From: Gary Hunt at the
Outpost of Freedom in Mishawaka, Indiana
Date: February 27, 1994 Phone: (219) xxx-xxxxSECOND MASSACRE IN WACO
Yesterday I was speaking to a number of patriots in Chicago when a message came, through the Hilton staff, to me that there was an acquittal of conspiracy and murder charges on all the Davidians. This information was relayed to the crowd and accepted with applause and cheers. It wasn’t until later, on the way back to Indiana, that I was able to listen to the news and find that there were convictions in the case.
I suppose that the contrast between the first message and the subsequent facts had the affect of generating a different sort of perspective on the matter. I know that I went from a very cheerful and happy state, knowing that the fine people I had met in Waco would be "walking" out of their imprisonment, with recourse, and then finding that many may spend up to ten years in prison (not to consider the up to $250,000 fine after having ALL of their property destroyed by the FBI).
What was accomplished in San Antonio? To understand this, let’s suppose that David Koresh had lead his followers out of Mt. Carmel on March 1,1993, just one day after the fateful raid. This has been suggested by Bob Ricks, Jeff Jamar, Janet Reno and even Bill Clinton, as the proper approach to situations of this nature. So, we have over one hundred people, not just the children and a handful of adults, coming out into the custody of federal authorities. The children will be put with family (if the family is determined to by "qualified" by the federal authorities) and every person who can be identified as having held a gun, and some who had not, would have remained in jail until the trial. Those who were witnesses to the events would be hustled into protective custody (detained) as material witnesses. After many months the case would have gone to trial and the witnesses brought forward to tell pretty much the same story that has recently been presented in San Antonio, and, presumably, a verdict similar to yesterdays would have been rendered.
This justifies, more than ever, the decision of those in Mt. Carmel Center to defend their lives and their property. Once they became a target, and once the BATF decided to "go in", there was no alternative but the loss of life. Nothing would have been gained had the Davidians surrendered in mass. Guilt by virtue of being a "target" of government has been clearly established, as much as in any other case in history.
What did this verdict tell us? Quite simply the verdict indicated that if the government is to assault your home/church shoot, injure and kill some of you, and then you return fire (as has been established in testimony) and injure or kill some of them, you will be found guilty of manslaughter. The judge defined manslaughter as murder committed under the "heat of passion." So, now you are only facing ten years in prison for defending yourself. Justice? But, let’s look a little further -witnesses, primarily three witnesses, all Davidians, were able to place guns in the hands of some of the defendants. Of course others who held guns, or even claimed to have shot people, as per testimony, were not even charged with these crimes (selective enforcement?). Not one person testified as to seeing any of the defendants "shooting" any ATE agents, however they claimed that some of the defendants claimed that they shot agents, perhaps they were bragging as young men just being baptized in fire will. Never were the details of the "manslaughter" brought forward with the sufficiency to "prove beyond a reasonable doubt" that any of the individual defendants ‘manslaughtered’ any particular agent. Ironically, we have five defendants guilty of ‘manslaughtering’ four agents.
The instructions of the judge were such that the jury was able to find that a person may have killed another person, and therefore should be judged guilty. The fact that, obviously, one of the defendants MUST be innocent, and being aware that others, uncharged, had made similar "boasts", it is probable that one or more of the defendants could not possibly be guilty of the crime of manslaughter. So how could we possibly have satisfied, "beyond a reasonable doubt", as we have been led to believe is what our criminal justice system is dependent upon?
What has come out of San Antonio is a message to "law enforcement" officers that THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW. Even though they may rest assured that if they kill an unarmed person, they will receive time off with pay, and, eventually, be exonerated. If one of them is killed, somebody, anybody, maybe even more than one, will be punished for the crime.
We’ve learned even more than that. The Treasury and Justice reports make it clear that both agencies claim that there are many "groups" out there that are of the same "criminal mentality" of the Branch Davidians (and most patriots) and should be dealt with accordingly. Waco (San Antonio) has become the instruction book for how to deal with these people. The bungling of the raid is not predicated on the method, rather the loss of the element of surprise. I’m sure that these agencies will be sure to NOT lose that element in the future. And, there will be a future, for Reno, Clinton, Bentsen and many others in government use Waco to justify "dealing" with these "criminal types." San Antonio gave them the means to accomplish this end. Patriots, be advised that the "license to kill" has been issued to the government by a jury in Texas.
Renos Avraam, Brad Branch, Jaime Castillo, Livingstone Fagan, Kevin Whitecliff - Guilty of manslaughter
Paul Fatta, Graeme Craddock - Firearms charges
Return to the Trial of the Branch Davidians index
Go to Next OPF Report
Got to Previous Report