Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Conspiracy Nation Vol. 01 Num. 10
Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 1 Num. 10
======================================
("Quid coniuratio est?")
-----------------------------------------------------------------
[From an interview with Linda Thompson on the *For the People*
radio show, Feb. 11, 1994. Host is Chuck Harder.]
[Continued...]
CHUCK HARDER: We are back. We're talking to Linda Thompson. She
is an attorney. And she has been studying the Waco matter. She
has produced a masterful videotape. (I saw the first one. The
second one, I understand, is just a real, real eye-popper.)
Now Linda, you're telling me that the government is throwing the
trial. What do you mean by "throwing" the trial? What will the
outcome be?
LINDA THOMPSON: The outcome will be... The only damaging
testimony has been against 2 people, Brad Branch and Livingstone
Fagan, thus far. There has not been any damaging testimony
against most of the other Branch Davidians. I think we're going
to see acquittals of the majority of the Branch Davidians. And
that is because the government is putting on witnesses that
*hurt* the government, at least in the eyes of the jury.
HARDER: Uh-huh. [Indicates he understands]
THOMPSON: Because the government has been able to completely
control the evidence available to the defense attorneys, for
instance. There's nobody that's going to challenge, effectively,
what is being presented. For instance, one glaring example of
this, at the trial the other day... One of the ATF agents
testified that they had moved the day of the raid up a day
because the *Waco Herald-Tribune* was gonna come out with their
articles on Saturday. And they moved the raid up to Sunday. And
that they had planned to do the raid, originally, on Monday.
That's not true. The [search] warrant was applied for on the
24th. It expired on the 28th, which was Sunday. And that is the
day the raid was done, was the 28th. They could not have had any
other plan to do it on Monday because the warrant would have
already been expired on Monday.
Now this is an example of a little bit of nonsense that they have
come up with to help bolster their story. You know, that they
"lost the element of surprise." The claim of losing the element
of surprise is in itself a lie. But it's being told, not for the
purpose of admitting that the government is a bunch of bumbling
boobs, but to reinforce the idea that the Branch Davidians were
*waiting* for them. When you say you "lost the element of
surprise," what are you essentially saying -- the Branch
Davidians had an opportunity to prepare. And that's what they're
claiming. That is their story: "The Branch Davidians were waiting
on us. Yes, our guys screwed up. They lost the element of
surprise." That's the government's official story. And this is
the kind of evidence that they're putting on, with a series of
these little "admissions": "Yes, we probably shot our own guys,"
"Yes, we lost the element of surprise," and so forth.
And that is what they're doing at trial, is presenting this
preconceived story, all of which *is* *a* *lie*. But they're
making sure that just that version comes out. There's nobody
there to effectively challenge it. It's going to go straight down
the way they've told it in the ATF final report. And at the same
time, the government is making sure that they release just enough
bad information against themselves that there will be acquittals.
And you would not do that... I mean, the prosecution does not put
on witnesses that *hurt* their case, unless they're throwing the
trial -- and that's what they're doing.
HARDER: All right. Why would they want acquittals?
THOMPSON: Because some of these people on trial are government
agents. They're not Branch Davidians.
And they're caught in a crack. They cannot reveal to the American
public that they've got government agents that are on trial.
Because those were undercover agents. They were plants. They were
people that you're not supposed to know are not Branch Davidians.
HARDER: So they're in a "catch-22".
THOMPSON: Well it's not really a "catch-22". It's really pretty
clever because they can use these same people to convict the ones
they need to convict, and yet use their own testimony of agents
that get up on the stand to give away just enough information to
*acquit* the ones they want acquitted. For instance, if you've
got somebody on the stand says, "Well I didn't see this guy with
a gun," and "He didn't do anything," while you've got another one
getting on the stand pointing a finger at a specific one, you can
tell who they're targeting. They're intending to get convictions
of a few of them and acquittals of others by the direct
testimony. They're manipulating this trial very effectively.
HARDER: I'm surprised that nobody moved to sever any of these
people. [CN -- By this, "sever", I think is meant to move for a
separate trial for a particular defendant.]
THOMPSON: Well I think they did, actually. There was one attorney
(that is not appointed) and he did move to sever. And the motion
was denied. That would be the basis for an appeal.
But there's a lot of things that I would have expected to see
from the defense attorneys that has not occurred. Such as
*endless* fights over the evidence. For instance, they should
have been entitled to all... All this stuff is filmed; every bit
of it was filmed...
HARDER: Right.
THOMPSON: ...top to bottom, inside-out. They should have been
entitled to those videos. They haven't been able to get 'em. And
rather than allow it to proceed to trial without that evidence,
my personal preference would have been to go on and appeal it
right then. You can get what's called an "interlocutory appeal,"
*demand* that you get this evidence. Because you're entitled to
it. By law you are entitled to anything that tends to prove that
your client is not guilty. We know from one of the pictures that
*is* available and has been shown at trial -- in fact it's in our
video... It's a picture of the front door. That is absolutely
good for the Branch Davidians because it shows that the ATF is
standing there shooting at the front door. There's no one at any
of the front windows. This is a dead-on picture. You'll see it in
"Waco II". It's not in "Waco I". But it's a picture of the front
door; no one at any of the windows. The front door is cracked
open; it opens inward. And the ATF has said, "The Branch
Davidians were at all the windows. They shot out through the
front door with such force that it bowed the door." You can't bow
a door that's open. You know, if it opens inward, the force of
bullets coming from inside would have slammed the door shut...
HARDER: Right.
THOMPSON: ...before it bowed the door.
Well the door's open, there's a lot of bullet holes in it.
They're all from the outside. There's not a single Branch
Davidian at any of the windows. And there's only *one* window
that's even broken -- and that's the window that ATF is shooting
into.
But the most *damning* pieces of evidence is that there's a
little child out front, as all this is going on, and then we've
got video footage that shows them taking another child, in a
little black body bag, to an ambulance. So they killed kids that
first day.
Now we've got proof that the first shots were fired by the
overhead helicopter; not by the Branch Davidians and not by ATF,
but by the helicopter that flew over and fired into the roof
where the women and children were. And they killed kids in there
too!
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
[CN Editor -- Now seems like a good time to insert the
following section from the Report of the Committee for
Waco Justice. Excerpts only.]
ALLEGATIONS AGENTS SHOT INDISCRIMINATELY AND FROM HELICOPTERS
(Section 13, BATF-Treasury section of report)
The Treasury report states that BATF agents "returned fire when
possible, but conserved their ammunition. They also fired only
when they saw an individual engage in a threatening action, such
as pointing a weapon." (TDR:101) However, Branch Davidians claim
BATF agents fired indiscriminately, including through walls, and
that helicopters sprayed the building with bullets. News video
tapes clearly show agents exercising little control over their
firing as they fire over vehicles with little or no view of what
they were shooting at. Both BATF Director Higgins at an April 2nd
Congressional hearing and Treasury Secretary Bentsen during the
September 1993 Treasury Department press conference denied
allegations that agents fired indiscriminately. {1}.
(a) Bullet Evidence in Doors, Walls and Roof
Branch Davidians, and attorneys Dick DeGuerin and Jack Zimmerman
who visited Mount Carmel during the siege, insist that there was
extensive evidence that BATF agents shot indiscriminately through
Mount Carmel Center's front door, walls and roof. They were very
concerned with preserving this evidence of an out-of-control
assault.
The *New York Times* reported, "both lawyers clearly believed
that helicopters flying over the compound during the raid had
fired into upper floors of the main building from above." {2}.
Except for half the front door, all this evidence was destroyed
by the April 19 tank rammings, the fire, and the bulldozing of
still burning walls into the rubble.
(b) Wayne Martin Allegations on 911 Tape
Wayne Martin and an unidentified Branch Davidian complain
frantically to Lieutenant Lynch 15 minutes after the start of the
raid about the continuing gun fire from BATF agents, even as they
themselves withhold fire. Nearly continuous gunfire can be heard
in the background of the tape.
MARTIN: Another chopper with more people; more guns
going off. They're firing. That's them, not us.
UNIDENTIFIED DAVIDIAN: There's a chopper with more of
them.
LYNCH: What!?
DAVIDIAN: Another chopper with more people and more guns
going off. Here they come!
(d) Catherine Matteson Allegation
"I seen (sic) those trailers drive up. I was downstairs. I
thought it strange, but I figured they were delivering firewood
or something. I picked up the Sunday paper and went upstairs to
my room, and started reading. When next, bullets came through the
roof. I could hear the helicopters overhead, I got under my bed."
{3}.
(e) Children's Pictures of Bullets Through Roof
A story about psychologist Bruce D. Perry's interviews with
Branch Davidian children who left Mount Carmel after the raid
mentions, "Still another child created a picture of a house
beneath a rainbow. When Perry asked, 'Is there anything else?'
the child calmly added bullet holes in the roof. That was an
allusion to the Feb. 28 shootout with federal agents that marked
the beginning of a 51-day standoff and left the compound near
Waco scarred with bullet holes." {4}. A May 19, 1993 *Newsweek*
story shows this picture with the caption, "A girl drew her
home's dotted roof. 'Bullets,' she said."
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
HARDER: We're talking about helicopter gunships firing against
American citizens. [CN Editor -- Yes, *and* indiscriminately
*and* at children.]
THOMPSON: Yeah, absolutely. And the thing is, in the ATF report,
they do very deceitful things. They say that... [music signalling a
break begins to be audible]... oh, sorry.
HARDER: All right. Let's do a short break here. This almost
sounds like George Orwell stuff. We'll be right back.
(to be continued)
--------------------------<< Notes >>----------------------------
{1} "Sect's Lawyers Dispute Gunfight Details," *New York Times*,
April 5, 1993, A10 and transcript of September 30, 1993 Treasury
Department press conference.
{2} *New York Times*, April 5, 1993, A10.
{3} Interview with Catherine Matteson, August 30, 1993, on file
at Gun Owners of America.
{4} Sue Anne Pressley, May 5, 1993, A17. [*New York Times*(??)]
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
*The Massacre of the Branch Davidians*. Report of the Committee
for Waco Justice. Committee for Waco Justice, PO Box 33037,
Washington, DC 20033. Phone: 202/986-1847 & 202/797-9877
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail
address, send a message in the form "subscribe my-email@address"
to bigxc@prairienet.org -- To cancel, send a message in the form
"cancel my-email@address." && Articles sent in are considered.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et
pauperem. -- Liber Proverbiorum XXXI: 8-9
