Copyright © 1999 NLThomas
All Rights Reserved

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
   
2. Political Prisoner
   
3. Myrtle Poor Bear Affidavits
   
4. Trial In Fargo, North Dakota
   
5. Vital Evidence Suppressed
   
6. Theft of Indian Lands
   
7. Canadian Complicity
   
8. Milwaukee Charge
   
9. Oregon Charge
   
10. Political Remedy
    
11. LPDC Canada Closing Remards
    
12. Letters To Governments Needed
    
13. Letters to United States
    
14. Letters to Canadians

INTRODUCTION

Internationally renowned American Indian Movement leader and political prisoner, Leonard Peltier, is suffering a tortuously slow death as a result of inhumane treatment during his 22 years of imprisonment for crimes he never committed. Either U.S. President Bill Clinton urgently grants him executive clemency or a specially convened parole board hearing on May 4, 1998 must release him on compassionate grounds due to failing health. Otherwise, Peltier, just 53 years old, may become this century's most beloved martyr to die defending Indian rights and sovereignty.

Peltier was originally convicted on F.B.I. coerced, falsified and manufactured evidence, then sentenced to the Marion, Illinois federal penitentiary for two consecutive life terms. Marion State penitentiary warehouses the majority of that nation's political prisoners, alongside their most hardened criminals and is infamous for its "behaviour modification unit." Peltier's prolonged confinements to these units; his efforts to improve prison conditions for his peoples; and his never-ending persecution for his continued support of human rights' issues globally have marked the beginning of his rapidly deteriorating health.

But his fragile medical condition only worsened with his transfer to the notorious Leavenworth penitentiary in Kansas, where there have been numerous long stretches of solitary confinement within a small, dark cell, dimly lit by a single 75-watt bulb. Despite his own critical health condition, Peltier has continued to be a powerful leader for Indian peoples throughout the Americas by his ongoing written statements and interviews to support groups around the world. And to strengthen his sanity against the inhumane treatment intended to silence him, Peltier has turned to painting as a means of re-creating images of his peoples, gaining strength from them to endure the ever-increasing politically generated abuses he has suffered since the beginning of his years in captivity.

Now, however, as a result of the continuous damage inflicted upon him within those two infamous institutions, Peltier is left partially blinded in one eye and with progressive degeneration of sight in the other. So, ironically, if Peltier does not die first, he may ultimately be denied one of the minimal pleasures of life left to him, one which keeps his fighting spirit alive.

Leonard Peltier's future rests entirely on the public's commitment to respond on his behalf before it is too late. Only political intervention at the highest levels will halt the further degeneration of his health. Peltier is plagued with a multitude of other potentially life-threatening disorders, including a condition similar to lockjaw, whereby the atrophied muscles and the jaw bones are immobilized. His teeth are therefore painfully and permanently locked a half inch apart, severely limiting his diet strictly to mashed food and liquids. Needless to say, Leavenworth prison officials are unwilling to accommodate his dietary needs, an act which may lead ultimately to malnourishment, starvation or possibly death ... unless the prison warden is convinced to change his stand on Peltier's overall medical attention.

From previous brutal experiences he suffered at the Springfield prison hospital, Peltier steadfastly rejects any further subjection to the tortuous treatment at that facility. His only hope now is to enter the renowned Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Mn., where a leading surgical specialist, Dr. Eugene Keller, has informed Leavenworth officials he is willing to treat Peltier. The warden has failed to respond to the offer, despite the fact countless other inmates have successfully been transferred to the clinic before. More alarming is the fact the Leavenworth warden is well aware of the consequences of leaving Peltier untreated.

Unless he is granted immediate release, Peltier's health is expected to deteriorate and at this rate it is doubtful whether he can hold out another 15 years until his next scheduled parole board hearing, if the May 4th special hearing denies his release on humanitarian grounds. Due to the urgency of his situation, the Canadian national "Leonard Peltier Defense Committee" with headquarters in Scarborough, Ontario and headed by Frank and Anne Dreaver, is urging his supporters to initiate immediate letter-writing campaigns directly to President Clinton for executive clemency and the U.S. Parole Commission for Peltier's humanitarian release.

In addition, due to the fact Canadian sovereignty was violated in order to gain Peltier's extradition, political pressure should also be maintained to have the United States return Peltier to this country. By violating the Canada-U.S. extradition treaty, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien; Justice Minister Anne McLellan; and Lloyd Axworthy, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Trade, can, by force of international law, seek to have Peltier returned to political asylum here. (All relevant addresses, phone and fax numbers are included on the last page.) The terrible irony, however, exists that, despite the fact Leonard Peltier's struggles have taken place on this continent, he is largely unknown amongst the general public due to the limited coverage of his political prosecution, akin to a near total media blackout. Ignorant of his history or the origins of his case, the average person disbelieves the very notion that the United States could possibly have its own political prisoners while denouncing or demanding of other nations the release of theirs. Peltier, nevertheless, is a household name throughout Europe, including Russia and other parts of the globe.

POLITICAL PRISONER

In order for Canadian people to respond to this urgent request to become involved in a letter-writing campaign to save the life of an American Indian leader, captured on this side of the border, but unlawfully returned to the U.S., it is essential to understand how Leonard Peltier became a political prisoner in the first place. Only then, by reviewing the facts of his case, can the Canadian public add their voice of protest to the multitude of peoples from around the world. By strength of numbers it may finally be possible to obtain the freedom that true justice demands for Peltier.

Leonard Peltier has always rightfully maintained his innocence in the trumped up charges of murdering two F.B.I. agents on the Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota on June 26, 1975. In fact, had he been tried at the same time as his two co-accused, Dino Butler and Bob Robideau, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, he would have been found innocent on the grounds of self- defense. However, in what has now proven to be a devastating error, he fled to Canada to escape U.S. government persecution in the misguided belief this country would provide the necessary asylum he sought.

Peltier was taken into custody by the R.C.M.P. in Hinton, Alberta. He was transferred shortly after to an outdated and overcrowded prison in Vancouver, Canada, where he was held in solitary confinement and shackles throughout the extradition hearings in 1976. No reasons were ever given in regards to the cruel and inhumane treatment while Peltier was incarcerated here, other than a later incident, which occurred during the Fargo trial, between Kitty Sparrow, a reporter for "Indian Voice" and the chief of the F.B.I. investigation, Norman Zigrossi. He informed her there was a very good working relationship between them and British Columbia police.

Needless to say, Peltier never expected the extreme measures the United States government would utilize in their efforts to extradite the Native American political prisoner. Through abuse of their own justice system, manipulated by the F.B.I., the American government violated Canada's sovereignty and made an absolute mockery of the Canadian justice system.

The United States government alleged Peltier had murdered two F.B.I. agents, Jack Coler and Ronald Williams, cold-bloodedly in a shootout between the two men and other members of the American Indian Movement (AIM). The shootout took place near the Jumping Bull Hall area of the Pine Ridge reservation, South Dakota, where a small group of AIM members had been asked by the Lakota elders to set up a spiritual encampment to protect and teach their youth the traditional ways.

The F.B.I. contended Coler and Williams were only present on the reservation to serve a warrant to Jimmy Eagle for the theft of a $25 pair of boots, although, under the "Major Crimes Act" passed by the U.S. Congress in 1863, they had no jurisdiction in this misdemeanor offense to be on reservation land.

Witnesses to the shootings, on the other hand, steadfastly maintained it was the two agents who had driven separately at high speed into the Jumping Bull Hall area of Pine Ridge, parked their cars in a "V" angle meant to provide optimum defense and started shooting up the village. Some defensive gunfire was returned. However, Peltier along with the other AIM members, were responsible for the protection of the Indian youths and, once the shootout began, Peltier was among the group to lead some of the youngsters to safety through a hailstorm of flying bullets fired to and from every direction.

In the Vancouver Supreme court month-long extradition hearing, which began May 13, 1976 and was presided over by Judge W.A. Schultz, a lawyer from the Canadian Justice Department, the late Paul Halprin represented the United States government's interests as part of the Canada-U.S. extradition treaty agreement. On their behalf, Halprin presented four affidavits to substantiate numerous crimes allegedly committed by Peltier.

The two most incriminating depositions were the notorious Myrtle Poor Bear affidavits, the first one dated Feb. 23, 1976, and the second, dated March 31, 1976. The two documents, presented by Halprin to the court, were asserted to be the true statements of Poor Bear who claimed that, as his girlfriend she was present with Peltier and an eyewitness to his murder of the two F.B.I. agents.

The third affidavit was from the police department of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, charging Peltier with attempting to murder one of their police officers. And the fourth sworn statement was from two Oregon State Police officers alleging the American Indian Movement leader had shot at them. (Judge Schultz found insufficient evidence for Peltier to be committed for trial on the Oregon charges.)

MYRTLE POOR BEAR AFFIDAVITS

Shortly after the extradition proceedings took place in Vancouver, Peltier's two co- accused, Dino Butler and Bob Robideau, stood trial in Cedar Rapids, Iowa for their part in the alleged murders of Coler and Williams. As a result of the disclosure of all documents during their trial, a third affidavit of Myrtle Poor Bear, dated Feb. 21, 1976, surfaced. This additional affidavit pre-dated the two documents Halprin presented in the Canadian court and flagrantly contradicted them. The Feb. 19th Poor Bear deposition clearly stated she was not an eyewitness to the alleged murders and was nowhere near the area of the incident. Instead, she claimed she had only been told by Peltier much later that he had shot and killed the two F.B.I. agents. This affidavit was, in fact, the first and original statement given by her and it contained none of the two later alleged eyewitness accounts of the gruesome and bloody murders. Peltier's defense lawyers only learned of the Feb. 19, 1976 written testimony after Judge Schultz ordered Peltier's extradition.

Yet, at the time of their introduction by Halprin as evidence to the court, Peltier immediately advised his two lawyers he had never even heard of Myrtle Poor Bear, let alone talked to her. The justice system had taken advantage of one of the major flaws of the Canada/U.S. extradition treaty which permits evidence to be presented by affidavits only, without benefit of cross examination in person of the accusers. Without the defense knowledge of the pre-existing Poor Bear affidavit and the inability to question her in person under oath in the Canadian court, Peltier's lawyers could not disprove her written evidence. The two depositions Halprin presented to Judge Schultz gave such a grisly and savage picture of the murders, they weighed heavily against Peltier.

Meanwhile, Butler and Robideau had the benefit of a change of venue for their trial from the highly racist states of North and South Dakota to Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Additionally their defense lawyers were allowed to present the broadest scope of evidence, including provisions in the historical Fort Laramie Treaty; the background of the violence-ridden Pine Ridge reservation, ongoing since the 1973 Wounded Knee uprising which left dozens of unsolved murders of traditional tribal members or AIM supporters; and establishing the unrelenting misconduct of the F.B.I. With the benefit of a full defense and a fair trial, Butler and Robideau were acquitted of all charges on the grounds of self-defence for returning the agents' fire.

Unbeknownst to Peltier or his defense team, however, Butler and Robideau's verdict of innocence would later hold severe repercussions for him as the F.B.I. intensified their efforts to prosecute the one remaining AIM leader. Peltier's Canadian lawyers, Stuart Rush and Don Rosenbloom, ultimately received the Feb. 19, 1976 Poor Bear affidavit and with this new evidence, the two lawyers appealed the decision to the B.C. Court of Appeal, but were turned down. The appeal's court justices concluded that irrespective of the false Poor Bear affidavits, there was still justifiable cause of Peltier's extradition due to the remaining two 'prima facie' cases established regarding the charges in Wisconsin and Oregon.

The defense made a final, but futile appeal to the then federal Minister of Justice Ronald Basford who upheld the appeal's court decision based on the theory the other two 'prima facie' cases were sufficient to extradite Peltier. The conditions placed on Peltier's extradition order were that he not face the death penalty (a prerequisite for anyone under Canada's extradition laws since capital punishment was banned over three decades ago in this country) and he be given a fair trial.

By the time Peltier was finally returned to the United States, the F.B.I., in conjunction with the U.S. Justice Department, were well prepared to gain a conviction of murder in the first degree of two of their agents. Since their humiliating defeat in the Butler-Robideau trial, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was unwilling to risk further embarrassment by not convicting someone, anyone, for the alleged crimes against members of their agency. By the end of the trial in Fargo, they achieved their goal when Peltier was found guilty, sentenced to two consecutive life terms and sent to Marion penitentiary.

TRIAL IN FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA

When Peltier ultimately went to trial in Fargo, North Dakota, the venue was established within the highly racist state and the original judge, believed to be too liberal, was replaced with the chosen hardline, arch-conservative U.S. District Judge Paul Benson, known to be favorable to the F.B.I.

Benson's prejudice was clearly demonstrated by his refusal to allow nearly 80 per cent of all evidence presented by Peltier's defense to be heard by the all-white jury. They were excused the majority of the defense's time, while only Benson heard and decided what could be presented to the jury members. In the United States justice system, as in Canada, the court procedure permits witnesses to testify in what is termed as an; quote "offer of proof" unquote (or "voir dire') without the jury's presence, with the presiding judge deciding, in what is basically; quote "a mini-trial within a trial" unquote, whether or not the jury will hear the evidence presented.

While the prosecution was able to call upon 25 separate witnesses, not one of whom saw the shootout, Judge Benson disallowed the majority of the defense witnesses' accounts. Benson had ruled against admitting into evidence anything before or after the one day of June 26, 1975 when agents Williams and Coler died. This single ruling by Benson so thoroughly limited the scope of admissible evidence by the defense, it guaranteed Peltier's conviction by ruling out all the crucial testimony that could have demonstrated the evidence was coerced, manufactured or manipulated by the F.B.I.

To illustrate the token defense permitted Peltier's defense team, headed by Elliot Taikeff, it is more noteworthy to demonstrate, with but a few examples, what crucial testimony was heard only by Benson, and then ruled inadmissable to the jury. Wilford Draper, for example, a 15-year-old Navajo, testified for the state prosecution, with the jury present, as to the type of gun Peltier had at the time of the shootout. Later, when Draper was produced as a witness for the defense, Benson dismissed the jury to decide whether or not the young Navajo's unperjured statements could be heard by them.

Draper recanted his earlier testimony and described how he had been coerced by F.B.I. agents who had come to his reservation, arrested him without charges and proceeded to interrogate him in front of his mother. Initially he refused to cooperate with the F.B.I. agents' demands to implicate Peltier, but one agent, Gary Adams, threatened to charge the young man with the same crime unless he collaborated with them and the prosecutor's office. His mother, terrified at what would happen to her son, immediately began to pressure him into saying whatever they wanted to hear.

Draper was able to resist only briefly, at which point he was forced into a swivel chair, with his hands cuffed behind his back, and whirled around for hours. All the while his mother kept screaming for him to cooperate. He testified he finally broke and agreed to say anything the F.B.I. told him to say. In his testimony for the defense, Draper stated he did not know one gun from another and that his earlier evidence for the prosecution regarding Peltier's gun and whereabouts at the time of the shootout, had originated from the F.B.I.

Due to the rigid limitations of Benson's ruling that only evidence relating to the severely restricted boundaries of the single day that Williams and Coler died, the jury heard Draper's prosecutorial testimony, but not a word of his statements of how he had been forced to take the stand against Peltier. It appeared truth meant nothing to Judge Benson as long as he could manipulate the scales of justice to protect the image of the federal agency. It was a ploy carried on throughout the entire Fargo trial.

But his restrictive ruling, excluding any and all evidence to the single date, applied only to Peltier's defense. The prosecution, had free reign to guarantee a guilty verdict. As just one case in point, Benson allowed Evan Hultman, head of the prosecution and backed by U.S. attorney Lynn Crooks to introduce the attempted murder charges of a Milwaukee policeman and the two Oregon officers in a brazen attempt to prove to the jury that Peltier was a rabid, psychopathic cop-killer. Yet, Peltier has not stood trial for either of the charges at the time of the Fargo trial. By exposing these prejudicial charges to the jury, Peltier was denied his constitutional right to; quote "presumption of innocence until found guilty." unquote

Furthermore, prosecutor Hultman, without application of Benson's notorious confinement of admissible evidence imposed upon the defense, paraded both alleged incidents before the jury despite their variation in time. The Milwaukee charge of attempted murder of a police officer preceded the June 26, 1975 date by about two years! The other alleged Oregon incident occurred several months after the shootout. And, the most disturbing aspect of these charges being used at all during both the Canadian extradition hearings and the Fargo trial, is that Peltier was not convicted in either of these two States for any of their charges!

Judge Benson's bias was again made obvious when the defense called for Myrtle Poor Bear to testify regarding the role of the F.B.I. in preparing her three affidavits for Peltier's extradition. The jury was again dismissed while Poor Bear testified F.B.I. agents David Price and William Woods held her "incommunicado" while in protective custody under the pretext they were safeguarding her from the American Indian Movement. She had testified in an earlier case against an AIM member and they implied other members of the movement would seek revenge against her.

Poor Bear swore she had no idea as to the contents of the three affidavits which she was forced to sign. She told the court the F.B.I. agents showed her gruesome photos of an autopsy performed on a Micmac Indian woman from Canada, Anna Mae Aquash, who was an AIM member.

While living on the Pine Ridge reservation, Aquash was not present on the day Coler and Williams died, although she was later questioned by the F.B.I. and warned she might not live out the year. She did disappear later, but her body was not discovered until February of the following year beneath a bank of thawing snow. She was buried quickly in an unmarked grave, with cause of death listed as having "frozen to death." The F.B.I. had cut off her hands and sent them to their Washington D.C. headquarters for identification, Once identified, her family went to South Dakota to recover her remains, intending to re-bury her according to the traditional ways. Prior to this, though, they had a private autopsy performed which easily identified the cause of death: a bullet right through the back of the head, shot at close range.

Poor Bear testified that even though Aquash's remains had not yet been identified, agents Woods and Price constantly referred to her as "that AIM bitch." And throughout the eight months she was held in custody by the F.B.I., the agents continually threatened her with the same fate and eventually the life of her eight-year-old daughter. Needless to say, Poor Bear also confirmed to Judge Benson she met Peltier for the first time that same day in court.

VITAL EVIDENCE SUPPRESSED

Benson was able to exclude the jury from hearing this crucial defense both under his prejudicial exclusion of evidence outside the scope of the one day in June, 1975. And, more critically, due to his constant blatant rulings that were meant to protect the F.B.I. from any charges of judicial misconduct. He decided against her testimony on the basis her three affidavits had already been proven false despite -- or better still, because Peltier's defense had proffered her factual confirmation of the events to demonstrate what extreme measures the F.B.I. were willing to use to gain Peltier's conviction.

The exclusion of Draper's and Poor Bear's evidence are but two illustrations to indicate how 80 per cent of the most vital evidence to prove Peltier's innocence was suppressed. His defense attorneys were obstructed time and time again throughout the Fargo trial in their efforts to prove the F.B.I. could only gain a conviction by such damning tactics of coercion, fabrication or manipulation of evidence against him. Since all these damaging actions by the federal agency had occurred either before or after the stated date, the defense team of Elliot Taikeff and John Lowe were literally knocked out of the fight in the defense arena.

While Butler and Robideau were granted a fair trial without limitations, Taikeff and Lowe were not allowed to place into evidence before the jury any past transgressions of the F.B.I. Nor were they allowed to expose the heavy concentration of diverse law enforcement officers spread out all over the Pine Ridge reservation from the very beginning of that day.

But, Edgar Bear Runner, a defense witness for the Canadian extradition hearings, gave a highly detailed eyewitness account of what real conditions were like on what he constantly referred to as the "Pine Ridge Concentration Camp." Bear Runner was able to fill in the gap of facts, unheard at the Fargo trial, by retelling precise pieces of information regarding his disheartening efforts to halt an inevitable massacre there, starting from the early morning of June 25, 1975.

After Bear Runner was informed military forces were surrounding the entire Oglala area, he made every effort to mediate a peaceful resolution between the approximately 250; quote "armed and ready to fire" unquote, mix of enforcers and the small band of AIM members in an area referred to as "Tent City." It was there, near the Jumping Bull Hall, Peltier and other AIM members had set up their spiritual encampment. Bear Runner recounted how, along his path to "Tent City", at specific intervals he encountered clusters of Bureau of Indian Affairs "(BIA) funded tribal goon squads", headed by the elected Tribal Chairman Dick Wilson (intent on suppressing resistance from the traditional people or their AIM supporters), another blockade further along that included a mixture of 150 different members of the State Highway Patrol, U.S. Federal Marshals, police S.W.A.T. teams and members of the armed forces in combat uniforms. All of them were heavily armed with sniper rifles and machine guns.

Arriving at the Jumping Bull Hall area after being given a deadline of 10 minutes to accomplish his objectives by the BIA Superintendent, Bear Runner was shaken up by the sudden outburst of an order to place his hands above his head. Frantic to depart the area before his 10- minute deadline, he was unable to locate any Indian people in the area, but was lead to a ravine overlooking another large group of uniformed men in combat green uniforms. They, too, were heavily armed with machine guns and sniper rifles, but with the addition of grenades. For his own safety, Bear Runner returned to the area where the BIA Superintendent was located. He was informed the men were getting impatient, as they were all preparing for a military assault. His attempted mediation failed. Even so, his observations of the overnight increase of military forces who, by then, had the whole area entirely secured and cordoned off, were pivotal in the quest for the motivation behind such an armed forces' intentions and presence there on such a significant day.

In order to assemble the vast array of military and law enforcement officers, then to carry out their intended assault, they would have unquestionably worked out the strategic planning much earlier and begun to assemble long before the time the two F.B.I. special agents were shot at. These facts, however, only stimulate further questioning regarding a possible hidden agenda. The unanswered questions, never brought up in any court, could not help but arouse logical and justifiable suspicions. In turn, there was definite uncertainty regarding any rationale for the eruption of unusual para-military actions on that June day in 1975. The only logical conclusion was the most obvious: the never-ending, historically based greed of the invaders for Indian lands.

THEFT OF INDIAN LANDS

What else but lust for Indian lands and their resources could reproduce such similarities to the 500-year-old struggle to defend what little land has ultimately been left to them? The motivation remains the same, only the technology, strategy and tactics have been refined to achieve the same goal: theft of Indian lands. Lest anyone forget, the mid-seventies OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) oil crisis was reason enough for then President Jimmy Carter to call for solutions against what he considered to be international blackmail regarding essential resources for the U.S. In order for the United States to become an energy self-sufficient country, President Carter formally declared there would be certain areas throughout the country that would have to be declared "national sacrifice areas" in the "moral equivalent of war."

What Carter failed to inform the public was the fact that due to population expansion and abuse of non-sustainable resources, 70 per cent of the remaining resource-rich lands were located on Indian reservations thoughout the country. In particular, the Oglala Sioux lands contain uranium, natural gas deposits and other resource rich supplies, untapped by them as a result of their sacred relationship to the lands of their peoples.

To maintain secrecy regarding Tribal Chairman Dick Wilson's arbitrary decision to support, or, in all honesty, to take advantage of the President's announced plans to exploit the necessary resources from the national sacrifice areas, he did not announce his travel plans to Washington D.C. With assistance from the BIA, Wilson, at some point related to the day of the shootout, signed away an eighth of the Pine Ridge reservation for uranium and other resource extraction. To avoid the natural consequence for his illegal act, by way of retaliatory measures from the traditional peoples, it had to have been deemed essential to distract and divert their attention elsewhere. And there was no doubt the men and women of the American Indian Movement would be fully supportive of the traditional people in their desire to defend their lands. Just as 'warriors' have for 500 years sacrificed their lives for the protection of the land and the people.

From the time of the Wounded Knee uprising whereby the traditional people, as always backed up by active support of the American Indian Movement, reaffirmed their sovereignty, until after the deaths of Coler and Williams, the Pine Ridge Indian reservation has been an armed camp, a powder keg ready to blow over the smallest or most simple reasons. Within the judicial system, Peltier has been required to circumnavigate the unexposed field of mines in the courts' ruling against him. It is much like the June 26, 1975 date when only a few dozen members of AIM were on the Pine Ridge reservation and, with over several hundreds of sherif's officers and military men shooting, Peltier was able to help guide members of the encampment to safety despite the cross fire of thousands of bullets.

Swift responses from leaders of both the United States and Canada may still permit Leonard Peltier to be safeguarded from the hazardous lack of medical responses to his tortuous afflictions. This must be done at the highest political levels, without forcing him through any more trials, stress-filled with their own set of traps to deny him a fair hearing. The Fargo trial was the most gruelling because Judge Benson granted the prosecution full reign to present their case to the jury, while severely limiting the defense. This created an impossible imbalance with no possibility for a fair trial.

Yet some of the testimony presented by the F.B.I. was at times so outrageous that, at one point, even prosecutor Evan Hultman could not refrain later from commenting on its content. Specifically in regards to Special Agent Frank Coward's claims to have seen Peltier in the area from a half mile away through the scope of rifle as he ran in the opposite direction!

Hultman, in discussing Coward's incredible ability to sight and correctly identify anyone from such a distance with his back to the agent, while fleeing the scene, let his guard down briefly once the jury had retired for deliberations. During a discussion with the Vancouver based 'Indian Voice' newspaper reporter, Hultman smiled slightly and confessed he found Coward's testimony "totally impossible!"

At another point in the Fargo trial, a badly burned AR15 semi-automatic was introduced into evidence as being Peltier's weapon. A Los Angeles forensic expert testified it was bullets from this gun that killed Coler and Williams. What the prosecution did not admit, however, is why they had to fly a California expert all the way to Fargo, South Dakota. It was only after the trial ended with Peltier's conviction, that his defense team was able to obtain 6,000 documents under the Freedom of Information Act. Within those hidden files it was discovered two local forensic experts had both tested the gun, which inoperable, but were able to conclude there was absolutely no way the weapon, alleged to be Peltier's, was the one that killed the two agents. When both experts refused to testify otherwise, the F.B.I. expanded their search for another expert who would swear to the court precisely what they needed in order to convict an innocent man.

CANADIAN COMPLICITY

Meanwhile, prosecutor Hultman unwittingly provided the initial witness, F.B.I. Special Agent David Price, who would give the court and his defense, the first hint of the Canadian Justice Department's complicity in the falsification of the Myrtle Poor Bear affidavits. Price testified that lawyer Paul Halprin, the Crown Counsel assigned by the Canadian Justice Department to represent F.B.I. investigation into the deaths of Coler and Williams at Pine Ridge was carried out in that city with over 150 agents involved. Price specifically recalled Halprin went there to assist in formulating the second and third Poor Bear affidavits, dated Feb. 23 and March 31, 1976. This was done because the first affidavit signed Feb. 19 and sent to the Vancouver division of the Justice Department allegedly did not conform in format to the Canadian evidentiary requirements for extradition.

Yet it was not so much the fact that the format was changed from the first one, but the facts clearly show there was a major alteration and addition of information in the second and third affidavits which totally contradicted the first. Poor Bear's first statement declared she was not at the Jumping Bull Hall area the day of the shootout and recounts a significantly shorter version, with limited details of events allegedly confessed to her later by Peltier. By the time Halprin was in Rapid City that version was retracted and kept secret. The subsequent affidavits, formulated by Halprin while in Rapid City, claim she was Peltier's girlfriend and was beside him while he ruthlessly murdered the F.B.I. A longer, dramatically grotesque story of the manner in which Peltier ruthlessly assassinated both Coler and Williams was added.

At the very least, Halprin had known about the first Poor Bear affidavit throughout the entire extradition hearing he conducted on behalf of the U.S. government while Peltier was still in Canada. He withheld this very pertinent information from Judge Schultz and the Canadian defense lawyers. He had to also have been entirely aware the first and contradictory affidavit gave insufficient evidence to extradite Peltier on those charges. By not disclosing his knowledge of the inadequate original Poor Bear affidavit, Halprin guaranteed Peltier's inability to have a fair hearing even in Canada!

In order for the Canadian reporter from the 'Indian Voice' to write an exact summary of Peltier's Fargo trial, daily copies of the trial transcripts were obtained to supplement notes taken throughout the proceedings. Inexplicably, though, the transcript of agent Price's testimony on Halprin's key role in formulating the Poor Bear affidavits was for some reason "unavailable" at the end of the day. After requesting a copy be sent to her office in Vancouver, the transcript arrived in Canada two weeks later. Without any explanation given, agent Price's testimony relating the extent of Halprin's involvement was completely garbled.

Nevertheless, when the reporter returned to Vancouver, she phoned the office of Stuart Rush, one of Peltier's senior defense lawyers representing him throughout the year-long series of hearings and appeals. She informed one of the junior lawyers in Rush's firm, Peter Grant, of Price's statements implicating Halprin as the author of Poor Bear's 2nd and 3rd affidavits, which Halprin introduced in Canada as the only affidavits provided to him. Grant then phoned 'The Vancouver Sun', this area's largest daily newspaper, and informed the paper that according to Price's testimony, Halprin had assisted in composing the two false affidavits. The newspaper reprinted a major story on it and Halprin ended up filing suit against both 'The Vancouver Sun' and Grant for slander.

The Honourable Justice Anderson, of the British Columbia Supreme Court, presided at the trial. His pivotal ruling that the United States was guilty of misconduct by falsifying the Poor Bear affidavits was the first judicial recognition there was illegal evidence constructed to prosecute Peltier. As a result of Justice Anderson's findings, Halprin's' defamation suit was dismissed.

Back in the U.S., Peltier's conviction was appealed to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis, Missouri. The Fargo trial defense attorney Elliot Taikeff had the responsibility of preparing the appeal in St. Louis. As time for the hearing drew close, though, Taikeff did not have all the submissions completed. Peltier, both profoundly concerned and angered at the possibility of losing his case, dropped Taikeff. He turned his case over to the now deceased William Kunstler who won the acquittal of Dino Butler and Bob Robideau on the same charges. Attorney D. Tiger assisted Kunstler, yet in such a crucial hearing each defense attorney was limited to a mere 15 minutes for summary arguments to win an appeal for Peltier. Incredibly, Evan Hultman, the head of the prosecution at Fargo, was given no such time restrictions.

At the time the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments on Peltier's case, Kunstler, on such short notice, was unable to be fully versed on every detail of the Fargo trial. So, when the cardinal question, "Did Draper recant?" was asked, Kunstler responded, "No." There were audible gasps from Taikeff and others who had been present at the Fargo trial when Draper had indeed recanted his evidence on behalf of the prosecution and, testified for the defense in detail regarding the threats and force used against him by the F.B.I.

Since Taikeff had been excluded entirely from the St. Louis appeal, he was unable to communicate to Kunstler anything regarding his erroneous response concerning Draper's retraction. But. largely due to that one wrong answer, the appeal was denied.

Insofar as the fraudulent Poor Bear affidavits, Prosecutor Hultman made sure the Appeals Court would not be unduly influenced by them as an example of the F.B.I.'s misconduct in gaining Peltier's conviction. Hultman gave an unusually long-winded and melodramatic account of how, during the Fargo trial, he had never given any credibility whatsoever to her sworn statements. By implying Peltier's conviction was in no way influenced by the manufactured evidence, the St. Louis court dealt with them in the same manner as the Canadian appeals court's excuse for extraditing Peltier: that there were two other 'prima facie' cases still facing him in Milwaukee and Oregon which would justify his continued imprisonment.

Despite the 8th Circuit Court's denial of an appeal on Peltier's behalf, the evidence heard still prompted one of the judges, Judge Ross, to state that: "It is obvious to anyone that the woman had to have been pressured to add more and more to the affidavits. If this is the way Indian people are treated by our judicial system, it is no wonder they have lost faith." With the two 'prima facie' cases against Peltier still untried, from Canada to St. Louis they continued to tie the hands of his defense teams, hindering justice and influencing the various courts' decisions against him. By the time those two alleged 'prima facie' cases were to be heard, Peltier's two life sentences for the murders he never committed were firmly established. With these two unproven charges continuously paraded by prosecution as smokescreens for F.B.I. involvement, true justice has been denied Peltier right up to the present date.

MILWAUKEE CHARGE

The primary case in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, finally went to trial January, 1978. From Marion prison, Peltier was brought to Milwaukee for trial. The charges were "The State of Wisconsin versus Leonard Peltier", alleging that on Nov. 22, 1973, outside the 'Texas Restaurant', Peltier attempted to kill two plain clothes police officers. Officers Ronald Hlavinka and James Ecles stated Peltier threatened to kill them and pulled out a gun. After a brief struggle, the two officers claimed to have disarmed Peltier.

The Milwaukee defense was handled by the late Lew Gurwitz (a famed Boston attorney who gave up his private practice completely to defend Indian rights' cases all over the United States for more than 30 years.) Gurwitz steadfastly maintained Peltier and several other Native Americans were drinking in the restaurant where two men dressed as bikers sat close to them. The bikers continuously and loudly made derogatory remarks about Native people.

After ignoring this racist harassment for a period of time, Peltier finally asked one of the bikers, who hurled an insult so derogatory it could not be disregarded, to step outside. When the biker left the premises with Peltier, the other biker followed them outside. Immediately the two men handcuffed Peltier, searched him and found a gun: (At the time, AIM members carried guns for their own protection due to the threats and violence directed at them and the dozens of actual murders on the Pine Ridge reservation that were never investigated.)

Once the gun was found, Peltier was immediately charged with the attempted murder of police officer Hlavinka. He was jailed and the gun was taken as evidence. When Peltier was brought into the Milwaukee court, the charge was laid before a judge who released him on bail. The gun was later checked and found to be inoperable.

Because Pelter knew he was being framed, he fled Milwaukee back to the Pine Ridge reservation, thus becoming a fugitive from "injustice" and the so-called enforcers of the law. This Milwaukee charge was contained within another affidavit used by Halprin to establish an additional 'prima facie' case which would enable the Canadian government to justify Peltier's extradition to the U.S. even after the Poor Bear affidavits were proven false.

The trial was going badly for the defense until Belle Anne Gild, Hlavinka's former fiance, surprisingly showed up to testify for the defense. She swore under oath that the day after the incident, a jubilant Hlavinka told her he had caught a big Indian. Gild asked if it was Russell Means or Dennis Banks, but he informed her it was Leonard Peltier. He then pulled out an F.B.I. picture of Peltier from his files. She told how her then fiance, Hlavinka, explained she would have to stay away from him for a while because the F.B.I. had warned him the Native Indian people might retaliate. As a result, she might be injured. Her testimony on the connection between Hlavinka and the F.B.I. gave the appearance the federal agency had targeted Peltier and that Hlavinka was their instrument. The entire Milwaukee case against Peltier was dismissed.

OREGON CHARGE

The second 'prima facie' case hanging over Peltier's head, which for so long had obstructed justice for him, occurred after the Pine Ridge reservation shootout when Peltier fled the area with Dennis Banks, another fugitive in the case and prominent AIM leader. Actor Marlon Brando, known for his support of Indian rights, had provided them with his mobile home in order for them to escape wrongful persecution by the F.B.I. On route through Oregon they were stopped by two police officers who shot at them as they fled.

Abandoning the vehicle, Banks headed south to California, with Peltier heading north to Canada. In an unusual twist of fate, the liberal and noted intellectual, California Governor Jerry Brown was more knowledgeable of his federal government's mistreatment of Indian activists at that time, and refused to extradite Banks from his state back to South Dakota.

Ironically, Peltier's belief in Canada's humanitarian treatment of political refugees led him, with the aid of other native Americans along the way, to Canada, where he hoped to find justice and sanctuary. He found neither. The final, outstanding 'prima facie' case alleged by the Canadian justice system to prove justifiable grounds for Peltier's extradition was contained in the affidavits by the two Oregon police officers who shot at Peltier and Banks. In their signed depositions to the Canadian Justice Department, they swore Peltier had shot at them and not the reverse.

This case, as with sworn affidavit against Peltier proved to be fabrications (with the F.B.I.'s involvement in each case.). The three infamous Poor Bear affidavits were recognized as false in the B.C. Supreme Court (Halprin's libel suit); the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis; and even prosecutor Hultman conceded they were false at the Fargo trial. The Milwaukee Court dismissed the charges there and the Oregon case could not be brought to trial.

Yet the Canadian extradition of Peltier depended solely on these affidavits and throughout the Fargo trial, the St. Louis Appeals court, the Milwaukee case, and up until the final Oregon charges were dismissed, they were used by the prosecution to endlessly portray Peltier as a dedicated "cop killer."

But, anyone who has come to know the real Leonard Peltier -- especially from before the great wounds of his incarceration set in; before the brutal and inhumane conditions were imposed upon him; and, even now, after 22 years of rising above the torturous suffering inflicted on him -- knows there is no killer lurking within. He is, first and foremost, a leader who places the needs of his people above his and consistently, tirelessly, works to unite all peoples for the common good of humanity.

It is for this reason the Canadian national Leonard Peltier Defense Committee requested Kitty Sparrow, the one 'Indian Voice' reporter, who covered all of Leonard Peltier's trials dating back to early 1976, to begin this summary. (Due to time constraints to have readers respond by May 4th for the specially convened parole board hearing, this is a highly condensed version which, over time, will be expanded upon so the entire story will be told.)

Appalled at the abuse of the Canadian justice department's fraudulent extradition of Peltier, Sparrow and Rose Charlie, President of the former B.C. Indian Homemakers Association, had sent a lengthy brief to the then Minister of Justice Marc Lalonde on Oct. 19, 1978. The brief contained the judgements of each of the many courts where the Myrtle Poor Bear affidavits were used, along with the subsequent confirmation by U.S. prosecutor Evan Hultman at the Fargo trial and the St. Louis Appeal Court of the fact the Poor Bear affidavits were completely false. Their brief ended with the damning statements made by Judge Ross of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis as to the force used by the F.B.I. to coerce the Indian woman into signing the documents. Charlie demanded an accounting from Lalonde for his department's integral role in assisting the F.B.I. in persecuting and prosecuting an Indian leader.

The Hon. Minister Lalonde replied that he, too, was very concerned about the Poor Bear affidavits and that he would make inquiries to the U.S. Government concerning these. But again, he added the two other charges from Milwaukee and Oregon constituted 'prima facie' cases, sufficient to extradite Peltier. Lalonde ignored the fact that, earlier the same year the charges from Milwaukee had been dismissed at trial and the Oregon charges had been thrown out. Despite Lalonde's promises to the contrary, the results of his inquiries were never made known to 'The Indian Homemaker's' or the public. It was only much later, from the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, it was discovered the reasons for Lalonde's lack of response. The U.S. information revealed their response to Canada's inquiry in F.B.I. memos and further implicated Canada's own involvement through Paul Halprin in the falsified affidavits. Lalonde, who had most likely believed his department would be vindicated, discovered the opposite.

The Canadian Minister of Justice was informed "The selection of the two affidavits (dated Feb. 23 and March 31) was based upon recommendation of Paul William Halprin, Canadian Department of Justice, Vancouver, British Columbia" and that "... he traveled to Rapid City, South Dakota ..." In fact, the affidavit of March 31st was obtained at the request of Halprin who indicated he desired "amplification of certain issues."

Despite their claims the affidavits were taken "in good faith" -- four years after their introduction into a Canadian Court -- there is no possible way that by 1980, the F.B.I. could still maintain their innocence in providing falsified evidence. The most damaging indicator of this is the glaring fact that nowhere in any one of the memos and covering letters sent to the Canadian Minister of Justice is there a single name or trace of any F.B.I. agents' identities ... not even of those who directly dealt with Halprin.

POLITICAL REMEDY

This cover-up of crucial information, such as the above response to the Canadian inquiry, proves the F.B.I. from start to finish, manipulated the evidence, manifests Canada's reluctance to be involved in a dispute with the United States over the violation of its justice system and its sovereignty. However, in part responding to the inquiries of millions of peoples over the years from Canada and worldwide; a Supreme Court of Canada suggestion in 1989 for a political remedy and recommendation of a ministerial review by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Canada's then Minister of Justice Allan Rock finally agreed to a departmental review of the extradition in April, 1994, which, four years later, is still pending before the present Justice Minister, Anne McLellan.

Now more than ever before, while the review takes on a renewed urgency, with the department of justice announcing that it is almost complete but for the minister's decision, it is important for each person to send in their demand to Canada's Justice Minister, the Prime Minister of Canada and to their federal Members of Parliament along with letters to the United States President and to the U.S. Attorney General. It is our hope that in reading this comprehensive overview, particularly noting Canada's role at the time of the extradition, and this country's stunning lack of response to the mounting evidence of fraud over the past 22 years, that we can all raise our voices in a Canada-wide and worldwide demand for Leonard Peltier's freedom.

LPDC CANADA CLOSING REMARKS

This article was written by Kitty Bell Sparrow (the original 'Indian Voice' reporter in 1976) with the assistance of her daughter, Kathleen Bell Younger and Anne Dreaver of the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee Canada. Mrs. Sparrow is a member of the advisory council to the LPDC Canada.

Mrs. Sparrow, who lives in Vancouver, B.C. is a member of the advisory council to the LPDC Canada which was established in 1987 following Leonard's second appeal and the U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to grant him a new trial. Attention then turned to Canada and Leonard's illegal extradition. A legal team was soon assembled and a national defense/offense committee, founded by Frank & Anne Dreaver, began its lobby and advocacy work under an autonomous legal/political mandate as the only other country to be violated in this case.

Today, the Canadian LPDC functions by bringing to light Canada's involvement and to seek out remedies both in Canada and internationally which has included filing interventions, appeals and presentations at United Nations human rights forums, with world governmental bodies, political organizations and directly with the Canadian government.

LPDC International Spokesperson Frank Dreaver, (Plains Cree, Saskatchewan) has participated in and helped to organize more than a dozen European lobby initiatives since 1990 including the first ever prayer vigil for Leonard Peltier's freedom at the U.N. human rights commission in Geneva in 1996 and in April, 1997 toured the former East bloc countries of Poland, Slovakia and Czech Republics as a keynote speaker & lobbyist.

Over the years other representatives have accompanied him, including two of Leonard's original defense attorneys, Bruce Ellison and the late Lew Gurwitz; Edgar Bear Runner of Pine Ridge Reservation and various staff at the U.S. LPDC, Lawrence, Kansas office.

"The struggle for Leonard's freedom stands today as a foremost example of what happens to indigenous peoples who have the courage to defend their true identity and nationhood rights", stated Dreaver.

We also want to acknowledge Ethel Pearson, an elder of the Kwakiutl nation and 52 traditional chiefs who offered Leonard sanctuary during the 1976 extradition process by formally adopting him into their nation to try and stop the extradition. (Gwarth-ee-lass was the name given to Leonard by the Kwakiutl elders; meaning: "To lead his people.")

"In principle, this country should annul all past (extradition) proceedings and request the return of Peltier, join the worldwide campaign for his clemency and forward all evidence and information regarding this case to any future inquiry", continued Dreaver. If Justice Minister Anne McLellan was to register a complaint in accordance with international law, she would be defending Canada's jurisdiction and the right to question this case beyond the domestic concern of the U.S. where it continues to be suppressed. Even the Supreme Court of Canada did not deny that a fraud had occurred between two countries when a formal appeal of the extradition was argued before the court eight years ago.

Over the years, numerous resolutions seeking remedies from Canada have been successfully adopted. Highlights of some include the federal New Democratic Party (NDP) (June, 1991) being the first political party in North America to officially recognize Leonard's political imprisonment in defense of the rights of all North American Indian peoples; the Canadian Labour Congress and its affiliates, representing about 2.5 million unionized workers; numerous aboriginal nations; human rights organizations and many others.

In 1992, 55 members of Canada's Parliament officially intervened in support of Leonard's immediate release to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recommending that "this tainted conviction be set aside." The highly publicized action was carried into the United States courtroom through the oral arguments of our Canadian attorney; news of which was carried on national television across Canada. And finally, in November, 1993 we presented thousands of pages of documentation and oral presentations in public hearings to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, which within weeks later recommended a ministerial review of the Peltier case directly to the then Justice Minister of Canada Allan Rock. In April 1994, 18 years after Leonard was extradited, the Canadian Department of Justice finally re-opened the case for examination.

In October of 1996, Dreaver collaborated with 16 Canadian musicians and bands, including Blue Rodeo's Greg Keelor and Jim Cuddy; award-winning singer-songwriter Sara McLachlan; The Tragically Hip, poet Michael Ondaatje, to name a few and produced an album titled: 'Pine Ridge: An Open Letter to Allan Rock".

Available across Canada in major music stores or through the LPDC Canada; its release through Warner Music has drawn national attention and support amongst the peoples of Canada to pressure the Canadian government to conclude its review by finding remedies for Leonard Peltier's immediate release. Dreaver's letter to the justice minister is in the liner of each CD and tape.

In closing and with our appreciation to Kitty Sparrow for her sharp memory and meticulous records, we turn to her words: "It is only right that the 'Indian Voice' reporter retells Peltier's story to a new generation of readers unaware of the true history, so that Leonard's voice is not silenced by inaction or apathy regarding this great warrior."

Only a few short hours after the May 4th special parole board hearing, the decision is announced that Leonard is denied parole and would not be considered again until the year 2008! We would like to ask that as many people as possible send a flood of letters, faxes or e-mail to the list of the most influential authorities of the two nations who may grant him the justice and freedom he urgently needs to receive proper medical care.

While Peltier's attorneys prepare to file a rebuttal, it becomes more urgent than ever to express your outrage by writing the parole board, the Bureau of Prisons, the United States President and the Attorney General.

In an interview, Leonard said: "They want me to die in here. All they said was two people died. They never said that three people died." (Joe Killsright Stuntz, an Indian man was also killed in the firefight along with the two agents on June 26, 1975. No investigation was ever conducted.)

According to Peltier the parole hearing was a set-up. He said the parole commissioner who attended made some amazing statements like: "The government can't prove who is responsible for the agents' deaths, someone has to pay." None of his lawyers was allowed to speak.

LETTERS TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
**Important Note: Letters regarding Peltier's parole must state at the top, "For Parole File of Leonard Peltier: reg. no. 89637-132), otherwise, all letters without this special notation will be thrown away. **

U.S. Parole Commission
5550 Friendship Blvd., #420
Chevy Chase, Md. U.S.A. 20815
FAX: (202) 492-6694

President Bill Clinton
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.,
Washington, D.C. U.S.A. 20500
Comment Line: (202) 456-1111
FAX: (202) 456-2461
Email: President@Whitehouse.gov
Vice.President@whitehouse.gov
First.Lady@whitehouse.gov

The Honorable Janet Reno
United States Attorney General
10th & Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. U.S.A. 20530
FAX: (202) 514-4371

Ms. Kathleen Hawk
Director, Bureau of Prisons
320 First St., NW
Washington, D.C. U.S.A. 20534
FAX: (202) 514-4371

LETTERS TO CANADIAN GOVERNMENT
**Important Note: All submissions in Canada should stipulate that due to the U.S. violation of the Canads/U.S. extradition treaty and its arrogant abuse of the Canadian system of justice, The United States must return Leonard Peltier to Canada.

If Peltier was granted new and fair extradition hearings today in this country, there is no doubt that his political asylum request of 22 years ago would be immediately granted if true justice were to be served. In addition, he would not be suffering the number of health threats to his life.

Letters should include urging the Prime Minister of Canada, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of External Affairs &, Foreign Trade to personally contact their U.S. counterparts to exert pressure in a strong demand for Leonard Peltier's immediate release through Executive clemency. **

Letters should be addressed to:

The Honoralbe Jean Chrétien
Prime Minister of Canada
201 Langevin Block,
80 Wellington St.,
Ottawa, ON., Canada K1A OA2
FAX: (613) 957-5673

The Honorable Anne McLellan
Justice Minister of Canada
239 Wellington St.,
Ottawa, ON., Canada K1A 0H8
FAX: (613) 954-0811

The Honorable Lloyd Axworthy
Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Trade
The Lester B. Pearson Bldg.,
125 Sussex Dr., Ottawa, ON., Canada K1A OG2
FAX: (613) 992-7559; 944-1246

Letters to other Ministers of government or specific federal Members of Parliament may also be sent to the following general address: Name of MP; House of Commons, Ottawa, ON., K1A OA6 Canada. (No postage necessary if mailed in Canada.)