SWATting ‘Prank’ Illustrates Lethal Consequences of Automatically Believing Accusations

This isn’t the only video. Where are the others? (Wichita Police bodycam screenshot)

Right now there are more questions than answers over last week’s deadly officer-involved shooting that appears to have been precipitated by a fake SWATting call to police. According to news accounts released so far, aside from having the misfortune of living at the address the caller gave police, the unarmed victim had nothing to do with an argument an online gamer had with another after which he made a fake call to police. The cowardly piece of …work…  pretended to be a killer who had shot his father, was holding his mother and brother hostage, and was threatening to set the house on fire.

Lost in all this is a fundamental presumption of innocence until proven guilty. No doubt about it, responding officers were primed to expect the worst. But that does not give them license to ignore the reasons they are employed by the public in the first place. And there are contradictions that need to be resolved.

“Due to the actions of a prankster, we have an innocent victim,” Wichita Deputy Police Chief Troy Livingston asserted. But what he said next was calculated to “justify” the decision to shoot an unarmed man he just said was innocent.

“Livingston said officers gave [victim Andrew] Finch several verbal commands to put his hands up. But, Livingston said Finch lowered his hands toward his ‘waist area’ multiple times, eventually leading an officer to fire a shot for fear that Finch had reached for a weapon.”

Did Finch? Do we automatically believe that, just as the fake 911 call was apparently automatically believed? Even though the caller clearly told the dispatcher his house was “one story” and the house at the address clearly has two stories and an attic window? That gave no one on site a clue that all might not be as “reported”?

Should we automatically believe claims by authorities that suspect movements warrant a lethal response?

Have we seen instances where bodycam recordings leave reasonable people room to dispute the report of hands going to waistbands? Does the name LaVoy Finicum ring a bell?

And have we seen other recordings where a “suspect,” scared out of his wits, was repeatedly screamed at and given contradictory “Simon Says” commands that the soberest among us would have trouble surviving?

Speaking of bodycams, the video released makes it pretty much impossible to tell what happened or if the citizen answering his door was merely too overwhelmed with confusion and fear to understand that he was an instant target for escalation to deadly force. And the department’s case is not helped by its historical resistance to providing such footage for media review – a newspaper has had to sue them over noncompliance with the Kansas Open Records Act.

Author Michael Z. Williamson pulls no punches when he writes “No One Cares If You Go Home Safe at The End of Your Shift.” Read more than the headline – he’s not saying that just to be a smart @$$. He’s walked the walk and has more than a point when he says:

“I … did walk into the Middle East and prepare to take fire while keeping expensive equipment functioning so our shooters could keep shooting. There’s not a single set of orders I got that said my primary job was to ‘Come home safe.’ They said it was to ‘support the mission’ or ‘complete the objective.’ Coming home safe was the ideal outcome, but entirely secondary to ‘supporting’ or ‘completing.’”

Ostensibly people sign up to be peace officers to serve and protect, and swear an oath to the Constitution obliging them to protect the Bill of Rights as much as anything else. The rest of us want to make it home at the end of their shift, too.

And it’s not like this is the first time “SWATting” has come up. I’ve heard of it many times over the years, haven’t you?

Remember the poor guy who got killed because a fraudulent “ex-Marine” saw him handling a pellet gun being sold at WalMart and called it in? Or the Orwellian-named Coalition to Stop Gun Violence putting this bit of SWATting set-up out there for the public to summon the shock troops?

Talk about an Opposite Day “progressive” way of guaranteeing more so-called “gun violence”…

And let’s not forget the SWATting potential of those ubiquitous snitch programs, some that even promise rewards for anonymous tips.

The suspect calling himself SWAuTistic reportedly bragged ““Bomb threats are more fun and cooler than swats in my opinion and I should have just stuck to that. But I began making $ doing some swat requests.”

Police have arrested the “alleged” twisted, malevolent and cowardly serial criminal (hardly a mere “prankster”) who set things in motion, and let’s hope that a full due process trial results in severe punishment to the full extent of the law if he’s proven guilty. Over a $1.50 “Call of Duty” bet … and the probable psychopath has shown absolutely no remorse or sense of responsibility.

But that won’t bring back the killed man or relieve his mother’s agony. Nor will it prevent further outrageous future tragedies from being inflicted on other Americans.

So what can be done?  Raise police awareness? More training? What about when hesitation proves a fatal mistake?

What’s certain is the worst thing the police could now would be anything that impedes transparency and full accountability. The primary goal, before coming up with any remedial plans, must be to determine the unvarnished truth about what happened and who did what.

For starters, we know the name of the victim and the name of the suspect arrested for making the call. But all too typically, the department appears to be in CYA/limited information-sharing mode. What compelling reasons, aside from liability damage control,  are there for withholding the names of all public employees involved, including the shooter (they wouldn’t withhold the name of a “civilian”), and releasing all bodycam recordings, some of which have still, inexplicably been kept under wraps?

The post SWATting ‘Prank’ Illustrates Lethal Consequences of Automatically Believing Accusations appeared first on Oath Keepers.

Was LaVoy Finicum on the KILL LIST?

We know there is a list. We want to know what names are on it!

Editorial by Shari Dovale  12-23-2027

Exposing corruption within the government is becoming an almost daily occurrence. Recently, we exposed the damning news that the FBI had a “Kill List” in place with Cliven Bundy, and others, on it.

It was revealed by Washington State Representative Matt Shea that the news of this list was found on a whistle-blower email from BLM investigator Larry Wooten.

My supervisor even took photographs in the secure command post area of the Las Vegas FBI Headquarters and even after he was told that no photographs were allowed, he recklessly emailed out photographs of the “Arrest Tracking Wall” in which Eric Parker and Cliven Bundy had “X’s” through their face and body (indicating prejudice and bias).

This “Arrest Tracking Wall” with the photographs showing Xs through these men’s faces was seen in the Las Vegas FBI Headquarters, and photographed by a BLM Supervisor. He then shared these pictures through email.

This makes two separate government agencies complicit in this horrifying idea of the Kill List. Both the FBI and the BLM.

This validates the existence of list but does not give us a complete look at who was on this list.

We know several people that could be on the list, beginning with every person that showed up to the Bunkerville Standoff. Every person named Bundy is likely on the list, including the women.

Think about Ruby Ridge for a moment. Was Vicki Weaver targeted for assassination, as many have reported?

Although the feds later claimed Vicki Weaver’s killing was an accident, the New York Times reported in 1993 that an internal FBI report justified the killing by saying she put herself in danger

Everything about the federal government’s actions in this case is sickening, but possibly the worst was their taunting of the Weaver family after Vicki Weaver’s murder: “Good morning, Mrs. Weaver. We had pancakes for breakfast. What did you have?” That was one of the FBI’s tactics revealed in court records, reported by Jerry Seper in the Washington Times in September 1993.

The federal government argued that sniper FBI Lon Horiuchi accidentally killed Weaver’s wife Vicki. At the trial, however, Horiuchi testified that he was an accurate shot at 200 yards.

Anyone that has had an impact on the outcome of events between Bunkerville and now, including LaVoy Finicum, is likely to be on a list. It may have taken nearly 2 years, but was his murder on that lonely stretch of highway part of the plan? Was he the first from the government’s ‘Kill List’?

Was LaVoy Finicum assassinated as part of the government’s agenda to stop citizens from speaking out and turn this country into a Totalitarian society?

LaVoy made a difference and was not afraid. He continues to be an inspiration to the people in this country. The government is afraid of people like LaVoy. By teaching Constitutional principles and awakening the masses, he was a threat to the government’s agenda. Teaching that we should get back to the ideas that the Founding Fathers had when they built this country is a dangerous concept to the government elite.

The Constitution is not a ‘living’ document, it is set in stone. If it needs to be changed, there is a process to do that. It is not to be interpreted to suit someone’s wishes, or circumstances.

There were several elected officials in Bunkerville on April 12, 2014. This list includes Matt Shea, Michele Fiore, Shelly Shelton, and more. These people were duly elected by the people in their districts. If they are to be targeted, for assassination or even arrest, the people have a right to know this.

We know there is a list. We want to know what names are on it!

 

Redoubt News

 

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  
You can donate HERE.

The post Was LaVoy Finicum on the KILL LIST? appeared first on Oath Keepers.

FBI Agent Indicted In Killing of Lavoy Finicum, Hires High-Profile DC Lawyer

EXECUTED:Robert LaVoy Finicum (January 27, 1961 – January 26, 2016)

21st Century Wire says… Back in January of 2016, 21WIRE reported how the Oregon Standoff protesters’ convoy was intercepted in a ambush by federal forces, and how Lavoy Finicum was executed by a rogue agent. The mainstream media was silent. Running point on the government’s propaganda campaign was the Oregonian newspaper’s supposed ‘award-winning reporter’ Les Zaitz who shamefully referred to the planned federal ambush as “a traffic stop.” As it turns out – the mainstream media was completely wrong – while we were right. 

This was an elaborate federally managed cover-up from the beginning.

21WIRE reported at the time the obvious contradiction; without any audio track to synch with the FBI’s aerial footage it was impossible to know when shots were fired and if the official story was actually true. As part of the federal cover-up, FBI Special Agent in Charge, Greg Bretzing, insisted that their footage provided an “honest and unfiltered view” of what happened. It wasn’t – and new evidence told a completely different story, exposing the official story as a lie from the onset.

Finicum was shot three times in the back An autopsy revealed with one of the bullets piercing Finicum’s heart.

The obvious problem with how these latest legal proceedings are being framed is this: Finicum is execute with three shots to the back after a pre-planned federal ambush, while the hired federal gunman who pulled the trigger is indicted for… ‘lying.’

Will his family and friends get justice this time around? 

  

Conrad Wilson
OPD

The FBI agent indicted for allegedly lying about a pivotal moment during the 2016 Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation has hired a high-profile Washington D.C.-based attorney to defend him.

Indicted FBI Hostage Rescue Team member W. Joseph Astarita has retained Robert Cary, who is well known in the nation’s capital for his defense of former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.

In 2008, the Department of Justice indicted the Republican senator on corruption charges. Years later, the case was dismissed and found to be an example of gross prosecutorial misconduct.

“If what happened to Sen. Ted Stevens, a powerful Senator … a few blocks from the Supreme Court of the United States, a few blocks from the United States Capitol – if it can happen to him, it can happen to anybody,” Cary said in a 2015 speech to an American Bar Association gathering.

Cary will serve as co-counsel in the Astarita case with Portland based attorneys David Angeli and Tyler Francis, according to Angeli.

Federal prosecutors have accused Astarita of lying to investigators about firing his gun during a traffic stop that left Malhuer occupation leader Robert “LaVoy” Finicum dead.

Though neither of Astarita’s shots hit Finicum, prosecutors have charged the FBI agent with several felonies for allegedly failing to disclose them. Those charges include making false statements and obstruction of justice…

Continue this story at OPD

Jeanette Finicum at Red Pill Expo Bozeman Montana June 24 2017

Elias Alias

Published on Jun 27, 2017

Before reading the text below, I would like to invite the reader to go to Jeanette’s website and order the book LaVoy Finicum wrote just months before the government assassinated him. Purchasing the book will help Jeanette and her family — but it will also provide you with a remarkably well-written novel. I had no idea that LaVoy was an excellent writer until I read this book, but now that I’ve read it I can heartily recommend it to all who’ve taken the Red Pill. Click this link please.
https://www.onecowboystandforfreedom….

Mrs. Finicum brought the house down with a voice filled with a sweet and lovely thunder which reached into the heart of everyone in that convention hall. With more than five hundred souls in seats in the convention center venue known as “The Commons” at Bozeman, Montana, Jeanette Finicum wrapped every soul at the place with a rhapsody of innocence. There was nary a dry eye in the whole house. The beauty and dignity of one cowboy’s stand for freedom galloped around Bozeman’s proud new convention center, swirling like four strong winds in all directions, invisibly yet with felt presence. Everyone was moved. LaVoy Finicum speaks from beyond the clouds through the love of his noble and courageous wife.

I am just back from the Red Pill Expo and a couple of follow-up days afterwrd. I have not slept in 23 hours, but as I reeled off four hundred miles my excitement about what this event *means* found a gravity in my mind and compelled me to get the above video out of the camera and posted up here before I sleep. I will add more here and do an article for The Mental Militia’s national website after I sleep.

For the moment I’ll just say — I am overwhelmed by having witnessed Jeanette Finicum’s touching presentation first-hand. The woman made me cry. She made everyone cry, either openly or silently inside their private minds. She tied all the presentations of all the speakers at the convention into one unified living symbol. She did it in a way which uplifted old-fashioned American family values, such as personal responsibility and property ownership and sweet liberty for every individual. And she immortalized LaVoy Finicum into the shimmering and volatile hallways of American history. She is the only person who could do that. He will always live on in her, and her love for him will spread his word.

Are We Anti-Government ? HELL NO!

Rocky Hall interviews rancher Thom Davis of Riley, Oregon about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, the ownership of grazing allotments, the Malheur Refuge, LaVoy Finicum, increasing violence, and a Constitutional government.

Published on Jul 12, 2017 – Rocky Hall

What would LaVoy do?

Are we anti-government or anti-corruption in government?

We do need a Constitutional government.

We do not support those promoting anarchy or violence towards police, the military, or the federal government.

FBI Agent Charged With Lying About His Role In Shooting An Activist During Oregon Wildlife Standoff

A grand jury in Portland, Oregon has charged FBI Agent W Joseph Astarita with three counts of making false statements, alleging that he lied when he claimed he did not fire his weapon during the attempted arrest of LaVoy Finicum, a key figure in the Oregon militia standoff at the Malheur national wildlife refuge in 2016.

Astarita, who pleaded not guilty in federal court in Portland, was assigned to arrest the leaders of the Oregon standoff in January 2016 when Finicum drove off the road and into a snowbank, before attempting to flee on foot. During the ensuing confrontation, some of which was captured on film, Oregon state police officers shot and killed Finicum, an Arizona rancher, who police say was reaching for his gun. Police later said the shooting was “justified”. 

Here is the press release from the United States Attorney"s Office:

The indictment alleges that Astarita knowingly and willfully made false statements to FBI Supervisory Special Agents, knowing that the statements were false and material to the FBI’s decision not to investigate the propriety of an agent-involved shooting. Specifically, Astarita falsely stated he had not fired his weapon during the attempted arrest of Mr. Finicum when he knew he had in fact fired his weapon. Astarita also knowingly engaged in misleading conduct toward Oregon State Police officers by failing to disclose that he had fired two rounds during the attempted arrest.

Astarita was arraigned on June 28, 2017, in Portland. He entered pleas of not guilty to each county and was released pending future appearances.

An indictment is only an accusation of a crime, and a defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

For those who missed it, a portion of Finicum"s confrontation with police was caught on film and clearly shows that the first shots were fired while his hands were up in the air..."ironically", no pop stars made a "Hands Up, Don"t Shoot" video after this incident.

Last year, we covered the background on the incidents leading up to the Oregon standoff in a post entitled "Now Is The Time To Stand Up": Armed Activists, Militiamen Seize Federal Wildlife Refuge Office In Oregon.  It all started when Oregon resident Dwight Hammond set fires on land he leased from the government, an effort he said was intended to fight back the intrusion of invasive plant species and prevent wildfires.  Apparently the government did agree and threw Hammond in jail for arson.

On Saturday, militants seized a remote government outpost following a protest by hundreds of angry citizens.

It all started back in 2001 when Dwight Hammond and his son Steven set fire to leased government land in what they said was an effort to beat back invasive plant species and - ironically - prevent wildfires. They set more fires in 2006 and were later convicted of arson.

Both men served time in prison but a judge eventually determined that their sentences were too light and ordered them back to jail.

Some folks were displeased with the ruling and staged a protest that saw some 300 people march through Burns, a city of around 3,000. The procession made a stop by the Hammond residence and proceeded to make an appearance at the local sheriff"s office as well.

Enter Ammon Bundy.

Fast forward to November and Bundy"s son Ammon was busy trying to come up with a way to keep Dwight Hammond and his son from going back to jail. "Ammon Bundy met with Dwight Hammond and his wife in November, seeking a way to keep the elderly rancher from having to surrender for prison," The Oregonian writes, adding that "the Hammonds professed through their attorneys that they had no interest in ignoring the order to report for prison."

But while the Hammonds have apparently come to terms with their fate, Bundy hasn"t and in a brazen move, he and an unspecified number of "outside militants" seized control of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge headquarters, which is a short drive from Burns (where the protest took place).

Of course, the standoff ultimately ended with multiple arrests and the death of LaVoy Finicum.

FBI agent indicted for alleged false statements in LaVoy Finicum shooting

The agent will face allegations of making a false statement with intent to obstruct justice, according to sources familiar with the case.

The indictment stems from a more than year-long investigation by the inspector general of the U.S. Department of Justice. The agent will be identified when he’s summoned to appear in U.S. District Court in Portland at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday.

Investigators said a member of the FBI’s elite Hostage Rescue Team fired at Finicum as his pickup crashed into a snow bank at a roadblock on U.S. 395. Finicum had just sped away from a surprise traffic stop on the rural highway as the occupation leaders traveled off the refuge to a community meeting Jan. 26, 2016.

The agent’s bullets didn’t hit Finicum, 54, an Arizona rancher who was the spokesman for the armed takeover of the federal sanctuary near Burns in Harney County. Moments later, state police troopers shot Finicum three times after he emerged from his white truck and reached for his inner jacket pocket, where police said he had a loaded 9mm handgun. One bullet pierced his heart, an autopsy found.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles Gorder Jr. revealed in court papers last June that a grand jury was reviewing the FBI actions. Gorder was explaining the government’s desire to keep its memorandum about the inspector general’s investigation out of the hands of defense lawyers representing other occupation leaders on federal conspiracy charges.

The FBI and state police had moved in on Ammon Bundy and other key figures as they were driving in two vehicles from the refuge to a meeting in John Day. Finicum initially stopped but then raced off from police, and less than a minute later swerved into the snow to avoid the roadblock set up by FBI and state police.

As Finicum left his truck, an FBI agent shot twice at Finicum, though none of the hostage team members admitted to discharging their firearms, the Deschutes County sheriff alleged. The county sheriff’s office was tasked with investigating the Finicum shooting.

Investigators find evidence that an FBI agent fired at Finicum, but later denied it. His bullets didn’t hit Finicum or contribute to his death. The investigation found two state troopers were justified in shooting the occupation spokesman three times in the back.

The Oregon investigators concluded that one agent fired at Finicum’s pickup, hitting it in the roof and missing on the second shot. A state trooper later described to investigators seeing two rifle casings in the area where the FBI agents were posted. But detectives called to investigate didn’t find the casings, police reports indicated.

Federal law prohibits “knowingly and willfully” making any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation or concealing information.

Less than two months after the shooting, the FBI acknowledged that a federal agent was under investigation for firing shots and four other members of his FBI team were under investigation for covering up the gunshots. The status of the investigation into the four other FBI team member is unclear.

At a news conference in March 2016, Portland’s-then FBI Special Agent in Charge Greg Bretzing told reporters, “The question of who fired these shots has not been resolved.”

It’s unclear if the indicted agent is on leave or has been dismissed from his job. The hostage team is part of the FBI’s Critical Incident Response Group, based out of Quantico, Virginia.