Urgent plea: let’s thwart FBI director Mr. Wray’s attempt to have an innocent man die in prison

The “United States Parole Commission” by July 1, 2024 will decide whether to grant Leonard Peltier “parole.”

Leonard Peltier, who is seriously ill, will be 80 years old in a few months, 48 of which he spent in prison as an innocent man, unjustly convicted of a crime he did not commit (it has been proven with absolute certainty that Leonard Peltier was convicted on the basis of false “testimony” and false “evidence”).

Leonard Peltier’s release has been called for by personalities such as Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, John Lennon, Robert Redford, the Dalai Lama, Pope Francis, humanitarian associations such as Amnesty International, and institutions such as the UN and the European Parliament.

In view of his advanced age and serious health condition, it is reasonable to assume that the United States Parole Commission will grant “parole” to Leonard Peltier.

But Mr. Christopher Wray (current FBI director, appointed by President Trump) wrote a letter to the “United States Parole Commission” on June 7, 2024 to prevent Leonard Peltier from being granted “parole.”

Mr. Wray in his letter presents untrue theses and conceals fundamental truths.

A point-by-point rebuttal of Mr. Wray’s letter is attached at the bottom of this appeal. Please read it.

We ask two things to those who read us:

1. the first: to write to the “United States Parole Commission” (e-mail: USParole.questions@usdoj.gov) to point out that Mr. Wray’s letter propounds untrue theses to Mr. Peltier’s detriment (and conceals with flagrant omissions the actual facts that are in Mr. Peltier’s favor); the letters could read as follows:

“Dear ladies and gentlemen of the United States Parole Commission,

in connection with your examination of Mr. Peltier’s situation we have learned that you have received a letter from Mr. Wray, director of the FBI, intended to induce you to deny the grant of “parole.”

A detailed examination of that letter, conducted by the “Centro di ricerca per la pace, i diritti umani e la difesa della biosfera” (Research Center for Peace, Human Rights and Biosphere Defense) in Viterbo, shows that Mr. Wray makes untrue claims and omits many facts favorable to Mr. Peltier.

Mr. Peltier, with all evidence, is an old and ill man who spent 48 years in prison for a crime he did not commit, and during the long period of his imprisonment he promoted educational and welfare initiatives and supported important nonviolent initiatives in defense of human rights and the living world.

Therefore, please do not allow yourself to be clouded by Mr. Wray’s untrue assertions and make your decision in good conscience, in accordance with your functions and duties and the relevant regulations and criteria, with full respect for truth, legality, and humanity.

Please accept our best regards.

Sign and Date.”

With the force of truth, with the force of democracy, with the force of law, with the force of nonviolence, we thwart Mr. Wray’s attempt to mislead the “United States Parole Commission”.

With the force of truth, with the force of democracy, with the force of law, with the force of nonviolence, let us thwart Mr. Wray’s attempt to make an innocent man die in prison.

Let Leonard Peltier be freed after 48 years of unjust imprisonment.

Let Leonard Peltier, an elderly and seriously ill man who cannot get the care he needs in prison, be freed.

Let Leonard Peltier be freed, may he spend his remaining time free among his family members.

Viterbo’s “Centro di ricerca per la pace, i diritti umani e la difesa della biosfera”

Viterbo (Italy), June 24, 2024

Sender: “Centro di ricerca per la pace, i diritti umani e la difesa della biosfera” Strada S. Barbara 9/E, 01100 Viterbo, e-mail: centropacevt@gmail.com

* * *

ATTACHED: AN “AD HOC” LETTER TO THE UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION

To the United States Parole Commission

USParole.questions@usdoj.gov

and for appropriate knowledge:

To the United States Attorney General (United States Attorney General).

https://www.justice.gov/doj/webform/your-message-department-justice

To the President of the United States of America

https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

to the attorneys assisting Mr. Leonard Peltier

ksharp@sanfordheisler.com

jenipherj@forthepeoplelegal.com

to the media

Subject: A letter “ad adiuvandum” to the United States Parole Commission, in rebuttal of the untrue allegations contained in a letter dated June 7, 2024, from Mr. Christopher Wray, director of the FBI, against Mr. Leonard Peltier.

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the United States Parole Commission,

having read the letter sent to you by Mr. Christopher Wray, director of the FBI, dated June 7, 2024, which to the detriment of Mr. Leonard Peltier contains untrue statements and omissions such as to constitute a blatant attempt to induce you to commit a sesquipedal error of judgment and a glaring injustice, I am determined to send you this letter “pro veritate atque pro bono publico” in rebuttal to that of Mr. Wray.

1. Mr. Wray’s letter dated June 7, 2024

Mr. Wray, Director of the FBI, sent on June 7, 2024, a letter to the Chairman of the United States Parole Commission.

The text of that letter is posted on the FBI website (www.fbi.gov).

The purpose of Mr. Wray’s letter is to express the FBI’s opposition to the granting of “parole” to Mr. Peltier (as is well known, the “United States Parole Commission” held a long-awaited hearing on the matter on June 10, 2024, and a final ruling is expected by July 1, 2024).

Mr. Peltier is a man now in his eighties, detained for 48 years for a crime he did not commit, gravely ill, the victim of overt persecution and a glaring miscarriage of justice, whose release has been called for by such distinguished personalities as Nelson Mandela and Mother Teresa of Calcutta, prestigious humanitarian movements such as Amnesty International, international institutions such as a special UN Commission and the European Parliament, and numerous members of the U.S. Congress.

Mr. Wray’s letter is structured as follows:

(a) an incipit that anticipates its content and presents its thesis and purpose: the thesis that Mr. Peltier is an unscrupulous and remorseless murderer, and the purpose that Mr. Peltier be denied “parole.”
(b) a first part intended to restate the thesis of Mr. Peltier’s guilt in the deaths of two FBI agents Jack Coler and Ronald Williams on June 26, 1975, and to confirm the thesis of Mr. Peltier’s guilt and dangerousness by referring to the events of his escape attempts in 1975 and 1979;
(c) a second part intended to reiterate the thesis that Mr. Peltier was a remorseless murderer (since he continued to plead innocence);

(d) a third part intended to recall how relatives and colleagues of Officers Coler and Williams still deeply mourn the deaths of their relatives, colleagues and friends, and resent Mr. Peltier by believing him responsible for their deaths;

(e) an explicit summarizing the content and again stating the thesis and purpose already set forth in the incipit.

2. Mr. Wray’s untrue claims and their refutation

The meaning and purpose of Mr. Wray’s letter are expressed with absolute clarity in its incipit and explicit.

Mr. Wry’s letter opens with these words, “I write on behalf of the entire FBI family to express our adamant opposition to Leonard Peltier’s latest application for parole. Peltier is a remorseless killer who brutally murdered two of our own before embarking on a violent flight from justice. His crimes also include a post-conviction escape from federal custody, during which he and his crew fired shots at prison employees. Throughout the years, Peltier has never accepted responsibility or shown remorse. He is wholly unfit for parole. To release Peltier now would significantly ‘depreciate the seriousness of his offense’ and ‘promote disrespect for the law.’”

It concludes with these words, “Given the overwhelming and unassailable evidence of his guilt, the brutality of his crimes, and his persistent refusal to accept responsibility, I urge you in the strongest terms possible to deny Peltier’s application for parole. To afford him release after what he did and how he has conducted himself since would most certainly “depreciate the seriousness of his offense [and] promote disrespect for the law.” Peltier is right where he belongs, serving consecutive life sentences for his cold-blooded murder of Jack and Ron.”

Well, Mr. Wray does not write the truth.

2.1. It is not true that Mr. Peltier’s “guilt” has been proven (“the overwhelming and unassailable evidence of his guilt”).

There is neither testimony nor evidence to prove his guilt.

Instead, there were so-called “testimonies” that were proven false (and extorted by manipulation and violence from a person in a fragile, uneasy, and fearful condition) and so-called “evidence” that was proven equally false: it is because of these falsehoods that Mr. Peltier’s unfair conviction was obtained.

It is quite clear that if there had been true testimony and genuine evidence against Mr. Peltier, the FBI would not have had to “fabricate” false ones.

The fabrication of false “testimony” and false “evidence” is thus itself further and final proof of the non-existence of testimony and evidence against Mr. Peltier.

2.2. It is not true that Mr. Peltier demonstrated “brutality” by committing “crimes” (“the brutality of his crimes”).

Mr. Peltier simply did not commit the crimes falsely attributed to him for which he was wrongly convicted.

2.3. It is not true that Mr. Peltier refuses to acknowledge his responsibility (“his persistent refusal to accept responsibility”).

On the contrary, Mr. Peltier, being innocent, fully asserted his genuine responsibilities as a defender of his people victimized during that period of time by the crimes of the “Goons” death squads and the infamous Cointelpro program (which also took the form of the FBI carrying out illegal and violent acts, even going so far as the murder of black and native rights defenders).

For his actual responsibilities, Mr. Peltier deserved not to be persecuted and imprisoned, but to be commended and honored.

2.4. It is not true that Mr. Peltier “depreciate the seriousness of his offense” (“depreciate the seriousness of his offense”).

Mr. Peltier simply did not commit the offense for which he was wrongly convicted.

2.5. It is not true that Mr. Peltier “promotes disregard for the law” (“promote disrespect for the law”).

Rather, the exact opposite is true: it is his persecutors who have promoted and promote disrespect and breaking the law.

In conclusion: Mr. Wray propounds untrue assertions.

And by such untrue assertions he attempts to induce the United States Parole Commission to commit a patent injustice to the detriment of Mr. Peltier, to the detriment of truth, to the detriment of law, and thus also to the detriment of the public good.

3. Mr. Wray’s omissions and their explicitness

In his letter, Mr. Wray expresses condolences for the deaths of Agents Coler and Williams, but completely fails to mention that on that June 26, 1975, on the Pine Ridge reservation, on the land owned by the Jumping Bull family that housed American Indian Movement militants, a young American Indian Movement militant, Mr. Joe Stuntz, was also killed in the course of the assault by the FBI and its flanking troops: for Mr. Stuntz’s death there was no trial, and his murder went completely unpunished, as did many other murders of Native people committed during that period.

3.1. The omission of the recollection of Mr. Stuntz’s killing in Mr. Wray’s letter serves a specific function: To conceal the fact that that day there was an armed FBI assault on the property of a traditionalist Native family housing American Indian Movement activists; that in that assault FBI troops and flankers fired countless gunshots at the Natives; and that the Natives fought in self-defense to save their own lives which they perceived to be threatened with death, as evidenced by the killing of Mr. Stuntz.

The omission of the recollection of Mr. Stuntz’s killing moreover is not the only omission in Mr. Wray’s letter.

3.2. Mr. Wray fails to mention that on the Pine Ridge reservation at the time, and for years, actual death squads called “Goons” had imposed a regime of terror against traditionalist natives: the “Goons” had repeatedly and with impunity murdered many traditionalist natives.

3.3. Mr. Wray fails to mention that in 1975 American Indian Movement activists were there at the very request of the local people to defend them from the murderous ferocity of the “Goons.”

3.4. Mr. Wray omits to recall that the FBI was conducting at that time a policy not only of effete aiding and abetting but also of direct execution of violence against Native people defending their culture and claiming their rights: in that turn of time the FBI was engaged in the infamous “Cointelpro” program which consisted of targeting with the utmost violence–and even with targeted assassinations–the militants of movements defending the human rights of Black and Native Americans such as the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement.

3.5. Mr. Wray fails to mention that FBI agents Coler and Williams on June 26, 1975 had entered the Jumping Bull family property armed and driving unmarked cars, triggering the firefight.

3.6. Mr. Wray fails to recall that shortly after the firefight began countless other armed men from both the FBI and flanking forces penetrated the area, forcing traditionalist Native people and American Indian Movement militants into desperate resistance and later desperate flight in order to stay alive.

3.7. Mr. Wray fails to mention that the FBI at first attributed the killing of Agents Coler and Williams to four natives: Messrs.

Dino Butler, Jimmy Eagle, Leonard Peltier, and Bob Robideau; Messrs. Butler and Robideau were arrested and tried first (in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, in June-July 1976) and were acquitted of acting in self-defense (and it is clear that the recognition that they acted in self-defense was intended to extend to all natives who took part in the conflict); after this defeat in court, the FBI gave up prosecuting Mr. Eagle and focused all charges on Mr. Peltier alone, and having obtained his extradition from Canada (where Mr. Peltier had taken refuge) in December 1976 thanks to outrageously untruthful affidavits, Mr. Peltier was tried in 1977 not in Cedar Rapids but in Fargo, North Dakota, in a town of strong racist traditions, in an atmosphere of heavy intimidation and with an all-white jury: Mr. Peltier was then convicted on the basis of so-called “testimony” proven false and extorted through intimidation, and so-called “evidence” proven equally false.

3.8. Mr. Wray fails to mention that Mr. Peltier’s extradition from Canada to the U.S. was obtained by lying affidavts extorted from Mrs. Myrtle Poor Bear who perjured herself because she was intimidated by the FBI.

3.9. Mr. Wray fails to mention that the “evidence” of the so-called “Peltier rifle,” which was presented as decisive, was false.

Only later did Mr. Peltier’s defense through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) gain access to the documents the FBI had kept secret and finally discovered the truth: that the “evidence” was false, and that the FBI was fully aware of it.

3.10. Mr. Wray fails to mention that Mr. Peltier’s flight to Canada was determined by the danger to his life.

3.11. Mr. Wray fails to mention that in prison Mr. Peltier learned that there was a plan to kill him, and that this motivated his short-lived escape in 1979, an escape that most likely saved his life.

3.12. Mr. Wray fails to mention that throughout nearly fifty years of imprisonment,

Mr. Peltier not only was intensely active on behalf of prisoners’ rights-for example, that of religious freedom-but also consistently expressed important support for nonviolent struggles in defense of native peoples, human rights, and nature; has promoted and supported educational and social welfare initiatives; and has increasingly become a global figurehead in efforts for the rights of native peoples, for the human rights of all human beings, and for the defense of the living world.

3.13. Mr. Wray also fails to mention what matters most in relation to the granting of “parole”:

namely, Mr. Peltier’s serious health condition and the fact that the prison regime does not allow adequate treatment for the conditions from which he suffers.

3.14. And lastly,

Mr. Wray, writing in 2024, fails to mention the pronouncement of the Ad Hoc Legal Commission of the United Nations (UN), which in 2022 after a reconnaissance of Mr. Peltier’s entire legal case concluded by calling for his release.

In conclusion: why all these omissions?

It is all too obvious: because remembering these facts would radically refute the distorted reconstruction and untrue theses advocated by Mr. Wray.

4. Some of Mr. Wray’s rhetorical devices

In his letter, in addition to the above-mentioned untrue statements and omissions, Mr. Wray makes use of some rhetorical devices whose suggestive and therefore misleading purpose is obvious.

4.1. Some facts are interpreted by reversing their meaning:

Mr. Peltier’s escape to Canada to save his own life is presented by Mr. Wray as a mere mindless criminal enterprise.

Equally as a mere senseless criminal enterprise is presented Mr. Peltier’s (very short-lived) escape in 1979, which instead had as its motivation the knowledge of the existence of a plan to kill him in prison, and which therefore also likely saved Mr. Peltier’s life.

Mr. Wray cannot ignore that the right to save his own life overrides all others.

4.2. Some fragmentary and decontextualized quotations are used in order to make theses seem based on objective data that in fact have been fully disproved.

4.3. the grief of Coler and Williams’ family members and colleagues is exploited for the purpose of injustice.

The grief of the victims’ family members, colleagues, and friends deserves respect and sympathy; using it to foment resentment against an innocent person, on the other hand, is not permissible; and worse, exploiting it to try to induce injustice against an innocent person.

5. Mr. Peltier’s expressed sorrow for all the victims

One final malevolent inference implicitly suggested by Mr. Wray’s letter needs to be refuted: the one that purports to depict Mr. Peltier as a callous man who feels no grief for the victims of the June 26, 1975 firefight.

Once again the exact opposite is true.

Mr. Peltier in his autobiographical book (which has been widely circulated and has also been translated into French, Italian, Spanish and German) wrote noble and glowing words of condolence and sympathy to the families of the victims.

Allow me an unabridged quote.

Wrote Mr. Peltier: “I have no apology to make, only sadness. I cannot apologize for what I have not done. But I can feel pain, and I do. Every day, every hour, I grieve for those who died in the 1975 Oglala confrontation and for their families — for the families of FBI agents Jack Coler and Ronald Williams and, yes, for the family of Joe Killsright Stuntz, whose death from a bullet in Oglala that same day, as well as the deaths of hundreds of other Indians in Pine Ridge during that terrible time, was never investigated. It tears at my heart to remember the suffering and fear in which many of my people were forced to live at that time, the same suffering and fear that drove me and others to Oglala that day to defend those who were defenseless.

I also feel sorrow and sadness for the loss suffered by my family because, to some extent, I died that day myself. I died for my family, for my children, for my grandchildren, for myself. I have been surviving my death for more than two decades.

Those who put me here and keep me here knowing of my innocence will have meager consolation from their undoubted revenge, which expresses who they are and what they are. And it is the most terrible revenge I could imagine.

I know who I am and what I am. I am an Indian, an Indian who dared to fight to defend his people. I am an innocent man who has never murdered anyone, nor intended to. And, yes, I am a Sun Dance practitioner. This is also my identity. If I have to suffer as a symbol of my people, then I suffer with pride.

I will never give in.

If you, the relatives and friends of the officers who died on the Jumping Bulls’ property, derive some kind of satisfaction from my being here, then I can at least give you this, despite the fact that I never stained myself with their blood. I feel your loss as my own. Like you I grieve that loss every day, every hour. And so does my family. We too know that inconsolable sorrow. We Indians are born, live, and die with that inconsolable sorrow. Twenty-three years today we have shared, your families and mine, this pain; how can we be enemies? Perhaps it is with you and us that the healing process can begin. You, the families of the officers, certainly were not at fault that day in 1975, as my family was not, yet you suffered as much as, even more than anyone who was there. It always seems to be the innocent who pay the highest price of injustice. That has always been the case in my life.

To the families of Coler and Williams who are still suffering I send my prayers, if you will accept them. I hope you will. They are the prayers of an entire people, not just mine. We have many of our own dead to pray for and we join our bitterness with yours. May our common sorrow be our bond.

Let those prayers be the balm for your sorrow, not the prolonged imprisonment of an innocent man.

I assure you that if I could have prevented what happened that day, your people would not have died. I would rather have died than knowingly allowed what happened to happen. And it certainly was not me who pulled the trigger that made it happen. May the Creator strike me down now if I am lying. I cannot see how my being here, separated from my grandchildren, can repair your loss.

I swear to you, I am only guilty of being an Indian. That is why I am here” (Leonard Peltier, Prison Writings: My Life is my Sun Dance, St. Martin’s Griffin, New York 1999, pp. 13-15).

6. A minimal bibliographical footnote

In support of the foregoing and more generally to deepen our knowledge and understanding of Mr. Peltier’s affair I point out as particularly useful (for different reasons, of course) the following publications:

– Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall, Agents of Repression: The FBI’s Secret Wars Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement, South End Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1988, 2002, Black Classic Press, Baltimore 2022.
– Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall, The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents from the FBI’s Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States, South End Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1990, 2002, Black Classic Press, Baltimore 2022.
– Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States, Beacon Press, Boston 2014.
– Steve Hendricks, The Unquiet Grave: The FBI and the Struggle for the Soul of Indian Country, Thunder’s Mouth Press, New York 2006.
– Bruce E. Johansen, Encyclopedia of the American Indian Movement, Greenwood, Santa Barbara – Denver – Oxford, 2013 and reprinted several times.
– Peter Matthiessen, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, 1980, Penguin Books, New York 1992 and subsequent reprints.
– Jim Messerschmidt, The Trial of Leonard Peltier, South End Press, Cambridge, MA, 1983, 1989, 2002.
– Michael Koch and Michael Schiffmann, Ein leben fur Freiheit. Leonard Peltier und der indianische Widerstand, TraumFaenger Verlag, Hohenthann 2016.
– Leonard Peltier (with the collaboration of Harvey Arden), Prison Writings: My Life is my Sun Dance, St. Martin’s Griffin, New York 1999.
– Michael E. Tigar, Wade H. McCree, Leonard Peltier, Petitioner, v. United States. U.S. Supreme Court transcript of record with supporting pleading, Gale MOML U.S. Supreme Court Records, 1978 and subsequent reprints.
– Joseph H. Trimbach and John M. Trimbach, American Indian Mafia: An FBI Agent’s True Story About Wounded Knee, Leonard Peltier, and the American Indian Movement (AIM), Outskirts Press, Denver 2009.

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the United States Parole Commission,

this letter was intended to make explicit:

(a) that Mr. Wray’s letter of June 7, 2024 contains serious untrue statements to the detriment of Mr. Peltier;

(b) that it fails to relate facts of decisive importance for the correct understanding of the events and the adequate reconstruction of the factual truth;

In sending you this rebuttal of Mr. Wray’s letter I believe I am doing a dutiful and useful thing; I hope it will reach you in time for you to be able and willing to take it into account as a contribution “adiuvandum.”

Dixi, et salvavi animam meam.

Please appreciate distinct greetings and fervent wishes for good work and a wise, just, beneficial decision,

Peppe Sini

Head of the “Research Center for Peace, Human Rights and Biosphere Defense” in Viterbo, Italy

Viterbo (Italy), June 22, 2024

Sender: Peppe Sini, head of the “Centro di ricerca per la pace, i diritti umani e la difesa della biosfera” in Viterbo, strada S. Barbara 9/E, 01100 Viterbo, e-mail: centropacevt@gmail.com

The “Research Center for Peace, Human Rights and Defense of the Biosphere” in Viterbo is a nonviolent structure active since the 1970s that has supported, promoted and coordinated various local, national and international campaigns for the common good. It is the nonviolent structure that in the 1980s coordinated for Italy the largest solidarity campaign with Nelson Mandela, then imprisoned in the prisons of the racist South African regime. In 1987 he promoted the first national study conference dedicated to Primo Levi. Since 2000 it has published the daily telematic newsletter “Nonviolence is on the Way.” Since 2021 it has been particularly involved in the campaign to free Leonard Peltier, the distinguished Native American activist defender of the human rights of all human beings and the entire living world, who has been an innocent prisoner for 48 years.