The trooper, a member of the state police SWAT team identified in court
papers only as "Officer 1,'' was involved in at least two unrelated
fatal shootings of civilians before the Finicum encounter, according to
lawyers for FBI agent W. Joseph Astarita.
Ammon Bundy writes June 13, 2018:
If the Police Officer who killed LaVoy also shot at him while his
hands were raised while first exiting the truck, would it reveal that
their intent to kill LaVoy had nothing to do with weather or not he
lowered his hand toward his jacket? Especially if the officer shot 3
bullets at him the first time while his hands were raised?#justiceforlavoy
“Lawyers for an indicted FBI agent suggest in court papers that one of
the state troopers who shot and killed Oregon refuge occupation
spokesman Robert "LaVoy" Finicum may have fired the two earlier shots
at Finicum as he emerged from his truck at a police roadblock.”
He shared the following article from the Oregonian-
Lawyers for an indicted FBI agent suggest in court papers that one of
the state troopers who shot and killed Oregon refuge occupation
spokesman Robert "LaVoy" Finicum may have fired the two earlier shots
at Finicum as he emerged from his truck at a police roadblock.
The government has refused to provide documents to the defense about
those past shootings despite repeated requests, the agent's lawyers
said. Astarita's lawyers are now asking a judge to compel the
prosecution team to release the material.
"Such evidence could potentially reveal a pattern of behavior that
might shed light on what Officer 1 did on January 26, 2016, and why he
may not have been truthful about that conduct in the days and weeks that
followed,'' defense lawyer Tyler Francis wrote in a motion filed this
week in U.S. District Court in Portland.
The motion reveals a theory of Astarita's defense lawyers intended to
cast doubt on the prosecution's contention that the FBI agent fired at
Finicum and then lied about it. One of the bullets hit the roof of
Finicum's truck and the other went astray.
Battle of experts in case of indicted FBI Agent W. Joseph Astarita
Government
reconstruction of shooting scene places Astarita as the blue figure,
and “Officer 1,” or the Oregon State Police SWAT trooper as the orange
figure. Prosecutors said Astarita fired two shots at Finicum as he
emerged from his truck. Defense lawyers question if the trooper fired
those shots. The trooper did fire 3 shots at Finicum’s truck as it was
driving toward the police roadblock and then fired 2 shots striking
Finicum after his truck stopped, got out and walked away from the truck.
The trooper was one of two state police officers who shot and killed
Finicum.
Astaritia's lawyers contend the government "overlooked or
misinterpreted'' several key pieces of evidence, "strongly suggesting
that Officer 1 may have lied about his role in the incident, and that
Officer 1 had a clear motive to do so.''
Astarita, a member of the FBI's elite Hostage Rescue Team, has
pleaded not guilty to a five-count indictment that charges him with
three counts of making a false statement and two counts of obstruction
of justice. His indictment followed grand jury testimony and analysis by
experts of the bullet trajectory from the shot that hit the roof of
Finicum's truck.
Astarita's lawyers said "Officer 1" was standing near Astarita when
someone fired twice - called "Shots 4 and 5" in court documents -- at
Finicum as he emerged from his truck when police arrested the leaders of
the armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
The trooper had fired three shots as Finicum was driving toward the
police roadblock, striking Finicum's truck in the front hood, center
grill and driver's side mirror. The trooper denied firing the next two
shots, "Shots 4 and 5," as Finicum emerged from his truck, but he may
have had a motive for the denial because moments later he fired other
shots that struck and killed Finicum, Astarita's lawyers contend.
Government’s reconstruction of shooting scene
Prosecutors
say FBI Agent W. Joseph Astarita was standing beside the open passenger
door of a white truck across from occupation spokesman Robert “LaVoy”
Finicum’s truck when he fired two shots from his rifle, one striking the
roof of Finicum’s truck. Astarita has denied firing any gunshots.
"If Officer 1 had initiated the use of deadly force by firing Shots 4
& 5 at Finicum just seconds earlier, his self-defense claim would
obviously have been more difficult to establish,'' Francis wrote in the
motion. "Officer 1's denial would be even less credible - substantially
so - if he had a history of using deadly force in similarly questionable
circumstances.''
"Officer 1'' was one of two state troopers who fatally shot Finicum
as he was reaching inside his jacket, police said. Investigators said
Finicum had a loaded handgun in an inner pocket.
Astarita's lawyers first asked for files from the different police
agencies that make up the Tri-County Major Incident Team, which helped
investigate the shooting, in a letter to prosecutors in July 2017. The
defense sent another letter in September, specifically asking that the
government produce "all documents regarding the involvement of (Officer
1) in any prior officer involved shooting.''
By December, the government told Astarita's lawyers that it had
reviewed documents on the trooper's prior officer-involved shootings but
didn't believe they had to be shared under the Brady rule.
The landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland says
prosecutors have a duty to turn over information that might be
favorable to defense attorneys in a case.
Top of LaVoy's truck bullet hole.
Prosecutors don't believe the trooper's prior shootings are relevant in the Astarita case, but Astarita's lawyers disagree.
Prosecutors have argued that no one other than Astarita could have
fired the shots as Finicum emerged from his pickup, and that he was the
only person standing in a stationary, "combat-ready stance'' with a
weapon trained on Finicum's truck when the two critical shots in
question were fired. They've said the state trooper was in motion,
moving around at the time.
Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson, whose office led the shooting
investigation, said that the Oregon state police trooper, or "Officer
1,'' told investigators he fired shots at Finicum's truck as it was
heading toward the roadblock, and then he fired after Finicum had walked
away from his truck and reached into his jacket.
Investigators examined the trooper's rifle magazine, and the evidence was consistent with the trooper's statement, Nelson said.
Yet Astarita's lawyers argue they should be entitled to review records on the trooper's previous shootings.
"Evidence demonstrating that an individual other than the accused had
a motive to lie to the police in statements impacting an investigation
is plainly exculpatory, particularly where that witness also had the
opportunity and means to commit the underlying act in
question,'' Francis wrote in court papers. "Records relating to Officer
1's prior shootings fall squarely into this category.''
Bullet impact on the roof of Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum’s truck
Forensic
investigators have dubbed the bullet impact to the roof of Robert
‘LaVoy’ Finicum’s truck as Impact “W.” It’s the bullet strike that FBI
Agent W. Joseph Astarita is accused of firing, but then denying he did.
The Deschutes County Sheriff's Office and state police have declined
to identify the troopers who fatally shot Finicum. The agencies have
turned down repeated public records requests seeking the names, citing
threats against the troopers. Lawyers in the Astarita case have the troopers' names but they're under a court protective order. Nelson said the investigation into the shooting that day is
continuing, with additional interviews, "so we make sure we have an
absolute accounting of what occurred.''
Cones showing bullet trajectory from bullet strike to roof
Prosecutors
say indicted FBI Agent W. Joseph Astarita is the figure in blue, and
the only one who could have fired the shot that hit the roof of
Finicum’s truck.
Defense challenges government’s reconstruction
Astarita’s
lawyer Robert Cary and a defense expert say the aerial video from the
FBI is so blurry and fuzzy, and impossible to rely on to determine where
the agent was standing.
Government’s placement of officers and vehicles at shooting scene
A
government expert’s placement of officers and FBI agents at the scene of
the Jan. 26, 2016 shooting. The blue figure is indicted FBI Agent W.
Joseph Astarita, and the orange figure is an Oregon State Police SWAT
team member.
Government expert Michael Haag’s bullet trajectory analysis
The
green line shows government forensic expert Michael Haag’s bullet
trajectory analysis from the bullet hole on the roof of occupation
spokesman Robert “LaVoy” Finicum’s truck, fired on Jan. 26, 2016. The
green line leads to the area where the bullet was fired from, according
to Haag.
Government’s placement of officers and vehicles at shooting scene
A
government expert’s placement of officers and FBI agents at the scene
of the Jan. 26, 2016 shooting. The blue figure is indicted FBI Agent W.
Joseph Astarita, and the orange figure is an Oregon State Police SWAT
team member.
DHS Whistle-blower information re-surfaces amid week long recess declared by Judge Gloria Navarro to allow Steve Myhre and his team to regroup after over 40 violations and firing of Government Investigator.
There is a resurgence of disgust and outrage as an unnamed Department Of Homeland Security Investigator's leaked report resurfaces along with added information that Dan Love Agent In Charge during the Bundy Ranch Standoff along with other government agencies, including the Military, compiled a "hit list" to carry out after the Standoff had ended in April 2014. It is being reported that there are photographs of this list with other evidence that confirms this and other tactics to be used against the Bundy Family and their supporters. It all began with a DHS Investigator leaking information of the government tactics and plans to Doug Hagmann to Steve Quayle in an email.
"At 1750 hours ET, I was contacted by my source within the Department of Homeland Security regarding the current situation at the Bundy Ranch. To put it bluntly, the people are being hoodwinked into believing that the situation is being resolved. It is not. It is a strategic de-escalation to fool the public. This source stated that the retreat of the BLM agents and the release of the cattle was actually crafted as a potential plan yesterday (Friday, 11 April 2014) based on the following:
1. A military assessment of satellite and drone surveillance imagery of the “patriot resistance". Drones under the control of the U.S. military were in use, taking real-time photographic images of not just the activity at the ranch, but "identifying the protesters", any arms and any supplies they might have or be carrying. “Mission accomplished.”
2. Real-time communication intercepts between patriots on-site and their off-site support;
3. Active monitoring of internet traffic regarding the coverage of events at ranch;
4. The monitoring of real-time video from the scene.
This source stated that a response by the patriot movement was anticipated, although exceeded their expectations. Although this was a real operation, they also ran this as a test case for future government operations once they saw the response. They were also actively managing the media, in some cases threatening to cut off White House access to anyone covering the event.
Despite this, the coverage by the alternative media began to create a public relations problem that was not easily managed. Note the lack of acknowledgment by the White House regarding this event. They are intentionally framing it as a state issue, despite the fact that all federal response has been and continues to be from the White House. There is a reason for this – a reason that has not been identified in any of the public reports to date. I will explain in further detail in a follow-up report on Sunday, after this source attends [redacted] to obtain more specific information about future federal operations. Regardless, according to this source, the government will take back ‘their land’ as they must to fulfill international obligations. It was never about grazing rights or anything other than (1) “securing clear title” to the land, and (2) further demonizing any patriotic resistance. It is my understanding, based on the information from this source, that it is a critical task to create a situation that will also advance their agenda of gun control and confiscation.
A more detailed report will follow on Sunday, 13 April 2014, with additional and much more specific information about their inside plans and future operations. PLEASE MAKE THIS VIRAL!"
This information confirms much of what Americans on the ground were reporting on the scene in real time. This also confirms what many of us have known for a long time, that the stand that took place in Oregon in 2016 was a continuation of this government plot to kill and silence the Americans who took a stand there. This confirms what I have been saying all along, "LaVoy was assassinated by the government and its operatives/Mercenaries". Like Shawna Cox reported, "[they] wanted us all dead"! Information on what other evidence is being leaked to the Defense in the current Nevada trial is still only being put out in somewhat cryptic fashion at this writing, but we are expecting more will be made public soon. It was reported that Steve Myhre fired an Investigator on his team regarding the Bundy Trial currently underway. It is assumed that this is one of, now several, DHS Whistleblowers. We know that these Whistleblowers have approached Defense Attorney's in this case. This only confirms that "they were at war with us, before we were at war with them". One thing is for sure, all of these people in government and their operatives need to be held accountable and all still employed within the government must be terminated!
Early Reports On New Information
Learn More About The Current Trial Of Tier #1 Defendants at this link.
