Copyright © 2000 NLThomas
All Rights Reserved

Yesterday, June 12, 2000 a parole hearing for Mr. Leonard Peltier was conducted at Leavenworth Federal Penitentiary. Mr. Peltier attended, together with his attorneys, Carl Nadler, Jennifer Harbury and Ramsay Clark . Despite the extraordinary presentation of evidence as to his eligibility, described below, Mr. Peltier was denied parole before the hearing officer had even read the materials offered. The decision will still be considered by the U.S. parole commissioners in Washington D.C. before the denial is finalized. However, it is abundantly clear that there will be no release, no matter how uniquely eligible Mr. Peltier may be, unless he confesses to a crime he did not commit.

AN ARBITRARY, IRRATIONAL AND CAPRICIOUS DENIAL OF PAROLE IS A DUE PROCESS VIOLATION UNDER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITION.

A DECISION TO DENY PAROLE BEFORE THE EVIDENCE IS EVEN READ OR CONSIDERED IS A DENIAL OF A FAIR HEARING AND CONSTITUTES A DUE PROCESS VIOLATION OF THE US CONSTITUTION AS WELL.

A DENIAL OF PAROLE IN ORDER TO FORCE MR. PELTIER TO CONFESS TO A CRIME HE DID NOT COMMIT IS A DUE PROCESS VIOLATION AS WELL.

PLEASE CALL JANET RENO’S OFFICES AND COMMENT:
THE MAIN SWITCHBOARD NUMBER IS 202 -514-2000

ALSO: WHITE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD 202-456 1414
CONGRESSIONAL SWITCHBOARD 202-224-3121

WHAT WAS PRESENTED AT THE HEARING:

1. 10,000 letters from supporters around the world, all from the last three months

2. Scores of letters from Nobel Peace Laureates, National and International religious networks, human rights luminaries such as Amnesty International, Coretta Scott King, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, and the Kennedy Memorial Center on Human Rights.

3. Scores of Tribal resolutions demanding Mr. Peltier’s immediate release.

4. A multi page listing of Mr. Peltier’s humanitarian work from behind bars, including sponsorship of a Native American scholarship program, an annual Christmas drive for the children of Pine Ridge, the adoption of children in Central America, and the establishment of a prisoner art program, among many other praiseworthy activities and contributions.

5. A multi page medical evaluation from a doctor affiliated with Physicians for Human Rights, detailing his deteriorating medical conditions including his diabetes and blood pressure problems, the inadequate medical care at Leavenworth, and the potential complications, including kidney failure and blindness.

6. Eight employment, social services and housing offers from across the United States and Canada.

7. Statements of support from and request for his release from representatives of the National Congress of American Indians as well as the Assembly of First Nations.

8. A character reference and call for healing from a survivor from the Reign of Terror.

9. Calls for his immediate and unconditional release from representatives from Amnesty International and the Interfaith League of Political Prisoners, an affiliate of the National Council of Churches.

The parole hearing officer received some of these materials, told us to mail him the rest, and declined to even read the medical evaluation or the other written materials. His key issue was the fact that Leonard’s version of the events that day do not square with the FBI version, for which he was convicted.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. Mr. Peltier did not receive a serious or fair hearing on his parole request.

2. Mr. Peltier is more qualified for parole than almost any other prisoner. Yet he will not be given parole unless he confesses to a crime that he did not commit. That fact that he was denied a fair trial and that false testimonies were used to convict him, and that a critical ballistic test showing his innocence was withheld, will not be taken into consideration. Nor will the fact that even the U.S. Attorney now admits that no one knows who pulled the trigger.