General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIS IT TIME TO FREE NATIVE AMERICAN ACTIVIST LEONARD PELTIER?
Last edited Fri May 20, 2016, 12:54 PM - Edit history (1)
http://www.newsweek.com/time-free-native-american-activist-leonard-peltier-460866----
As he wages a four-decade legal battle in a case clouded with conflicting testimony, political influence and doubt, he also struggles with declining health, including diabetes, a heart condition, multiple jaw surgeries and loss of vision and motor function due to a stroke.
In the first month of 2016, Peltier was diagnosed with an abdominal aortic aneurysma swollen aorta that can amount to a tiny ticking time bomb if left untreated. Sometime during our visit, he turned to me and said, If you dont get me out of here, Im going to dieand it wont be of old age.
Unless President Obama grants him clemency, Peltiers prediction will almost certainly come true.
The long and complicated case history reveals a pattern of misconduct by the FBI, including the coercion of an alleged eyewitness, suppression of potentially exculpatory evidence and deep concerns about the agencys political motivation for so zealously pursuing the case.
The U.S. Parole Commission has acknowledged to Peltier the lack of any direct evidence that you personally participated in the executions of two FBI agents."
...more...
...more...
dembotoz
(16,808 posts)uppityperson
(115,677 posts)DLevine
(1,788 posts)hlthe2b
(102,292 posts)It is tragic that he is the victim of political cowardice. He should have been released under Clinton, IMO.
G_j
(40,367 posts)about this than any other issue..(4 presidents)
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)thereismore
(13,326 posts)niyad
(113,344 posts)libodem
(19,288 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)He should have been out years ago.
Akicita
(1,196 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Obama should have pardoned him already.
I should add that the killing of a law enforcement agent is a very serious crime. Someone killed the agent and, either that person should come forward, or the person who knows who did it should speak out.
If Peltier did not kill the agent, who did?
That question should also be answered. Was the situation so chaotic that no one knows?
The burden of proof is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Main article: Reasonable doubt
This is the highest standard used as the burden of proof in Anglo-American jurisprudence and typically only applies in criminal proceedings and when considering aggravating circumstances in criminal proceedings. It has been described, in negative terms, as a proof having been met if there is no plausible reason to believe otherwise. If there is a real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or lack of evidence, in a case, then the level of proof has not been met.
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, is proof of such a convincing character that one would be willing to rely and act upon it without hesitation in the most important of one's own affairs. However, it does not mean an absolute certainty. The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution is that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent unless and until proven guilty.
If the trier of fact has no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, then the prosecutor has proved the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant should be pronounced guilty.
The term connotes that evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty which precludes the existence of any reasonable alternatives. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no reasonable doubt is possible from the evidence presented. Further to this notion of moral certainty, where the trier of fact relies on proof that is solely circumstantial, i.e., when conviction is based entirely on circumstantial evidence, certain jurisdictions specifically require the prosecution's burden of proof to be such that the facts proved must exclude to a moral certainty every reasonable hypothesis or inference other than guilt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_burden_of_proof#Beyond_reasonable_doubt
Akicita
(1,196 posts)up his cause. Trump probably couldn't care less in any case.
ISeeA BrightFuture
(22 posts)freebrew
(1,917 posts)PufPuf23
(8,791 posts)Puha Ekapi
(594 posts)...so far has been too chicken shit to release him, and I have no doubt that Hillary will do the same. Goddamn politicians that lack the courage to do what is actually the right thing because of political consequences.
DI Freighter Watcher
(128 posts)It was way past time in 1990 when I first read his story. This is another example of the indifference the justice system has for actual justice!
rdking647
(5,113 posts)i dont think theres much doubt that he was involved in the killings
he admitted firing at the cops in his memoirs. he gave several different alibi's.
the other evidence points to a pretty strong case that he was involved.
on the other hand hes been in jail for 40 years and is in ill health.
My gut feeling is Obama should grant him clemency but not a pardon.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)PBass
(1,537 posts)Please like and share the Free Leonard Peltier page on Facebook, and sign the Change.org petition.
Thanks!