I want to take a second to let every know, I will be doing my damnist to honor the 20th anniversary of Ruby Ridge. It's been 20 years, I have known about Ruby Ridge for all of 25 min. Sad, right? I don't remember much media coverage about this. I mean it was 1992, August 21st to be exact. I was just getting ready for college. The Internet was still practically unheard of, cable TV was maybe a 10th of what they have now. Imagine my surprise when I came by this article. Ladies and gents, in the times that we are heading for, when they want to strip us of every liberty, Taking over raising our children through their "No child left Behind" schools. As we draw nearer to this date, I ask you to do; two things for me. Read the story if you haven't and honor the memory of our constitution as we watch it slip through our fingers............ Ruby Ridge~Aug 21st 1992- Aug 21st 2012
Kill a Boy, Get a
Medalby James Bovard, June
1996
On
March 1, 1996, the U.S. Marshals Service gave its highest award for valor to
five U.S. marshals involved in the 1992 Ruby Ridge, Idaho, shoot-out, including
the marshal who shot a 14-year-old boy in the back and killed him, and another
marshal who started a firefight by shooting the boy's dog without provocation.
The valor award announcement symbolizes federal law enforcement's contempt for
court verdicts, the Congress, and the American people.
The marshals received the award, according to U.S. Marshals Service Director
Eduardo Gonzalez, for "their exceptional courage, their sound judgment in the
face of attack, and their high degree of professional competence during this
incident." Gonzalez declared: "When gunfire broke out on Ruby Ridge on that
summer day, every member of the team came under fire at some point." Gonzalez
labeled the men "heroes."
The Ruby Ridge story began with the entrapment of Randy Weaver, a white
separatist, by an Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms informant, after which Weaver
was indicted, and the U.S. Marshal's Service was assigned the job of arresting
him. Once an indictment was handed down, the U.S. Marshals Service made
capturing Weaver a high priority — even naming the mission to apprehend him
"Operation Northern Exposure." A confidential Justice Department report later
observed: "It appears at initial glance that the resources the marshals
committed to the case were disproportionate to the relatively insignificant
underlying charge."
The marshals spend the next year and a half spying on Weaver, sneaking around
his land dozens of times, and erecting spy cameras to record all his family's
movements. David Nevin, a lawyer involved in the subsequent court case, noted
later:
"The marshals called in military aerial reconnaissance and had photos studied
by the Defense Mapping Agency. . . . They had psychological profiles performed
and installed $130,000 worth of solar powered long-range spy cameras. They
intercepted the Weavers' mail. They even knew the menstrual cycle of Weaver's
teenage daughter, and planned an arrest scenario around it."
The confidential report concluded that the August 1992 timing of the federal
government's showdown with Weaver was largely a measure of political convenience
for Henry Hudson, the acting director of the U.S. Marshals Service. The report
noted:
"The plan to apprehend Weaver was delayed for three months pending the
confirmation of Henry Hudson as the Marshals Service Director. The [U.S.
marshals] reconnaissance team expressed frustration over the delay because some
believed the delay caused a gap in their surveillance intelligence."
On August 21, 1992, six U.S. marshals sneaked onto Weaver's property,
outfitted in full camouflage and ski masks and carrying submachine guns and
other high-powered weapons. Three agents circled close to the cabin and threw
rocks at the cabin in order to get the attention of Weaver's dogs. Alan Bock, in
his excellent book, Ambush at Ruby Ridge (Dickens Press, 1995), stated
that marshal Larry Cooper admitted at the trial "that [he] was carrying a
silenced weapon because [he] had orders to lure the dogs and shoot them so the
marshals could sneak up on the Weaver cabin without worrying about the dogs."
After the dogs began barking, Weaver's fourteen-year-old son, Sammy, and
Kevin Harris, a twenty-five-year-old family friend who was living in the cabin,
ran to see what the dogs were barking at.
At this point, the marshals took off running through the woods, followed by
one dog. The marshals later told the FBI that they had been ambushed by the
Weavers. However, according to a Justice Department confidential report, the
marshals chose to stop running and take a stand behind stumps and trees. The
report stated that Cooper "told the others that it was 'bullshit' for them to
continue running and that he did not want to 'run down the trail and get shot in
the back.' He urged them to take up defensive positions. The others agreed. . .
. William Degan . . . took a position behind a stump approximately three to four
feet off the right of the trail." The marshals had the advantage of surprise,
camouflage, and vastly more firepower than the boy and Kevin Harris possessed.
The firefight began when marshal Arthur Roderick shot and killed the family
dog, as a Senate subcommittee investigation concluded last December. Roderick
and Cooper claimed that the first shot of the encounter had been fired by Kevin
Harris and had killed marshal Bill Degan. But Captain Dave Neal of the Idaho
State Police team that rescued the marshals twelve hours later stated that
Roderick indicated that he had fired the first shot to kill the dog.
After his dog had been killed, Sammy fired his gun in the direction where the
shots had come from. Sammy was running back to the cabin when, according to the
federal government's ballistics expert at Weaver's 1993 trial, a shot from
marshal Larry Cooper hit him in the back and killed him. Kevin Harris stated
that he responded to Sammy's shooting by firing one shot into the woods to try
to protect Sammy and to defend himself. Harris's shot apparently killed marshal
Bill Degan; an Idaho jury later ruled that Harris acted in self-defense. Though
Cooper and Roderick testified that Degan had not fired a shot, evidence later
proved that he had fired seven shots.
Marshals Roderick and Cooper later stated that they had stayed huddled
alongside Degan's body for the next twelve hours, afraid that they might be shot
if they tried to carry Degan off the mountain — even though the Weavers had long
since retrieved their son's body and gone back to their ramshackle cabin. Other
marshals panicked and wrongly claimed that the Weavers had U.S. marshals "pinned
down" for hours under heavy gunfire. In reality, the marshals fired far more
shots at Sammy Weaver and Harris than Sammy and Harris fired at them. And the
marshals had no arrest warrant for either Sammy or Kevin Harris — and thus had
no right to open fire upon them.
Several places in the confidential report deal with the possibility of a
government cover-up. After the firefight between the U.S. marshals and the
Weavers and Kevin Harris, the surviving marshals were taken to a condominium to
rest and recuperate. The report observed:
"We note that the marshals were kept together for several hours before giving
their statements. We question the wisdom of keeping the marshals together at the
condominium for several hours, while awaiting interviews with the FBI. Isolating
them in that manner created the appearance and generated allegations that they
were fabricating stories and colluding to cover-up the true circumstances of the
shootings at the Y."
FBI Hostage Rescue Team snipers arrived on the scene. The Senate subcommittee
report noted: "FBI agents who were briefed in Washington and in Idaho during the
early stages of the crisis at Ruby Ridge received a great deal of inaccurate or
exaggerated information concerning . . . the firefight." The marshals' gross
mischaracterization helped pave the way to the FBI "shoot to kill" orders that
led to the killing of Vicki Weaver.
Roderick and Cooper testified last September 15 before the Senate Judiciary
subcommittee hearings chaired by Senator Arlen Specter, Republican from
Pennsylvania, on the Ruby Ridge case. Cooper and Roderick stunned the committee
by announcing that Randy Weaver had actually accidentally shot his own son.
Though Sammy was shot as he was running in the direction of his father, and
though Weaver was far away from the scene of his son's death and was located in
front of him and at a higher elevation, and though his son was shot in the back
by a bullet with an upward trajectory, Cooper insisted the father still somehow
shot the son.
The only plausible theory that would explain how that could have happened
would have been if Randy Weaver had been using "Roger Rabbit" cartoon bullets —
bullets that could twist around trees, take U-turns, and defy all the laws of
physics. Defense attorney Chuck Peterson observed:
"The evidence places Randy Weaver hundreds of feet up the hill and out of
sight of the scene when Sammy was shot in the back. The bullet's trajectory can
be placed from below the place where Sammy fell, as the lead projectile traveled
upward from its entry point low in his back."
The jury foreman at the federal trial in 1993 characterized the new
Cooper-Roderick theory as "[expletive deleted]" and told The Washington
Post that "the government's story has changed every time you turn around."
The Senate subcommittee report concluded: "The Subcommittee . . . has seen no
evidence which would support the Marshals' claim. . . ." The subcommittee has
two independent experts analyzing the evidence on who shot the boy, and
preliminary results have reportedly found nothing to support the latest
Cooper-Roderick theory.
Cooper and Roderick insisted that they did not know that Sammy Weaver had
been killed at the firefight and professed shock when the FBI reported finding
the boy's body a few days later. Yet, an FBI agent who interviewed Marshals
Service Director Henry Hudson in 1993 reported that Hudson said he knew of
Sammy's shooting the same day it happened; Hudson last September denied to the
Senate subcommittee making that statement, saying he was "perplexed" at the FBI
official report. Jeffrey Howard, then-associate deputy attorney general, told
Specter's subcommittee that he was informed on the morning of August 22, the
following day, that Sammy Weaver had apparently been killed.
The marshals' dubious conduct is further indicated by the Marshals Service's
refusal to do routine internal investigations after the fatal shootings. The
Senate subcommittee noted:
"We were disappointed to learn that, based on his desire to avoid creating
discoverable documents that might be used by the defense in the Weaver/Harris
trial . . . former [Marshals Service] Director Henry Hudson decided to conduct
no formal internal review of USMS activities connected with the Weaver case and
the Ruby Ridge incident."
Last August 15, the Justice Department announced that it was paying the
surviving Weaver family members $3.1 million to settle their wrongful-death
lawsuit against the federal government. A Justice Department press release
announced:
"The settlement reflects the loss to the Weaver children of their mother and
brother. By entering into a settlement, the United States hopes to take a
substantial step toward healing the wounds the incident inflicted."
Justice Department officials later insisted that the government admitted no
wrongdoing in paying off the Weavers — yet, if that is the case, then the
officials who approved the payoff should be indicted for squandering taxpayers'
money. One Justice Department official explained the settlement to The
Washington Post : "We recognized that an Idaho jury probably would give
Weaver $200 million." Actually, it was probably sound judgment on the Marshals
Service's part to delay giving valor awards to the marshals involved in killing
Sammy Weaver until after the Weaver's lawsuit was settled; otherwise, the
settlement might have cost taxpayers millions more.
Are marshals Cooper and Roderick getting the valor awards for "bravery" at
Ruby Ridge — or for their courageous story-telling before the Senate Judiciary
Committee? David Nevin, the Idaho lawyer who successfully defended Kevin Harris,
notes that perjury by federal lawmen is a serious problem: "They know that if
they show up with their broad shoulders and their neatly clipped hair they can
say whatever they damn well please."
Does the Marshals Service believe that Americans are obliged to give the
benefit of the doubt to people in Ninja outfits and face masks who jump out of
the woods and begin firing submachine guns at them? Federal law enforcement
agencies have yet to learn that they cannot brazenly shoot innocent Americans
and then pretend that the agents involved should be treated like national
heroes.
