Jump to content

Talk:Leonard Peltier

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mjensen32, Carlsontemple.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Wind Chases the Sun (2010) documentary?

[edit]

The article states that it is a "documentary film about Peltier and his trial by Preston Randolph, released in 2011." But this doesn't appear to be the case. It isn't available anywhere, and looking at the http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/wind-chases-the-sun website for the film it states: "Please feel free to contact us through our website www.windchasesthesun.com or email cactusproductionsfilms@gmail.com and we will get back to you very quickly." but when you go to the www.windchasesthesun.com website it redirects to http://www.cactusprofilms.com . However, I have contacted them to find out what is going on. Will update ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.230.125 (talk) 19:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from Preston Randolph, "Thank you for your interest in the project. Due to legalities we were forced to halt production until late next year. With that said, we will commence our work again in 2014. Thank you again for your interest. Preston Randolph"
Let's wait until the film is actually made and then we can put it in the article. As the saying goes, no wine before its time... Hammersbach (talk) 19:21, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Incident at Oglala (1992) documentary

[edit]

This is billed as a 1992 documentary, but on the back of the DVD case it says "1988 / Color / Approximate Feature Running Time: 90 Min." but also "(c) 1992 Miramax Films Release. All Arights Reserved." So which is it? And if it is 1992 then it should be known it was made in 1988. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.230.125 (talk) 20:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peltier as a source about his trial?

[edit]

Several claims about the trial only cite Peltier interviews, obviously he is a biased questionable source regarding this topic. Unless other sources are provided or a more expienced editor over rules me I will delete them. Also many of the links are dead.

177.133.114.160 (talk) 01:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think if Leonard Peltier interview published by press, there is no problem to cite them with references - this is just encyclopedia, that lists in short all facts, that were published. If references are not working, then better try to fix them if it is possible. PoetVeches (talk) 11:31, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

False information about death

[edit]

Information is appearing that is false regarding the subject's death. Peltier's death did not occur today according to any news sources. Therefore I am removing the following information: "This is what has been removed: "On November 26, 2009, at the age of 65, Peltier died in prison of smallpox. He had contracted smallpox from a blanket given to him by his captors."

Kitschqueen (talk) 04:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes, an obvious thoughtless addition. ( Martin | talk • contribs 02:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
[edit]

Does anyone else have an issue with a section that so dominates the article uses such definitive language and is entirely sourced to Peltier's website and one radio program in which his defense lawyers were interviewed? JLBertzel (talk) 16:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am also concerned about such sources. I have read other accounts about the controversy, but using Peltier's website as the main source weakens the article. In addition, there is too much reliance on editor(s) making their own selections of material from trial testimony, which is a primary source and an action comprising Original Research (OR). All such material can be removed as improperly sourced. Editors are supposed to rely on published secondary sources, preferably in peer-reviewed or otherwise established reliable sources. Given the high visibility of this case, it has doubtless been written about by scholars as well as activists, and needs better sourcing.Parkwells (talk) 19:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Poor Bears affidavit, used as part of the Canadian extradition papers, was false, and little doubt that someone at the FBI had to know it. She was not allowed to testify at trial. Few trials are certain, and this trial has lots of non-judicial motivations, aside from the unthinkable: did a state of war exist between the FBI and AIM?( Martin | talk • contribs 02:59, 13 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
The other item is that that the FBI, "despite its claim to the contrary, could and did conduct a firing pin test on the Wichita AR-15, the weapon attributed to Peltier and which was alleged to have caused Agests Williams' and Coler's fatal injuries. That test proved conclusively that the shell casing offered into evidence at Peltier's 1977 tial was not fired by the Witchita AR-15. This means only one thing... Peltier did not shoot the agents." Quote taken from Ghost Rider Roads isbn 978-1469905716, reprint of a letter to the Toronto Sun. ( Martin | talk • contribs 07:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Martin, are you proposing that we should somehow take into serious consideration a quote from "a letter to the Toronto Sun"? Hammersbach (talk) 21:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The boots and POV re: assault and robbery

[edit]

Regarding Jimmy eagle: Is it true that "He was wanted for questioning in connection with the recent assault and robbery"? Isn't this an inflation of the charges? Were there charges, at this point? The next sentence says the conflict was an altercation between an AIM teenager, Jimmy Eagle, and a local, and some missing boots. This seems pretty minor, not a topic for the FBI, even if they thought the boots crossed state lines, compared to the outstanding unsolved murders, barely noted. Why are two FBI agents working a missing boots case? Is each agent after one boot? By 1PM there are hundreds of people at the scene. Where did they come from? Missing from this part of the story is the notion that Calvin Jumping Bull's property was the location of the AIM camp; where AIM hung out. The FBI was certainly concerned and worried about the AIM movement, and so would be focusing surveilance on this location. This was the period of COINTELLPRO. The camp was described as 'strongly defended', fortified, so driving in there in speeding cars chasing a red pickup is hardly a run of the mill "innocent" pursuit, hot on the trail of a pair of missing boots.

Or- what is really going on here? Note the case is called RESMURS (Reservation Murders), but it concerns the two killed FBI agents only. The dozens of murders that took place on the reservation, to natives, do not register. ( Martin | talk • contribs 13:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]

The altercation with Jimmy Eagle would have been assault, and the theft of the boots would have been robbery. The FBI has jurisdiction over crimes that occur on Indian Reservations because the Reservations are federal land. Hope that helps. 67.149.196.159 (talk) 22:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving without consensus

[edit]

Someone set up this talk page to be regularly archived without any consensus on this board, which is against Wikipedia policy. As a consequence, there are now 38 very valuable conversations hidden away in Talk:Leonard Peltier/Archive 1. The bot was set up to archive all threads inactive for over 90 days. I have removed the coding at the top of this Talk page that activated the bot, so hopefully it will stop. If not, please notify an admin so that they can turn off the bot; thanks. Also, I recommend that any relevant thread from the archives be restored to this talk page. This is a highly controversial article, and information discussing it should not be censored or hidden away. Softlavender (talk) 10:02, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

archiving of stale discussions is completely in line with wikipedia policy and does not require a prior consensus making process. All the information in the archives is readily available to anyone who wants to read it it is neither censored or hidden away.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 21:22, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Instructions on automatic archiving clearly read in a highlighted notification box: "Before setting up automatic archiving on an article's talk page, please establish a consensus that archiving is really needed there." User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo. Softlavender (talk) 06:11, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this Talk Page so short? I am new to this controversy. It seems the source of pressure against a more usual course of events in prosecution and subsequent legal redress and against political pardon is very narrow and very highly placed for this case. On the open and public Wikipedia forum, people with what kind of approach and tone support incarceration? Does the evolution of this Wikipedia page show the odd kind of contributions I have seen in the Bradley Birkenfeld (Talk page) and USB bank pages? I am interested in the Talk page because it is a window into the society in which I live. I'll go dig. I don't understand why this Talk Page needs such a haircut.
Jerry-va (talk) 15:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)jerry-va[reply]

It's a pretty standard undertaking for any page with a lengthy amount of discussion. I'm not sure why it's such a problem.--Chimino (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Popular Culture--Music

[edit]

Perhaps an appropriate addition for the Music sub heading of the Pop Culture section would be the Goats, a highly politicized American rap outfit from the 90s who have some tracks about and mentioning Peltier? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.217.94 (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Location of Cole's Pistol?

[edit]

The article currently lists two separate discoveries of Agent Cole's .38 revolver: once under the seat in an RV, and once in a burned-out station wagon. Which is it? It is also problematic that neither account is sourced.

Content unsourced since December 2012

[edit]

I suggest it be removed. This is a BLP. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:14, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I OR'd it up

[edit]

I added that the claim about the government admitting not knowing who shot the agents was actually a reference to the case of Gordon Kahl, not Peltier. This is true, but it's WP:OR, and verified by court docs (although a brief, not transcripts). I can't actually find TPA for the claim that it was a reference to Kahl, although NPPA does say that it was not a reference to Peltier (http://www.noparolepeltier.com/faq.html#11). Will fix eventually. Dingsuntil (talk) 21:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Leonard Peltier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leonard Peltier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:44, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

infobox

[edit]

I added missed first name "Leonard" in infobox under photo. There seems to be one more error in info box: I will see to redress ethnicity line "Dakota" that does not appear, bs {{ of references placed, disrupting info box. PoetVeches (talk) 11:40, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Leonard Peltier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:36, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Revisions to “Leonard Peltier” Article

[edit]

Revision List:

-The main edits that I will be making surround the article’s issue with reliability in order to address the concerns expressed by the banners above certain sections. These edits will include adding citations, adding more reliable sources, replacing dead links, and paraphrasing to remove plagiarism. I will be focusing on the two subsections with banners about reliability: Shootout at Pine Ridge and Aftermath.

-I will add citations to improve the article’s reliability, an important element of Wikipedia’s guidelines for quality articles. There are dozens of sentences without citations that need to be included in order to improve reliability.

-I will add content about Leonard Peltier’s early life to fill in a content gap I identified in the article regarding his education.

-I will consider adding content about Leonard Peltier’s history of clemency denials in order to fill in content gaps and include a more reliable source.

-I will edit the content in areas that contain inaccuracies or misinterpretations of references in order to give readers accurate and neutral content about a living figure (Wikipedia’s words).

-I will tighten and shorten some of the subsections under the Other Development section because they seem (to use the language in Wikipedia’s guidelines) overly long in proportion to their overall importance to the subject of the article, Leonard Peltier.

-I will also be making various small edits (correcting grammar mistakes, making longer sentences more concise, etc) in order to improve readability, so that Wikipedia readers/users can obtain clear and accurate content about Leonard Peltier.

Bibliography:

Brand, Johanna, and Barnett Richling. "The Life & Death of Anna Mae Aquash. 2nd Ed." Canadian Ethnic Studies 27.1 (1995): 173-4. ProQuest Central. Web.

"But will anyone believe him? Robert Robideau confesses to shooting agents " News from Indian Country. Web. <http://archive.li/Sie9A>.

"Decision at Oglala." Boston Globe (pre-1997 Fulltext), 1993, p. 10. ProQuest Central. Web. <http://proxy.library.georgetown.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/294789062?accountid=11091>.

"Governor Says He Persuaded Clinton to Not Pardon Peltier." Bismarck Tribune, The (ND), 2001, NewsBank. Web.

Lappas, Thomas, and Gary L. Anderson. "Oglala, Incident At." Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications, 2007. Web.

Meister, Mark, and Ann Burnett. "Rhetorical Exclusion in the Trial of Leonard Peltier." American Indian Quarterly 28.3/4 (2004): 719-42. ProQuest Central, Research Library. Web.

"Peltier, Leonard." Gale Biographies: Popular People. Ed. Gale Cengage Learning,. Farmington, MI, USA: Gale, 2018. Web.

Sandage, Diane, and Richard T. Schaefer. "Peltier, Leonard (1944–)." Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity, and Society. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications, 2008. Web.

Glisson, Susan M. The Human Tradition in the Civil Rights Movement. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2006. Web.

Privitera, John J. "Toward a Remedy for International Extradition by Fraud: The Case of Leonard Peltier." Yale Law & Policy Review 2.1 (1983): 49-61. Web.

"335. Leonard Peltier". Most Wanted. Retrieved 7 December 2018. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjensen32 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mjensen32 (talk) 18:13, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stuntz

[edit]

So, after reading this article, here's a question I have. I noticed this particular passage in the article (in the section explaining the events of the shootout at Pine Ridge), which I find particularly interesting:

"At 6:30 p.m., they used tear gas to storm the Jumping Bull houses, where they found the body of a Native American, Joseph Stuntz. Stuntz was clad in Coler's green FBI field jacket, which he appeared to have taken from the agent's car. The two FBI Agents were later confirmed to have died on June 26, 1975. Stuntz appeared to have died later, during subsequent shooting."

This passage mentions a few very interesting facts about the Native American, Joseph Stuntz, who was also killed at Pine Ridge. First, he was found "clad in [Agent] Coler's green FBI field jacket, which he appeared to have taken from the agent's car". Second, "Stuntz appeared to have died later [than the two FBI agents], during subsequent shooting." My question is, knowing these facts, was there ever any investigation into whether it could actually have been Stuntz who had done the execution-style killing of the two FBI agents? The reason I ask this is, since Stuntz was found wearing a "green FBI field jacket" that had belonged to one of the two slain agents, I would have thought that the very first thing that crossed investigators' minds would have been that perhaps Stuntz had walked up to the two injured agents, fired the fatal shots, and then (for some reason) took the jacket from Coler's car (and, perhaps, also retrieved the gun that was later found in Peltier's RV). Indeed, the fact that Stuntz apparently died later could very well fit with this version of events, as, for lack of more extensive details of his condition when he was found, it stands to reason that he could have been injured in some way, perhaps from a non-fatal gunshot or the like, by Williams as he approached to fire the fatal shots, and then sustained more injuries in the later gunfight that, on top of the injuries he had already received from Williams, combined to kill him.

I realize that wording was kind of confusing, so here's a simplified version of what I'm suggesting: As the the two FBI agents lay dying, Joseph Stuntz approaches them, carrying a gun. Williams, attempting to defend himself and Coler, fires a shot or two at Stuntz, but, due to Williams' injuries and his position (laying on the ground), only succeeds in wounding Stuntz. Stuntz reaches the two agents, and kills them, execution style. Then, for some unknown (at least from the information presented here) reason, Stuntz takes the FBI field jacket from Coler's car (and perhaps also takes the two agents' weapons), and leaves the area. Sometime shortly thereafter, the wounded Stuntz is caught up in another firefight, during which he is shot again. Now having sustained at least 2 separate gunshot wounds (or possibly more, again, the information presented here doesn't say) Stuntz, who, as a result, is probably bleeding heavily, stumbles into the Jumping Bull houses (where his body was later found), and succumbs to his injuries. Meanwhile, at some point the two FBI agents' guns are taken by other Native Americans, either from the agents' bodies or vehicles, or from some other location Stuntz had left them (if he was the one that originally took them from the agents), and get shuffled around among whatever other weapons the Native Americans had in their possession, until Williams' revolver and shells from both agents' handguns end up in the vehicle outside the house where Butler was arrested (where they were found by investigators), Coler's revolver ends up in a bag under the front seat of Peltier's RV, and Coler's rifle ends up in the station wagon that exploded while Robideau, Charles, and Anderson were driving it on the Kansas Turnpike.

My point is, I just find it kind of odd that, at least as far as I can tell from this article, this possibility never occurred to either the original investigators of the murder or any of Peltier's defense teams during the trial or any of the subsequent appeals over the years.

I know article talk pages on Wikipedia aren't for just talking in general about the subject of the article, I just wonder if anyone could find any sources that mention this possibility and if any parties in the case ever investigated it. If such sources could be found, I think it would be a great addition to the article.

I would Be Bold, but, as a busy college student, I unfortunately don't have the time. Floyd661 (talk) 20:57, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Citations missing for "longest-serving political prisoner"

[edit]

The opening paragraph states rather definitively that, "as of 2020, Peltier is one of the longest-serving political prisoners in the world, having spent 43 years in prison." This is missing citations both for the assertion that Peltier is a "political prisoner" (someone imprisoned for their political views as opposed to an apolitical crime), and that he is "one of the longest-serving" if so. Beyond the opening paragraph, no significant support for either assertion is given in the article. A reader not primed for the inference would probably not come away from the article thinking Peltier was unambiguously a "political prisoner", and there is no further reference that I could find to any kind of "list of longest-serving political prisoners" against which to measure Peltier's prison term. Cmuratori (talk) 05:30, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cmuratori:  Done (by @HaeB: — see #Not neutral). DemonDays64 (talk) 20:52, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not neutral

[edit]

This article quite definitively claims he is a political prisoner without citing much that actually says that. It really needs sources for stuff like saying "Peltier is one of the longest-serving political prisoners in the world". Statements like "Peltier is widely considered a political prisoner" that don't even judge whether it's true are horrendously sourced — that one cites one source that is literally just the organization he was in. This article is not neutral and is improperly sourced. DemonDays64 (talk) 07:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC) (please ping on reply)[reply]

Agreed, I have removed the first statement per WP:BURDEN, and changed the second one.
The first one had been added here by User:Escallaway with a misleading edit summary. The same editor has made other problematic edits as well, e.g. claiming that Peltier "was charged with aiding and abetting, not first degree murder", which does not seem to be true.
Regards, HaeB (talk) 12:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Luizpuodzius:

[edit]

Poderias traduzir este artigo? att 2804:14C:5BB3:A319:28D5:60A7:3ED1:8AE0 (talk) 10:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What and where is the Jumping Bull Compound?

[edit]

This is something that is mentioned in the article with no description or explanation, as if everything about Jumping Bull Compound were common knowledge. Can someone please add an explanation of Jumping Bull Compound to the article?--RJBowman (talk) 19:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That it's not the same set-of-3 men, is obvious

[edit]

Even from only this wikipedia, you can irrefutably see, that the set of 3 injured when they blew up his car, (which suggests they could've wanted future investigators to assume the owner was-also a shooter, which is not a direct-logic)

were NOT the same 3 men as those captured at the compound, which is also, not a direct link;

i.e.

Peltier, ROBIDEAU, Butler.

ROBIDEAU, Charles, Michael.

Only Robideau is common in BOTH.

---

If anything, it looks like Peltier should've been done in for at least one accessory-to (being a driver) & possession-of-the-handgun, by having driven at the second incident with the state-trooper, if-not-also the shootout THERE. That doesn't make him a killer of the FIRST two, it'd make him risking the life of the trooper, if it really was to-kill, rather than to only distract/decoy while running.

Also, there's no dis-proof that he'd've been doing what he did willingly - for all we know, his uncle? Robideau could've been threatening / social-pressuring him to help out - mitigation'd be reasonable at-that-point.

---

NOR does it appear that the man previously interviewed by Williams was-ALSO Peltier. If that description was-also, then you might have a reasonable chance that Jimmy Eagle had been in contact with Peltier,

BUT ; even then, considering that they blew up his car and dumped the weapons there, isn't it bleeping obvious, that they framed him?

The previous contact with Eagle, suggests that-that-was WHEN, Eagle was probably asking him to borrow his car for the day / for a few days, etc. Even if that previously-interviewed suspect was Peliter, at most that might end up being charges like concealing what he knew of Eagle / the 1st potential for accessory-to , if Eagle had been honest with him, but how would we now-know? it doesn't look like there's direct-logic/proof that that (assumed-Peltier?) previous interviewee, WAS-Peliter either,.. so... ?? It could've been someone else not even IN any of the records - did the officer SPECIFY which interviewee, and if-so, did he specify Peliter?

i.e. Did the prosecution made it SEEM that way? inferred that it was the same man the jury was being told-about ... verbally,.. as the facts were being read-out? Sounds like that could've been ommitted.

---

Considering that it looks like Robideau was the only one present in BOTH sets of 3-men, how the BLEEP did THAT connection, somehow jump-over to Peltier?

just because it was his car where they found the guns / he'd bought a car soon-after? Again, social-pressure / family mitigation, again, that doesn't make him a killer.

did the judge or prosecutor end-up confusing/blurring the two? i.e. WHICH suspect was present at both sets of 3

If the judge also-failed to prevent the prosecutor from UNreasonably associating Peltier WITH either of the 2 possible-links, ( possibly being the previous interviewee / assumed part 'of the gang' by it having been his car used to dump/burn the weapons )

Then it looks like they've mis-carried-J / mis-trialled, and then let Robideau slip-away OF-THE-OTHER two, while carelessly not checking that the one OF THE THREE (present in both sets of 3 ) , was Peliter, when it wasn't?

Accessory-to (once if not twice), aiding&abbetting, at least discharging a stolen firearm at the border, sounds reasonable, sounds reasonable, sounds reasonable,

But it doesn't seem like there's anything direct in relation to killing or even firing at the initial two.

Nor does there seem to be anything DIRECT of possession of the AR15 - it having been BURNT OUT in his truck, prooves very little.

120.21.44.148 (talk) 08:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Leonard_Peltier&oldid=1227860465"