http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010605/ts/crime_rubyridge_dc_2.html
So there are going to try the shooter of Randy Weavers wife. Is this a good thing? I believe it is. He had to see her in his sights, see that she was unarmed, and holding her baby. Yet he shot anyway. Why shouldn’t he be prosecuted?
there are…geez
proof read proof read proof read
From what I’ve heard, the shooter’s story is that he was trying to shoot Harris, not Mrs. Weaver. Harris was armed and was ducking into the house at that moment through the same door that Mrs. Weaver was standing in.
I’ve also heard that Mrs. Weaver was partly hidden by the door, and that the baby she was holding was totally hidden by the door, so the shooter had no way of knowing she was carrying a baby with her.
Then again, I’ve also heard that even if he was trying to shoot Harris, he shouldn’t have done so, because the FBI’s rules of engagement did not condone firing under those circumstances. The shooter’s argument that he was trying to protect a helicopter from getting shot by Harris sounds specious.
Perhaps the shooter should have aimed at the helicopter, then he might have hit Randy. And clearly he didn’t shoot at the mother, because then he would have shot down his own copter.
A sad episode all around. And certainly he should be tried. Even accepting the “it was an accident!” story (a major suspension of disbelief for me; i.e., I’d make a lousy juror here) for gross incompetence with his weapon. Unless the FBI is using a definition of “sharpshooter” that I am unfamiliar with.
So Reeder, if, in some hypothetical future, the Chicago cops who shot their way into the Black Panthers’ apartment in December 1969, killing, among others, Fred Hampton while he was still in bed, were to go on trial, could we look forward to one of these fine threads on whether or not justice should be served in that case?
Can I safely say that to ask the question is to answer it?
:rolleyes:
Is it going to be a real trial, fair and square? Are you accepting bets Drastic?
Pantom
Forgive my ignorance, but who was Fred Hampton? I seem to miss your point here. Was he targeted as he lay there as Randy Weavers wife was standing there with her child in her arms?
As to the OP…
The court was split 6-5 so I thought the split might be same amoung the teeming millions. So I feel it’s a great debate. But if we aren’t split…so much the better.
Proof read proof read proof read.
It is the state doing the prosecution, not the feds. They don’t have fair trials in Idaho?
I’ll be glad to see a trial of Lon Horiuchi. Even though Randy Weaver was an Anti-Semite, the behavior of various alw enforcement groups was atrocious. I actually don’t expect Horiuchi to be convicted, but the trial may bring out more facts in this case.
By the way, does any one know if more court action is planned in order to avert a trial. Is the government appealing the case farther?
Sort of a hijack, but when people are bashing Janet Reno, they always bring up Ruby Ridge after Waco. Why? Reno wasn’t even in office at that point-hell, Clinton hadn’t even been elected.
So why do they use Ruby Ridge against Reno?
No, actually they were asleep. I believe everyone in that apartment was killed.
The point is simple: a white supremacist, given 10 days to give up after the initial gunfight, gets sympathy and his day in court. A bunch of black supremacists get killed with no recourse, and of course get no day in court, and no sympathy.
Neither of them deserve any sympathy, far as I’m concerned, for their political views. But the selectivity with which the majority choose to see injustice is always, well, interesting.
Pantom…
This is not about Randy weaver. This is about an FBI “sharpshooter” targeting an unarmed woman holding a baby. So he should have the freedom to do that?
Ok, bluntly: would you really care so much if this had happened to a black supremacist in downtown Oakland? The exact same circumstances? If Al Sharpton were leading protest marches in this person’s cause, would you be sympathetic?
Be honest.
You seem to be trying to lable me as a racist. Why is that?
I would support anyone given the same circumstances.
Give this a read…
http://users.netonecom.net/~gwood/TLP/ref/weaver.htm
Granted Randy Weaver was a white seperatist. But this is not about Randy Weaver
You can’t understand that?
Don’t know you, and I really don’t care on that subject. My point, once again, is that Weaver appears to have a rather large group of people supporting him, and that now they’ve gotten it to the point where it appears the FBI agent may actually go on trial.
By contrast, what happened in Chicago was lots of controversy, but no trials. Even though, in that case, the victims had no chance to surrender peacefully.
It was a far, far more blatant, irresponsible, and criminal use of police power. But because of the race of the victims combined with their views, I can guarantee you without qualification that every single one of the policemen involved will go to their graves without any sort of blot on their records.
And if it were to happen today, it would be the same.
Two words: Amadou Diallo. Unarmed. Shot in the doorway of his building more than twenty times. Dead. Never given a chance to surrender. (For what? He was only standing in the doorway of the apartment building where he lived.) The policemen were never brought to trial.
Randy Weaver has two things going for him: that he’s white, and that his family was shot by a Federal agent. If it were a local policeman, his chances would be many times less. And if he were black, he’d have no chance at all.
It is about Randy Weaver. Actually, the combination of Randy Weaver against the Feds. Because if it had been another person in a different place victimized by a local police force, no one would care.
No one ever said life was fair.
I don’t know the ins and outs of the cases you refer to. But the murderer of Vicki Weaver shouldn’t stand trial because of them?
What happened in Chicago happened over 30 years ago. That DOES make a difference, and if that happened today there would have been even more controversy and things would be very different.
Nine years later…It’s about time!
Horiuchi lay there for hours with the Weavers and Harris in his telescopic sights. Sharpshooter indeed! Even my children know that the first rule is to make certain of your target and what’s behind it.
Unfortunately, our new County Prosecutor is known as “Do Nothing”. His only priority is to arrest and prosecute every last dope smoker living in or passing through the area. He is currently under a cloud of accusations and likely doesn’t have time to do anything other than cover his own ass.
Horiuchi was awarded a medal of valor for murdering Vickie Weaver, what kind of message does that impart?
No one here supports Weaver or his cowardly actions, few, other than some law enforcement types condone Horiuchi’s actions. If he is tried here in Idaho he will be convicted.
This is blatantly untrue. The four policemen were brought to trial. They were acquitted, because a New York jury thought there was a reasonable doubt whether the officers killed Diallo under the mistaken impression that they were defending themselves.
Where there is no reasonable doubt about self-defense, police officers can be and are put away for savaging black people. Ask Justin Volpe or Laurence Powell (remember Powell was convicted in the federal trial).
I’m not familiar with the Fred Hampton case, and frankly your description of the Diallo case does not inspire me to be confident in your grasp of historical events. But if he was in fact killed in bed, asleep, and unarmed, it sounds to me just as bad as killing Vicki Weaver and deserving of the same punishment. I agree with Badtz Maru that the different length of time elapsed since the alleged murders is at least as important as race in determining why Weaver is more famous than Hampton.
I also think sex makes a big difference. Legally, there is no distinction between killing a woman and a man, but culturally Americans tend to look on killing a woman as worse, and killing a mother with a young child as worst of all. Even if Hampton had been white, there would still be more people excited over Weaver because she was a woman shot down with her baby in her arms.
Anyway, I’m glad the court decided as it did. Maybe the sniper is innocent, but there’s no way any government agent, state or federal, should be considered immune from criminal prosecution just because he’s an agent. The very idea puts me in mind of Hermann Goering’s instructions to the Prussian police: “Shoot first and inquire afterward, and if you make mistakes I will protect you.”
I just can’t believe this guy was also at Waco.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/991108/horiuchi.htm
U.S. News 11/8/99
That’s an old article, but it gives a pretty good background of the killer.