This woman has guts and is speaking the truth. If we don’t have the constitutional right to protect ourselves when we are unjustly detained and shot at by government authorities, of what use is the Second Amendment?
On March 8, 2016, Oregon State Police held a news conference in which the DesChutes County investigative team announced its investigative report. It was a dog and pony show that turned sour. In short, it’s a huge cover up. It’s state law that police must turn on their body cams at times such as this. But instead they deliberately turned them off. This is a trend nationwide.
Here is the video that Shawna Cox took from inside LaVoy Finicum’s truck during his assassination.
Courtesy: OregonLive (The Oregonian)
In addition the OSP turned on the FBI because shots were fired prematurely and were not accounted for.
In reviewing the autopsy, omissions were apparent and then upon review of the 360 page written report, strange inconsistencies appeared. One includes the mysterious Mark McConnell. Suspected by the protestors to be an FBI plant, he insisted on driving the group to the John Day meeting, and then when they encountered the ambush, his main concern was whether his Jeep had been harmed, not the man lying dead on the ground.
Furthermore, he was the only one of the group not detained and his name is entirely missing in the very detailed police report.
Another alarming detailed jumped out of the report: One police officer said they changed the kill stop (also called a deadman’s blockade), never used on civilians, from Grant County to Harney because Grant was a “UN-free Zone.” WE will be reporting more on what exactly that officer meant in our next update.
JEANETTE FINICUM RESPONDS
LaVoy’s widow Jeanette gave this statement after review of the investigative report:
March 9, 2016, St. George, UT — Yesterday a tag-team of law enforcement officials announced they have found that the Oregon officer who shot my husband dead while he had his hands in the air was justified. These officials announced that “without a doubt” the officer who killed my husband did so “to protect” himself and his fellow officers “from imminent harm.”
I know my husband, Robert LaVoy Finicum, and I knew him on the day he died. With his hands in the air, he was no danger to anyone, he intended no “imminent harm.” He was giving himself up in order to divert shooters from the others in the truck. Right down to the very last act of his life, he was giving for others. That was my husband. That was the man who the panel of investigators concluded was “responsible for” the situation in which he was killed in a well-planned ambush.
My family and I reject the biased, whitewash findings and conclusion reported yesterday. My lawyers have assured me that the men who ambushed my husband, who set him up for death, who assassinated him, will face justice in a court before an unbiased jury that will be deciding whether my husband was killed by a wrongful action or omission on the part of the police. That action will be joined with an action based on violation of the due process clause of the United States Constitution, the very document for which my husband gave his life. That is a Civil Rights Act claim.
Prior to yesterday the FBI held the position that my husband was shot during a “traffic stop.” That was such a stretch of the truth that even the tag-team news conference group could not repeat it. There was no “traffic stop.” This was an ambush by use of a “Deadman’s Blockade” designed to allow a “Kill Stop”—a roadblock on a blind curve on an almost abandoned road.
Those officers at the roadblock were the last line available to block the truck LaVoy drove, to assure that he was killed. In our wrongful death and civil rights violation lawsuit we will prove the kind of man my husband was, and that as a leading spokesman of this movement to restore the U.S. Constitution and our unalienable rights, he had to be made an example: “Don’t interfere if we as law officers are depriving someone of their rights, property and person.” Is this what Americans believe? Or is this the kind of fear tactic despots in the Middle East have used for centuries when they place crucifixes along the highway to strike fear into their slaves – don’t you dare oppose our unjust laws or this is what will happen to you!”
I don’t think so. Not in America. I still believe we are governed by the same Constitution that our founders created and that we are a republic, one nation under God.
Yesterday, as before, the officers set up a false scenario that my husband was reaching for a loaded gun as he was shot. Before yesterday’s selectively edited video showing, we saw the uncut version. In that uncut version, we see my husband with his hands up, walking away from the truck and not reaching for anything when a man to the right of the video obviously fired some projectile at him. Immediately he leaned over to his left hip area where it appeared some projectile hit him. At that one moment, shots were reigned down on him and he died there in the snow bank—where he lay for ten minutes without anyone checking to see whether he was alive. They let him lay there because they knew that the three shots into the back had killed him.
My attorneys have already begun to assemble a trial team of investigators, paralegals, videographers and writers to make sure that the man who shot my husband in the back and all those who were accomplices will face justice. They will soon be filing the Oregon 30.275 notice that precedes a lawsuit for wrongful death and civil rights violations.
At least twice yesterday the officials blamed my husband for being solely responsible for what happened at the site where he was ambushed. Again, my attorneys assure me that we can show differently, even with yesterday’s law enforcement whitewash. This tag-team said that the officers on the scene where the killing took place were there, putting themselves in harm’s way as part of an effort to “bring the situation at the refuge to an end peacefully.” This statement is consistent with the goal law enforcement announced from the beginning in this case: Let’s just get them out of the refuge building peacefully to the outside where we can talk.
If they had been telling the truth, on January 26, they could easily have achieved their goal. They knew from an informant inside the refuge that all but four of the people inside the refuge would be leaving for several hours. That included the long trip to John Day, the meeting with Sheriff Glenn Palmer, and the ranchers’ workshop that evening on the original intent of the Constitution.
So, I ask, why didn’t the officers pull the roadblock and let the group go out peacefully to John Day? Why didn’t they choose to arrest him while at the Sheriff’s office? If they had done that, this case would have been put in the books with the peaceful ending they now claim they wanted. In fact, the Harney County Sheriff had every opportunity during their stay at the Malheur Refuge to make a peaceful arrest during the numerous conversations they had with him in Burns. My lawyers believe we can show that was not their goal because there is no better evidence of their intent than their actions.
So when the officials said yesterday that my husband was “solely responsible” for the situation and happening of his death, they were spreading their whitewash with a very broad brush. Yesterday one of the tag-team said that my husband chose to break the law, chose to put himself and other people in danger, and then chose to enter into a face-to-face confrontation with armed police officers. My lawyers have already discussed with me how the facts will show that the officers intended to shoot LaVoy, how an informant arranged for him to be in the lead truck, how the officers started shooting at the truck to force it to stop, and then finally how my husband gave himself up in order to draw attention away from the others in the truck.
Contrary to what the panel of officials “found,” my husband was not responsible for the situation that ended with his death. He is not the one who blockaded the road with a “deadman’s blockade.” He is not the one responsible for officers armed with long guns firing from behind the trees. He is not the one who chose to block himself and his friends from leaving the refuge to go out to John Day. He is not the one who lined armed personnel all along the roadway from the refuge to the blockade. No, all those actions can be laid at the feet of the officials who spoke of their innocence yesterday. They will not have to explain their actions in a preliminary hearing or at trial, because their actions were glossed over—“law officers will take care of their own” I was told. But I still had faith in the system my husband fought to protect. I was wrong.
We had no chance at justice in this investigation of law enforcement officers by other law enforcement officers, more like the fox guarding the hen house. But in a wrongful death action, coupled with a civil rights action, the shooters and their partners will make sure that the officers involved will face the same kind of music enjoyed yesterday at our expense.
Yesterday the panel said that “the troopers knew that Mr. Finicum carried a weapon on his left side. Mr. Finicum was reaching for that loaded 9mm gun when the troopers lawfully used deadly force to protect themselves and others including the trooper armed with a taser.” You all have seen the full video where it shows the trooper with the gun or taser to the right of the screen as you look toward the screen. You see my husband lean over to his left hip area immediately where he grabs for the place he was hit. The gunman turns his back on my husband and runs. Isn’t it strange that a law officer turns his back on a person he believes to be heavily armed? Not so strange if he knows that his partner intends to shoot that person in the back.
We believe they will have a hard time squaring their actions with the Attorney General’s statements when we next get into court. My attorneys tell me that we will have to get past the motion to dismiss the civil rights action, which is a motion often governed by intangibles such as, “Does the action of the state shock the conscience?” The media have called my husband a lot of names that are foreign to the peaceful man and extraordinary father of our children that I knew. We must now ask the question, “Who are the real ‘domestic terrorists here?”
We believe that this “Kill Stop” staged by government agents was barbaric, that their whitewash of this horrific incident is more worthy of an Academy Award-winning film in the fiction category and that unbiased American citizens will have their conscience shocked by the government agents’ conduct in:
• Arranging for imbedding an informant among those in the house, on the basis of the informant’s information they set up a Deadman’s Blockade and an intentional killing;
• They shot at the truck in an effort to prevent it from leaving peacefully;
• They shot at the truck after it came to a halt;
• Then they shot my husband, the father of our eleven children, as he moved away from the truck with both hands in the air;
• At the time he was seen to reach down and bend down to his left as though he had been shot or hit with a bullet or taser ray;
• As he bent down, and then tried to straighten back up he was shot three times in the back and died.
I believe, my family believes, my lawyers believe that this evidence will “shock the conscience.”
Listen to the Liberty Lineup Radio Show M-F, 10-Noon Mountain time AM 630, SLC or online www.k-talk.com and we will add more to this fascinating story.
Here is the complete news conference from Tuesday, March 8, 2016. It is Oregon’s attempt to continue laying the foundation of its legal case. This is a very one-sided report. It is clear that LaVoy made every attempt to let authorities know he needed to get to the Sheriff for help. The Oregon State Police are in an ongoing investigation and have accused the FBI of misconduct. The original facts presented have been since altered as to the number of shots fired.
This video courtesy OregonLive (The Oregonian)
Here is the OregonLive.com video that shows Shawna Cox’s video from inside LaVoy Finicum’s truck. The investigative team says they have synchronized it with the FBI’s aerial video. Shawna says they have edited it and that the narrative is a lie.
This synchronized video itself is edited and incomplete. Still missing are body cams (required by Oregon State law), along with Shawna Cox’s incomplete video.
We have since learned that the OSP TURNED OFF THEIR BODY CAMS! This is happening around the country. So it is required by law, but police are now deciding to turn off the cams to hide evidence.
Finally, here is Jeanette Finicum’s statement today in response to the Oregon news conference.
Victoria Sharp, who will be singing in the memorial concert for LaVoy Finicum on Friday evening in Kanab, Utah, something she was on her way to do when their truck was ambushed on a desolate Oregon highway.
Listen to her testimony with CNN. Even though she had never seen the FBI video, she did not waiver from her strong conviction as an eye witness that LaVoy did NOT reach for a gun.
We spend hours going frame by frame of this video and pared it with Victoria’s testimony which came out immediately after the ambush because she was not arrested. Thank God for her testimony!
If the FBI video had sound, we would see that LaVoy came out of the car with both arms up and that he ran away from the car (no police in sight) and was reacting to the gun shots. In less than 15 seconds he was dead. And the FBI and mainstream media continue to repeat the lie – that he reached for his gun twice. He was murdered. And we stand by that analysis.
More and more evidence is now emerging that this is correct.
God bless LaVoy Finicum’s family. The FBI has no idea what they have ignited – we now not only have ONE Finicum. We’ve got TWELVE. His wife and children are now dedicated to carrying on his legacy of spreading the principles of the Constitution, and the unconstitutionality of environmentalism that gives overreaching power to steal people’s land and property. It is really socialism in disguise.
Finicum’s Stand for Freedom is moving forward in his children!
Another opinion has come forward after closely analyzing the FBI video – a former Salt Lake City constable named Barry. Listen to what he says about the claim LaVoy reached for a gun. It’s unlikely that he had a weapon in his waistband. The FBI claims he had a .9mm revolver inside a coat pocket. Did his coat have a pocket? We also need to look at what he calls the “pow-ouch” reflex, which we have said after analyzing this video for several hours frame by frame. Does the FBI have NO other videos? NO audio? What, did we run out of taxpayer funds to get those body and dash cams.
We need the evidence ASAP.
Written and Performed by The LaVoy Finicum daughters
A Tribute to LaVoy Finicum, the Arizona rancher and father of 11 who was killed in an apparent FBI-OPS operation ambush near Burns, Oregon, Tuesday, January 26, 2016
The family of Arizona rancher LaVoy Finicum, killed in Oregon shooting, has released the following statement:
We know that there are always at least two sides to every story. We also know and recognize that the FBI and law enforcement agencies involved will do everything in their power to make it appear as if the needless death of our husband, father, grandfather, brother and son, LaVoy Finicum, was justified.
Like almost everyone else, we were not there, so we don’t know exactly what happened. Like most others, we have no choice but to rely on other sources of information. One of those sources of information is the account of Victoria Sharp. Another piece of information is the video recently released by the FBI, along with the FBI’s chosen narrative of what happened. In response to this information, we would like to make a few observations.
The first observation is that from what we understand, the occupation was on track toward a peaceful resolution. LaVoy and those he was with were en route to a public meeting in an adjoining county when they were stopped in something far different than a “routine traffic stop,” as has been portrayed by the media. Unfortunately, the powers that be were not interested in being patient enough for the occupation to come to a peaceful end. Some had called for LaVoy and those he was with to simply be gunned down, just as he was, with no due process. Oregon Governor, Kate Brown, was putting pressure on the FBI to end it sooner rather than later. The Harney County Sheriff’s Department working in conjunction with the FBI tried to do everything they could to emphasize how disruptive the occupation was to the local community, when in reality it appears to have been their own reaction that was causing most of the disruption. And it was the FBI that chose to escalate the situation to force a confrontation, and violent ending.
With respect to the actual facts and circumstances surrounding LaVoy’s death, the video really speaks for itself. People will interpret it according to their own views. As the FBI’s own narrative stated, LaVoy was not wielding a firearm or any other weapon when he was killed. His hands were obviously in the air. Knowing LaVoy, it is our view that he was moving away from the vehicle in an attempt to draw any hostility or violence away from the others. Unfortunately, we don’t know what he was saying, and what was being said to him. He appears to have been gesturing, or trying to keep his balance while moving in the deep snow. Although he may have been animated, he does not appear to have been threatening or posing any real threat or danger to anyone. The FBI claims that LaVoy had a loaded firearm in an inside pocket of his coat. After re-reviewing the extended video, at this point we are not accepting at face value the FBI’s statement that LaVoy was actually armed. But even if he was, as far as we can see,that firearm posed no more danger to anyone than it would have if he had stayed in the vehicle, with his hands on the steering wheel. Contrary to what has been stated by some sources, LaVoy was not “charging” anyone. He appears to have been shot in the back, with his hands in the air.
It is our understanding that according to applicable law, the use of deadly force is justified only if there is a genuine threat of death or serious bodily injury. It is our understanding and position that deadly force should only be used as a last resort. In LaVoy’s case it appears that they were determined to go straight to the last resort. It is our understanding that the U.S. Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit Court of appeals have ruled as follows:
“The reasonableness of [officers’] actions depends both on whether the officers were in danger at the precise moment that they used force and on whether [the officers’] own reckless or deliberate conduct during the seizure unreasonably created the need to use such force.”
“[W]here an officer intentionally or recklessly provokes a violent confrontation . . . he may be held liable for his otherwise defensive use of deadly force.” Although officers may claim self-defense, they may still be liable for using excessive force if their reckless and unconstitutional actions create the need to use excessive force.
It is our understanding that in addition to shooting LaVoy multiple times, after he was left lying harmlessly on the ground the officers also fired upon his truck and the passengers in it, putting them all at risk, despite the fact that they were posing no threat to anyone. The video clearly shows one of the windows being blown out. It has been gut-wrenching for our family to view the video of LaVoy being shot, and then left to lie in the snow while a whole army of so-called “public servants” terrorized the others. We can only hope their families never have to watch such a thing. We will be interested to inspect the vehicle. We will also be interested to see the autopsy report.
At this point we will await the outcome of any investigation, but based on the information currently available to us, we do not believe that LaVoy’s shooting death was justified. We likewise can’t see any justification for the force and risk of serious injury or death that was exerted against the others in the truck, who posed no threat.
We know that under such circumstances law enforcement typically makes every attempt to cast such shooting victims in the worst possible light. In that regard, we also want to observe and emphasize that LaVoy had a squeaky clean record, and had never had so much as a speeding ticket. In addition to raising his own eleven children, he had also been entrusted with the care of at least 50 foster children over the course of approximately 10 years.
On January 7, 2016, LaVoy issued an official statement from the Malheur Wildlife Refuge. Among other things, the statement said:
“We want to clarify that we share any and all concerns about safety for everyone involved, including ourselves, our families, the public, and law enforcement officers. All lives are important to us. Ultimately, we want everyone involved to be able to return safely to their homes and families.
We are deeply troubled and saddened that our governments do not share the same concern for human life. We are deeply troubled that our governments would view whatever was happening at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge to be worth spilling blood over. We are deeply troubled and saddened that our governments have come to place so little value on life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness.
We love LaVoy as our husband, father, grandfather, brother and son. He was a hero to us. We believe he died as a patriotic martyr. Regardless of any and all differing opinions, we know that he died standing for a cause HE believed in.
LaVoy’s funeral will be held in Kanab, Utah on Friday, February 5, 2016. We take comfort in our faith and our belief that LaVoy is now in a better place. May our dear Lord bless and receive him into that realm. We sincerely appreciate all the thoughts and prayers that have been sent our way. We pray for those who chose to take LaVoy’s life. We desire justice and genuine accountability for what happened, but we pray for them.
And finally, we thank God for this country and what it is supposed to stand for. We pray for this country, and that God will please bless, help and forgive us all.
VIDEO COMMENTARY – UPDATE, Friday, January 29, 2016
After the FBI news conference on Thursday.
This video was released Thursday, Jan. 28, 2016 by the FBI.
WARNING: This is difficult to watch, but it is not a close up – it’s an aerial view. Combined with the testimonies of the audio interchange between LaVoy and the troopers, it is proof that LaVoy Finicum was murdered.
God bless LaVoy Finicum and his wife Jeanette, eleven children and all the grandchildren. LaVoy said from the moment he arrived in the Malheur Refuge that he was prepared to die in defending freedom but that he would not be the aggressor. He emphasized that he would rather die than spend time in jail.
What has this country become that it would unleash military style reinforcements on the people we knew wanted a peaceful resolution?
There are no words.
Here is the complete video. Start at about 9:20.
We want to thank our friend Sean Hannity for pressuring the FBI to release this video. I hope to get more evidence soon. We will keep you updated.
I posted the embed code in my last email communication instead of the link. Here it is. It has been corrected here.
Listen to this chilling audio testimony of an eye witness describing how things actually came down in Burns, Oregon yesterday. Victoria was one of the passengers in the same car as LaVoy Finicum when he was shot in cold blood. As far as I could understand, she is still at the refuge.
Does this describe “confronting them at a traffic stop,” and “three shots fired” as the officials speaking at the Burns, Oregon news conference reported on January 27, 2016 on Fox News?
Fair and balanced??? You decide.
Please post this link or share this post with your local news media and ask them to report this additional information now.
We need volunteers to help us with social media, blog content and research. Your generous contribution will help our volunteer talk show hosts bring you the best quality of news you can trust. To donate, click on the tab above.