at shooting scene:

Officer #1 Fired two rapid fire rounds into LaVoy’s back, first shooter; also fired three rounds at truck as it approached the roadblock
Officer #2 Fired one round into LaVoy’s back, was second shooter
Officer #3 Officer with taser, approaches LaVoy from tree line
Officer #4 Drove Gray truck
Officer #5 Non-lethal (40mm) single round
Officer #6 Driver of Root Beer Truck (Lead Vehicle)
Officer #7 Non-lethal (40mm) multi-launcher – 6 rounds
Officer #8 Second OSP in Root Beer Truck

Note: Interviews will be presented in the order that they appear in the Report.
Note that all vehicles, OSP and FBI, were unmarked. Dress was “civies” in Burns, change to tactical gear on deployment to US 395. Deployment was staggered to avoid scrutiny by militia. Radio communication was different between FBI and OSP, requiring mixed partnering in vehicles to share communications. There was apprehension that the militia in Burns would respond, if open communication were used.

Officer #2
The first report {3} is from DCSO #4, who visited the scene on January 27 (day after the shooting) at 0330 hours. He found only one (1) .233 cartridge. Later, on the 29th, he observed OSP Crime Lab personnel remove a shard of metal from the driver’s side mirror. That is all he had to say.

Next, we have “DCSO 20” with a Narrative {6-8} of his investigation of Officer #2, one of the OSP shooters. From the Narrative, we find that the FBI was in charge of the operation, with command being FBI HRT (Hostage Rescue Team). That OSP was assigned to assist the FBI in the operation. With regard to Officer #2, “A request for blood and urine from Officer #2 was made upon completion of the collection of property and we were informed that Officer #2 had been advised by counsel/representation not to provide a blood/urine sample.”

So, we have an officer that had shot LaVoy Finicum. When asked to provide blood/urine samples, he refused based upon the advice of his “counsel”. Now, that refusal could keep you from getting a job, get you fired from a job, lose your driver’s license, and be cause for denial of certain government services. However, when you work for the agency that protects judges, you can expect the judges to protect those who protect them. That is pretty darned serious, and there would be no reason to refuse, if there were no reason to refuse.

Next, we have two DCSO officers interviewing Officer #2, in a transcribed interview {9-53}, on January 31. In all interviews, training, length of service, qualifications, and other information that might help to identify an officer, have been redacted. The following is from that interview:

It is clear that they had background on the “occupiers” {14}. The three primary vehicles (not counting the roadblock where the shooting occurred) were described. “There was the root beer colored pickup truck, which is a large Dodge pickup truck, there was my gray truck, which is the same model and design as the root beer truck, and a [green] van. Those three vehicles constituted the initial arrest team for the traffic stop.”

In describing Ryan Payne’s exit from LaVoy’s truck, we have the following {20}:
So eventually there is conversations between those HRT members and Payne, and he acts like — Payne acts like — he’s kind half out the truck. He acts like he’s going to go back in. He starts to kind of go back in, and OFFICER NO. 5 fires a 40 millimeter less lethal sponge tip round which hits him in the arm, and then gives him more commands, starts to give commands: “You need to come out now. Put your hands up,” you know, et cetera, which he did.
Officer #2 then talks about what happened after LaVoy had told them that he was going to see the Sheriff {23}.

So we, in pursuit of that vehicle, followed it until it started getting close to the roadblock and we backed off slightly, anticipating there might be an issue there.

As we came around the corner and saw the roadblock, I observed the white truck swerve to the left. It didn’t appear to be slowing down at all. I had time slow down and stop, and, in fact, the white truck appeared to accelerate rapidly away from us, and then maintain that speed throughout until it got to the roadblock.

Then, he explains his arrival at the shooting scene. He pulls up a ways back from LaVoy’s truck. He sees Officer #1 over by the roadblock trucks. Officer #3 (the “non-lethal” officer) to the left and about 10 or 15 feet away from LaVoy {24-25}.

As I stepped up and was moving, I saw Mr. Finicum turn his back towards me and OFFICER NO. 1, and then I saw his right arm again dig deeply in towards what I would term as maybe a shoulder holster or something As I stepped up and was moving, I saw Mr. Finicum turn his back towards me and OFFICER NO. 1, and then I saw his right arm again dig deeply in towards what I would term as maybe a shoulder holster or something in that vicinity, and he seemed to struggle for just a second.
* * *
And just as soon as I pulled my rifle up and put the cross hair on Mr. Finicum, OFFICER NO. 1 fired, and I distinctly heard him fire, and I knew it was him firing, for whatever, reason.
And as soon as he fired and my scope just came up and was right in the middle of the back of Mr. Finicum, and I squeezed off a single round.

So, this guy shoots LaVoy in the back, because Officer #1 shot LaVoy. But, maybe the story isn’t clear enough, so they take a break {30}. Now, let’s see what subtly changes in the story {31-32}, so that it is no longer, because Officer #1 shot, rather, he was going to shoot, anyway. Can’t leave your buddy out to dry, alone.
I’d like to go back to the point where I’m getting out of my truck. After Mr. Finicum exited the vehicle, and I had seen him stick his hand in his coat once as he was coming out of the vehicle, and as I was exiting my vehicle and moving to a position to cover Mr. Finicum and could see OFFICER NO. 3, you know, 10, 15 feet to his left, and then OFFICER NO. 1 to my right, I recognized that OFFICER NO. 3 was in a very dangerous position, and he was exposed to the white truck as well as Mr. Finicum, and as I pulled my rifle up to cover Mr. Finicum, while this is going on, I’m seeing him turn and stick his hand into his coat again, as I previously stated to what I believed, to grab a pistol, and at that point I believe that if I didn’t engage Mr. Finicum, that OFFICER NO. 3 was in a very close proximity and probably would have been shot, and that’s what was going through my mind, is that OFFICER NO. 3 was in a very bad spot.

And I didn’t want to wait – all these things cross your mind. I didn’t want to wait for him to bring out a firearm, because I knew that by the time that I was able to recognize that and deal with it, that he could have very likely have shot OFFICER NO. 3.

So as I was bringing my rifle up, I had a scope on the rifle, which is a one by six power, and I had it on one power, so I had a wide field of view, and as I brought the scope up and put the cross hairs on Mr. Finicum’s back, while I’m seeing him struggle with something in his coat, I had made a decision at that point that I’m going to fire my rifle, and had gone through the process of taking it off safe and started — and had my finger going to the trigger and was starting to squeeze it when OFFICER NO. 1 had fired, and so I was already in the process of firing my rifle at that point, and was just a second behind OFFICER NO. 1 on that, or whatever it was. I don’t know.
Later, he, again, clarifies why he shot {33}, when he says, “But I had made that determination and was in — going — had my finger on the trigger and was starting to squeeze the trigger when he [Officer #1] fired.”

Officer #1
So, let’s move on to Officer #1. Again, we have a transcribed interview {65-112}, conducted on January 31. Officer #1 was already at the roadblock. As they receive word, via radio, that LaVoy’s truck had “run’, they begin preparing for its arrival {85}.
I remember to the right OFFICER NO 3 falling in the snow, and I could see clearly OFFICER NO. 3 is making an aggressive move to try to get off of the roadway through the snow, and what I presumed would be to a safe area where there was some trees.
So, even though there is no immediate danger, we have Officer #3 “falling in the snow.”

As the truck approaches, we get Officer #1‘s description of the event:
As it rounded the corner, and I believe that there was no other option, it was going to run into the roadblock. I fired multiple rounds from an AR-15 rifle that is assigned to me, and I was aiming towards the — what would be the driver area, and at the motor.
* * *
So I’m now on the left, and I watched the truck plow through that snow and push snow like you would push water if you ran a car into a lake, and I saw an officer in front of the truck, and I believed that the officer was ran over by the truck, and I felt that he was likely under that truck.

As the truck comes to a stop, I immediately move — I would say move quickly towards the truck, covering the truck, anticipating based off of those actions, such an aggressive action, I anticipated likely being shot at through those windows of that vehicle, and that’s based off of all the intelligence reports and the fact that they are armed and now they are committed to the point of running over an officer.

He has fired three shots, one hitting the left side of the truck, one into the engine compartment, and one into the right front of the hood. Those in the truck have been fired on, for the second time — and, they haven’t even drawn a weapon. Darn I wonder how that feels. But, I would much rather wonder than find out, as it begins to appear that the OSP has blood on its mind — or, they honestly believe that a 0.223 can stop a truck, or, if they killed the driver, the truck would stop, instead of careening wildly around, possibly killing agents and those who remained alive inside of the truck..

He also believes that LaVoy had run over a fellow officer. On the contrary, by the aerial footage, LaVoy swerved to the left to avoid hitting the officer, possibly saving the life of a fellow officer of the two that killed LaVoy.
Then, we have Officer #1‘s account of LaVoy exiting the truck {88}:
I see the driver exiting the truck, and I am now perceiving that as the greatest threat at that point.
* * *
I’m out in the open. The footing isn’t great. I’m walking on, you know, loose snow, but immediately as I’m in view of the driver, I am focused solely on the driver, and I’m covering him with my rifle.

Now, Officer #1 provides an excuse, or incentive, by referring to the comments made by LaVoy {89}, however, those comments have no indication of a threat, nor is there any indication that LaVoy intended to draw a weapon.

I remember the driver saying, “Just shoot me. You are going to have to shoot me.” There could have been other words intermixed there, but that’s what I recall. He’s yelling in an angry-get-my-point-across loud voice, “Just shoot me.” You are going to have to shoot me,” and he’s yelling at us.
Officer #1 continues:

He had been reaching. He spins — reaching, I mean kind of reaching in his waist band/shirt area. He spins, and this is all happening pretty fast. He kind of spins away from me. I remember viewing his back as I’m covering him. I remember a distinct kind of a sweeping motion with one arm, and the other arm diving into what believe, based off of prior videos and intelligence, would be what. I would call a shoulder rig, shoulder harnesses, and it was consistent with grabbing a firearm, which I knew could be drawn and fired with, you know, extremely fast, and the person that was exposed was OFFICER NO. 3, as he had turned slightly away from me and he was more facing OFFICER NO. 3, and had he drawn, OFFICER NO. 3 was in his path.

And I think at that point his attention was away from me as he now kind of was moving, what I perceived as back away from me, and his attention was back directed towards OFFICER NO. 3.
I could see OFFICER NO. 3 advancing, and I just knew that based off of what I was seeing, and the totality of all of the circumstances there, that I needed to take action to stop him from being a threat to OFFICER NO. 3, and at that point I fired two rounds, what I thought was striking him in the center of his back, and the driver falls to his knees.

So, now, even though Officer #3, as we see in the aerial footage, doesn’t seem concerned, and continues to approach LaVoy, with taser poised to inflict the “non-lethal”. Officer #1 is, clearly, setting the stage for his subsequent actions. So, he stops LaVoy from being a “threat, by shooting him in the back, twice.
Now, based upon Officer #2‘s initial statement, he fired because Officer #1 fired. So, we have Officer #3, who seemed to be nothing more than cautious. We have Officer #2, extremely agitated, creating apprehension that is not shown by Officer #3. And, we have Officer #1, who fires because Officer #2 has fired at the back of LaVoy Finicum. Or, as my father used to say, “If you want an excuse, any excuse is good enough.” And, if we can throw in a fear for the life of another trained officer, that doesn’t seem in fear of his life, well, we real have a justification, without justification — but that is always good enough for the police state employees.

So, we still have three people in LaVoy’s truck. They were shot at during the first stop. They were shot at as the approached the roadblock. They were shot at the same time that LaVoy was being murdered. And, now, Officer #1 tells us {91}:

So I, from there I transitioned background to the main element of officers that were behind the two vehicles in a wedge, and there was-discussion amongst officers that there is still clearly movement in the vehicle. There is still occupants in the vehicle.
They are being now, diversions had started going off over the vehicle, multiple diversions to try to distract the people that were in the vehicle, and try to get them to comply with the verbal commands that I was hearing being yelled.

The “diversions” were “nine bangers”, explained later. Unknown to the occupants, who have just seen their friend murdered, they were not firing lethal rounds. The passengers, however, as is apparent in the Shawna Cox footage, are in fear for their lives — way so more than any of the battle-geared officers. They are staying as low as they can possibly get, hoping to survive. But, the officers outside seem to think that any normal person would respond to the verbal commands, while listen ting to the fusillade being directed at them, windows breaking, and CS gas being sent into the front seat area. Who could possibly “comply”, under those circumstances? But, here we have a demonstration of the arrogance of law enforcement, the disdain for the “them” in the “them or us” mentality, and the expectation of absolute and immediate obedience to their commands.

In their efforts to force compliance, Officer #1 tells us {92}:
There was discussion that more officers were coming down to that immediate scene, and that OFFICER NO. 7 was going to be showing up any moment with a multi launcher, and I knew the multi-launcher would have orange tips, meaning that they would contain OCCS chemical agents in them, and that they were going to deploy those rounds into the truck, as minutes had lapsed and the occupants in the truck were not complying with the commands. They were not exiting the truck within a reasonable amount of time whatsoever. There was no reason they couldn’t have exited the truck and complied with the commands.

Gas was deployed into the truck. There was still a period of time where they were not coming out There was discussion that we are not hearing coughing, and then it goes into the occupants ultimately exiting the truck and following commands.
Now, we need a break — perhaps we need to clarify some things {94}. So, let’s revisit the shooting of the moving truck {101-102}. But, let’s start with a leading question so that Officer #1 gets it right, this time.

Q. And when you saw the white truck round the corner, I’m pretty sure you mentioned this, you saw it approaching your location. What was your perception of whether it was or was not yielding to the roadblock?
A. It was clear to me, the speed the truck was traveling was I would say between 60 and 70 miles per hour, was traveling at a speed which I knew from my training and experience, it was — had no intention to stop. There was no visibility of the front end dropping like brakes were being applied. There was just no variation of speed, other than maintaining that high speed directly at us.

And when 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, and there was no indication that the driver was going to make any evasive maneuver or try to avoid hitting any of us, and with the locations of the officers, once I was put in the spot of trying to defend the officers and prevent that truck from running through that roadblock, that’s when I felt that the use of force was my only option to try to prevent them from running into us.

Now, let’s make sure that we can justify shooting someone because he had hit the FBI agent that had jumped in front of him {103}. If he killed, or even injured, that agent, it would definitely establish a better framework for justification for murdering LaVoy.
I was in a position to see one FBI agent or officer. I knew — I did know it was an FBI officer, because I knew OFFICER NO. 3 had moved up into — or moving towards the timber as he fell and was struggling to kind of get that way, and I — so, yeah, I knew that that agent was in the path of that truck, and in the process of the truck plowing full speed around the FBI vehicles, it looked to me like he was hit by the truck, and I believed he was under it, and as I approached, I was looking for the agent to see what -I could do to cover him and provide any aid and identify where he was.
But, we need to revisit shooting LaVoy — have got to make it a stronger case {104-105}.

Q. So with your experience, would you say that Finicum was complying with the commands?
A. No. So let me elaborate on that.

Finicum was moving away from the vehicle. Finicum was approaching me and looking at me. Finicum had more than ample opportunity to turn around and comply with the commands. Finicum actively reached in an area that I believed and had information that he was carrying a firearm. He did this more than once, and the second time as he’s now avoiding back away from me, he is still not showing any signs of complying with our presence or our commands.

He reaches clearly like he is reaching into, you know, the left side of his torso, where a weapon would be kept, and I know that through my training and experience, that had he pulled that weapon out and fired, or, had he pulled it out, I could not have reacted to stopping that threat to myself or to OFFICER NO. 3, and the decision to use force against Finicum was to prevent any injury to OFFICER NO. 3 or, myself.

And I know that that motion to pull a gun out can happen faster than I can react to it, and I couldn’t wait for the gun to be pointed at OFFICER NO. 3 or myself, that additionally, I know that a gun can be fired through a jacket right between arm and his torso, which would have been in line with where OFFICER NO. 3 was.

Q. Okay. What was your perception of the distance between Finicum and OFFICER NO. 3?
A. Roughly 15 feet.

Now, let’s take another break {109-110}, and then we can improve what the record will show.
There is a couple things I’d like to add and clarify. At the point the vehicle’s approaching, we had the group that was there, had set out spike strips. The spike strips were just in front of the vehicles, and I knew that that would have no effect on slowing down that pickup that was coming at us. I knew that that would not change the velocity of that vehicle and the impact it was going to have on coming into our scene.

When I made the decision to fire at Finicum, and I’m covering, and I use that force, I believed that he was going to pull a gun and shoot OFFICER NO. 3, and in that moment with everything I was observing, the actions and verbal statements, everything that I had learned and been briefed on, I truly believed that he was going to shoot OFFICER NO. 3.

Q. For clarification, also for you, too, right? For your safety as well?
A. Yeah. I mean obviously he had seen where I was, He had engaged, made eye contact with me prior to that moment, and clearly I was exposed to him and whatever actions he was actively trying to take, and what would have continued to happen if I did not use deadly physical force at that moment.

So, now, he realizes that shooting at the truck would serve no purpose, but, heck, I just wanted to shoot somebody. After all, I had to get up early and drive all of the way out here.

And, I was sure that he was going to shoot Officer #3, it’s just that Officer #3 didn’t realize he was going to get shot — if I didn’t shoot first. Oh, can I use that, too? Yes, I feared for my own safety, as well.

Officer #4
Next, we have the digitally recorded, then transcribed, interview of Officer #4 {143-185}. The interview was conducted on January 29, 2016.

Now, we have been told that this was a felony arrest stop, the purpose being to arrest those individuals that were considered the leaders of the Malheur NWR occupation. However, the absence of a warrant brings into question the justification of the stop, as explained in Ambush. However, Officer #4 appears to have been paying attention. When the following occurred {149}:

DCSO 4: Ok. So, who-who was in charge of the operation? Who’s running the show?

OFFICER 4: So, basically, it, uh, it was FBI’s, uh, information, we were just basically there to kind of, uh, assist with helpin’ ’em, how it was planned and how, uh, we were gonna be, uh, conducting, and determine who the traffic stop on, uh, then take those people into custody. An had info-basically knowledge that they had, um, an active, uh, arrest warrant for ’em.

DCSO 4: -Um-hum-

OFFICER 4: –not warrant, but uh, information that they could be detained.

So, he realizes that there was no arrest warrant, that they “could be detained”. Darn, everybody else, even the FBI spokesman, has said that the stop was to arrest, not to detain. But, this fits with the absence of a Criminal Complaint and Arrest Warrants, until after LaVoy was murdered.

Here, Officer #4 {180-182} describes as he arrives at the shooting scene. Of course, he also takes the Officer Safety routine, and even suggests that if could have gotten the safety off on his rifle, we would have shot, too.

He’s crossin’ over the centerline an takin’ like, wantin’ the the corners wide, uh then, obviously, I know the roadblock is up-up ahead of us, uh, cause they had that information that, um, there-he had now left and was going to be traveling towards them, um, the,. I didn’t know the exact location of the roadblock, uh, but It was kinda set up around a cor-a little bit of a corner and then a straight stretch after that. So, I was following behind still, um, tryin’ ta catch up him, come around the, uh, kinda of a corner and at that point I could see, uh, a brief period of brake lights on LaVoy’s pickup and then, uh, the brake lights go off an It appeared that the vehicle accelerated at that point and um, drove-it almost initially looked like it was gonna take and just plow directly into all the vehicles and instead it looked like it made a last second decision to kinda go, uh, left and barely missed the spike strips that were-that were put out… in front of all the vehicles, um, barely misses that, tries going around to the left to go through the deep snow an looked like he was tryin’ to drive basically around, uh, the roadblock set up there and, uh, truck become stuck in the snow, right after that, I can-I can see all-all this happen but I’m still, uh, a ways behind at this point. Um, I see the spikes up ahead where it’s happenin’. Soon as the vehicle comes to a stop, the driver’s door comes open and about that point I’m getting-I could see LaVoy comin’ out at the same time, I see movement kinda back up-as I’m watchin’ him, I could see movement back up and to the left of, um, LaVoy, that, and, uh, could see there was another OSP person back up that-uh, behind him near a tree. And, so by this time, I stopped near the spike strips an get out an basically, uh, get my gun up through the, uh, between the door and the A pillar of the-of the truck, tryin’ ta come up on a sights, still see what’s goin’ on, I could see another OSP person moving to my left, kinda away from Finicum an Finicum seems to be more or less, uh, kinda travelin’ kinda at an angle toward that, uh, OSP person who was back up to the left, an-and initially when Finicum comes out, he’s got his hands raised in the air but by this time, ya know, I was outta the vehicle and I can actually hear what’s goin’ on and I can hear him just say ta fuckin’ shoot him, is what I recall um, so. eventually, uh, by the time I get my gun out and kinda up in that direction tryin’ ta-kinda quickly observe what’s goin’ or if people are gonna come out, uh, his hands come down lower and basically, um, looks like he kinda makes a-a real quick um, I’m not sure if he kinda stumbled an tried to catch himself or what, but, uh, I could see what I recall, at least two times, uh, clearly that he made an like initial grab over to, uh looked like, like he-he reachin’ for a gun. Like I said, I know that he carries a, uh, a shoulder holstered pistol, um, on him. So, makes a initial grab, almost kinda looks like he didn’t-didn’t quite get it inside of his coat at that point and then almost reached up with uh, his, uh, second hand and was actually was able to get ahold of his coat and what I recall, uh, hold his coat and actually almost kinda get it open and then you could see him clearly reach inside, ya know-that point, I was tryin’-the first initial grab, uh, that he-he made to go inside, I believe he was going for his gun . uh, and the gun I was actually shooting has a little bit longer safety on it to get to, um, per our policy is, ya know, ya have to be, uh, ya know, basically on on safety until you’ve made that decision to shoot. At that point, I made the decision to shoot and was reaching out to get my safety off, uh, an actually had to roll my hand around, it takes a little bit longer to actually get to it. uh, get my safety off, comin’ back up onto, ya know, getting’ back into target and see him then, like-like I say, clearly reach in-inside and, I-I believed he was going for his gun at that point, and that’s when I heard, uh, a couple shots go off. I don’t know exactly how many, but, I-I mean it was at least a couple. um, so once the shots go off, I basically kinda gettin’ on my trigger at that point, and but it-by then you could see that he’d been hit and went down pretty quick. So that’s when I decided not ta-not shoot, um, stayed there on him fer a little bit, I mean, obviously everything seems like it happens super super fast, but um, ya know, once I could tell he was-he was actually down, uh, so from that point, I saw um. ya know the-the OSP guy that was up off to the left of Finicum, they were in very close proximity to each other and that was the other reason I basically made that decision to shoot just because-just the close proximity to, uh, the other OSP officer that was there, uh, I felt that basically he was in danger, uh, and, so, after he went down, um, after a minute or so, nobody had else had came out of the-the vehicle, um, I know other people scrabblin’ around all over the place.
Simply for an understanding of the OSP opinion of FBI, I include some Q&A {164-165} from the interview — about the mysterious

FBI agents:

DCSO 4: and how about the FBI guy that was in your rig?

OFFICER 4: From what I recall he went by, ya know what? I might be thinkin’ of a different person. From what I recall, his name is

Officer 13. I’m not 100%

DCSO 4: -maybe-maybe Officer 13?

OFFICER 4: Maybe Officer 13.

DCSO 4: Ok. Alright since I’ve been on this I’m figurin’ out these guys are mysterious.

OFFICER 4: (chuckles), yeah.

Officer #7
Next to be interviewed is Officer #7 {186-212}. The top of the forms has a date of January 26, and the bottom, February 18. However, the date of the interview is not given, only that the interview was conducted “At approximately 2143 hours” {187}.
Officer #7 describes his arrival at the scene of the shooting. LaVoy is already “down hard” {201-202}.

DCSO 4: Ok, so, when you got there to this gray vehicle, you recall, um, any gunshots or less lethal being fired or commands being given, anything like that?

OFFICER 7: I heard-I heard a lot of um, I didn’t hear any gunshots, um, there was multiple people, um, yelling commands at the truck, I can’t tell you who was yelling what though.

DCSO 4: Ok.
OFFICER 7: Uh. And as far as, um, less lethal, I, I believe when I got there, the right front passenger window, um, was broken and I assumed by one of the other member’s 40mms.

DCSO 4: Ok so-so what happened next?

OFFICER 7: Uh, I recall seeing, uh, an Individual that I recognized as being Mr. Finicum, um, he was lying, um, in the snow, uh, generally to the rear of his vehicle uh I recall uh, Officer 6 arriving shortly thereafter and I recall Officer 6 asking one of the FBI agents uh, something to the effect of what’s the status, or something to that effect, referring ta Mr. Finicum, an I recall the FBI agent stating something to effect of he’s down hard, which we all-er I interpreted as he had been shot.

DCSO 4: Ok. So what-what happened next?

OFFICER 7: Uh, there was, um, I-I was being told-I-an I don’t-I can’t recall by who, one of-I believe-one of the agents near me, um there was still people in the vehicle not coming out.

DCSO 4: Um-hum.

OFFICER 7: Um. One of the agents. I don’t recall the verbiage he used, but he asked me ta put, um, 40mm. uh, less lethal rounds, um, into, the vehicle I uh, made eye contact with Officer 6, um, and, uh verbally-I don’t remember what words exactly I used or he used but I, um, got verbal confirmation from him that I was ok to do that.

DCSO 4: Ok.

OFFICER 7: Um, and I then, uh, targeted the the area where the dash meets the front windshield and I believe I fired six rounds into the dash slash windshield area through the broken right front window.

DCSO 4: Ok. Is that the right front passenger window?

OFFICER 7: Correct.

DCSO 4: Ok. Now is that-are all those 40mm?

OFFICER 7: Yes.

DCSO 4: You remember what-what kind of less lethal-what kind of munition it is?

OFFICER 7: Yeah, those, um, were 40mm, um, they’re, uh, direct fire non-lethal rounds, these particular ones were filled, um, with, uh, OC powder.

DCSO 4: And what do those-look like?-Can you describe those rounds?

OFFICER 7: Uh, yeah, they-they have a-an aluminum casing, um, uh, there’s a kind of a black, it-um, the collar area an then these particular rounds the um the cartridge itself and the-the tip are all painted orange.

DCSO 4: Do-do you recall firing any of the-I guess the blue sponge rounds-impact rounds at all?

OFFICER 7: I-initially, I did not.

DCSO 4: Ok.

OFFICER 7: Uh I may have, um, fired blue-we call ’em blue tips, um, same cartridge but no OC powder, later.

DCSO 4: Ok.

OFFICER 7: But initially, I, I’m certain the first six were all the orange tips.

DCSO 4: Ok. All the same spot, the dash windshield?

OFFICER 7: -correct

Here, again, we have a fusillade, and the government people can’t grasp why the people in the truck don’t just get out. However, just to make it worse, shortly thereafter, he says, “There was-there was delay, uh, I believe-I had-I had reloaded, I didn’t, uh, ejected the empty casings from the multi launcher [A 40mm launcher that holds 6 rounds], um, I believe I put six more orange tips in, uh, there was a delay, uh, where no one had no one was coming out of the truck, um, I recall putting, uh, firing more rounds into the same location, uh, the front dash slash wind-front window area but I don’t recall how many rounds I fired on that second um, deployment.”

Officer #5
Then we have the interview of Officer #5 {213-239}. The interview was conducted on January 29, “At approximately 2242 hours” {214}.

Officer #5 describes his duties {219}, “So during the brief, I-I was told I would be driving the green van. That was one of our, uh, vehicles that we brought for this operation. I would be assigned to drive three FBI, uh, HRT members. Two of them were gonna be main shooters with long guns and the third was their K-9 unit.” So, the FBI HRT had “shooters“. This kinda deviates from the OSP is going to do the stop and FBI do the arrests.

As Officer #5 exits his truck and begins to get a grasp on what is happening at the roadblock, just before LaVoy falls to the ground, he describes the provocation created by the FBI {226-227}.
An then as you work your way across the highway, there was, uh, one of our vehicles an then another FBI truck, if I recall correctly. As-as we are finally pulling up, I hear one of the FBI agents say, “He’s shooting, He’s shooting!” I look up an I see an individual out of the white truck with his hands kinda out to the sides, and one of our uh, I think it was Officer 3, one of our SWAT units-OSP was in-in the timber kinda coming out, so as I hear he’s shooting, he’s shooting, I look up and it looked to me like this individual was being challenged by Officer 3. So, then I look back down, I have to stop the truck to let the FBI guys out, park, I say, “Go, go, go!” I grab my 40 and as I’m stepping out, I see. uh, at the vehicle-what’s called a nine banger-FBI said in the brief that they would have these-it’s basically a flashbang, uh, a noise sound diversionary device that has nine, like really bright little firecrackers-they said if something like this would occur, they would be throwing them, just to let us know, hey, man that’s not gonna be rapid succession of gun fire, that’s gonna be our nine bangers. So I see them going off, and now I am closing distance to go up to our vehicles. I remember there was-there was two FBI vehicles in the roadblock with ours in the middle. I’m working my way out to that point, so I could start fortying if I needed to, uh, Finicum’s vehicle. Doing, so, I see Finicum falling to the ground, so I’m thinking he’s complying with commands. I get up to our vehicle with, uh, some FBI units and one of our, uh, SWAT units named Officer 1. The FBI is, uh, asking for a 40mm to open the window because the-the passenger’s window in the front had been closed at this point. It is not tinted. The back passenger compartment window is tinted and-is also closed, so we cannot see In the truck. So, they’re asking for authority to open those windows up. So I step up, it’s loaded with an orange tip, which is an OC round, it’s a harder round, but will basically burst into an OC powder, when it hits, but we use ’em to break windows cuz they are a little bit harder initially.
So, an agent is yelling, “He’s shooting! He’s shooting!” This would get everyone in earshot on their toes, and really defensive — ready to shoot at the shooter. To top it off, they are using “nine bangers”, to emulate rapid fire, possibly to force those in the truck to return fire. Nothing provocative here. Just move along.
Later {230}, he reaffirms that activity:

OFFICER 5: The-the loud noises I heard were the-what I interpreted as the nine bangs goin’ off.

DCSO 4: Ok, um-

OFFICER 5: –yeah, the only indication that somebody was shooting was the FBI agents saying he’s shooting, he’s shooting. I didn’t know who.
It is difficult, given the above, to believe that the FBI HRT wasn’t trying to provoke a shootout. The entire nature of the roadblock, had LaVoy not by-passed the initial intended stop, on the roadway, was to provide a perfect ambush kill zone. Now, that would be speculative, without the testimony of Officer #5. However, his testimony suggests the probability of that intention — kill them all.

Officer #6
In The Officer #6 transcription {242-274} we get a rather interesting comment {246} where he mentions State Police, FBI, and adds, “and there may have been other people Involved, but a lot of people were plain clothes and not displaying identification.” As far as what their purpose was, he says {249}, “We were told that there was federal probable cause for arrest of the main players.”

In discussing Shawna Cox’s exit from the vehicle, he describes her difficulty in negotiating the heavy snow {271}, we get this sequence:

(#3867): OK. I just want to confirm that, Um, and then even even though they had to walk over, uh, presumably the same snow that LaVoy Finicum had just walked over, is that correct? The same area of snow?

(#6): The same area, I don’t, I couldn’t attest to the depth of the snow,

(#3867): Right.

(#6): But she was having some difficulty navigating it.
When Officer #6 was asked if wanted to add anything, he made this comment {272}, somewhat surprised at not understanding that he had participated in the murder of an innocent man, with no constitutional authority or arrest warrant to do so:

The only thing that’s struck me as very odd, uh, as we were getting the scene organized and turned over for investigation, uh, the people who were detained were all standing with FBI agents, uh, who were part of the operation. And as I walked to talk to one of the the FBI guys to coordinate some, uh, I forget what I was going to coordinate, but wanted to talk to them, the older lady, who had trouble navigating the snow, looked at me and asked me if I believe In the constitution. Which struck me weird because a man was just killed. Uh, in in my experience, my 15,16 years in law enforcement, when some, something like this happens, whether you know the person who was shot or injured, or you’re just a bystander, that’s what they want to talk about. And so her question about whether I believed in the constitution or not, it almost, it irritated me. You know, cause that’s what we want to talk about right now? OK. And then so, I started to walk away. I remember Mr. Payne turning around and mean mugging me, trying to give me a dirty look like he’s a tough guy. And I didn’t understand that. Like it’s not the time for, you know, your attitude right now.

Unfortunately, many have taken the oath simply to get their jobs — with no real consideration to what they have taken an oath. He just doesn’t seem to understand that he has only dealt with criminals, in the past.

Officer #8
Finally, we get to the Officer #8 {275-298} interview, and the last of the interviews in the report.
It appears that some believed that it was to “detain”, some believed that there were arrest warrants, and Officer #8, well:

(#3867): OK. And what was the, uh, was their, uh, crimes that they had committed? Or what was your understanding about, uh, the reason to arrest them?

(#8): Uh, we were told (cough) that there were federal indictments out on these individuals for, uh, it was some longwinded, uh, federal statute that I don’t exactly, I’m not going to, uh, I’d butcher it if I tried to repeat it.

With regard to walking in the snow, we have this testimony {285}:
(#3867): I saw, at the scene, when I was there, that there’s some snow where that truck and uh, and uh, stopping and it’s fairly deep in some areas.

(#8): Yes.

(#3867): Did did they have to walk over that snow to get to, uh, where they were taken in to custody?

(#8): Yeah, they did.

(#3867): OK. Uh, they then, uh, they fall over? Um.

(#8): They st, they looked like they stumbled. Uh, you know, they tried to have their hands up and their hands dropped for for a little bit, but, uh, it was one of those things that you could certainly tell that that it was because of the terrain they were walking on and not because of, they were actually trying to grab a weapon.

(#3867): OK.

(#8): So, it was clear to me and that that even though they might have dropped their hands for a brief second, that it we really wasn’t, the intent wasn’t there.

So, again, walking in the snow, especially with hands held up, creates an observable “stumbling”, as LaVoy’s walking was described by some of the officers, is “reaching for a gun” a justification, after the fact, for shooting LaVoy? Especially considering that one officer even testified that an agent said, “He’s shooting! He’s shooting!”

After a break, we come back to clarify that “fear” in the officers.

Officer #8 tells us {294-295}:
Um, so um, our team had had a few, uh, briefings and an then talked about, uh, the situation and I know several times we were told, “Yeah, just be prepared, er, if this, this is developing” and then, “Expect to be called”. Um, having bags packed in case you are called and prepared for cold weather. Um, during, during, uh, these briefings, we were told that, uh, a little bit of the history-back in 2014, uh, with the stand-off of when he was in Nevada, when they actually, uh, confronted federal agents, pointed rifles at, uh, federal agents, uh, that they had counter-sniper positions, sometimes even two, one to two guns per agent on them. So, and they were able intimidate those agents, uh, and made them retreat, uh, so, there was a sense of empowerment that they could do this and get away with it. Um, received pictures, huhh, both on the news and the briefings of, uh, these key players, Ammon, uh, Finicum, Payne, uh, Ryan Bundy, all these guys. Uh, they, we’ve been told that they known, they’ve been known to carry firearms. I’ve seen, uh, pistols on hips ranging from, uh, semiautomatic to to revolvers, uh, shoulder holsters, uh, people carrying everything from a hunting rifle to shotguns to, uh, semiautomatic rifles. We were told that they had people at the refuge with, uh, in the tower, uh, with possibly .50 caliber, um, rifles. So we were told that these these folks were were were well armed, um, and that they may say this that they need, are willing to die for their cause, um, to fight, fight the government, uh, to get the land back, to get the Hammonds, uh, out of prison.

And, finally, from Officer 3866 {323}, we know that LaVoy’s body was removed at about 1:00 AM, on January 27 (the next morning).
As far as Crime Scene photos, either Officer 3866 was obsessed with LaVoy’s truck being difficult to remove from its location, frozen in the snow bank {325-356}, or we are simply denied any photos with substance.

Surely an interview was done with Officer #3. He was the closest to LaVoy Finicum and best able to describe what happened during the shooting, especially his observation of whether he was scared and whether LaVoy was stumbling, or reaching for a gun, Absent his interview, we must wonder why the government chose to keep it from us.

~So who is responsible for murdering LaVoy Finicum?

Will Kullman (aka Nighthawk)

Mark McConnell

Thomas S. Dyman (Tom Dyman)

Robert “Rob” Seever (R.W. Seaver)

Terri Linnell (Mama Bear)

Fabio Minoggio (John Killman)

Dennis Dickenson (Dennis Jones)

Allen Varner (Wolf)

Contact Us Today!

Peak Forestry
PO Box 632

Bend, Oregon 97709


Phone: +1 541 610-8897+1 541 610-8897

E-mail: mattcox@peakforestry.com

Special Facebook Promotion

Like us on Facebook and get 10% off your next order.

Print Print | Sitemap
© Peak Forestry - 1&1 MyWebsite