LaVoy Finicum (BUNDY) was NOT shot with his hands up! He charged at LEO's. (from others arrested)

Yup nothing, sorry bout that !
If anyone finds something, link pls
a reply to: butcherguy

I wish I could but the time has passed for me to update the OP.

Sorry. Maybe a MOD can. (but they won't).

a reply to: Balans

a reply to: Sublimecraft

I find his being released so quickly quite suspicious...Probably an agent of some sort himself. He said he met these folks three weeks ago, so it's not like they knew him, knew him.

I'm perplyon the whole deal. Idk why the Feds need to "own" so much land. We just drove through part of Colorado this weekend and while vast, beautiful and remote as it was, SO much of it was National this or Fed that type of land. Weird.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Danowski
How about everyone who wasn't there grabs a chill pill and we'll wait until there is more information available?
Sounds quite reasonable doesn't it?
A human life just ended. It's a shameful path already which shouldn't be continued.
Demand nothing but the truth.

Interesting how there's an apparent blackout on details, and even the MSM (though I choke to use the phrase) is soft-peddlling the whole thing. Usually there's a clamour for information. Wonder what that portends?

I also find the MSM's soft reporting on the arrest and especially the shooting rather odd. The whole thing is just bizarre to me anyway. From the original reasons why the took control of the area to the arrest and shorting last night. So much to sift through to find the real truth, like that'll ever happen anyway.

The Group Brushed off the Feds under constitutional law......Commonly understood that the County Sherriff is the ultimate law officer for any county, and can even deny the Feds access to the county to some extent......
Look up Constitutional Sherriffs and see what they say....
That the Sherriff had not deputized ie..given consent to the officers presence and authority.....was at issue I believe...
I think they shot the # out of LaVoy Fincum because he was probably what they considered the most dangerous (to the feds) because he was dedicated and smart and could actually be the best communicator to the rest of America ....
NONE of these people have taken the path they chose lightly or without just cause....
I doubt there are many of us who would have the guts to do the same....unless we too felt we were being marginalized in some very damaging fashion.....
The actions of the group are far more comprehensible from a pure constitutional standpoint.....and their actions and motives should be far more understandable when looked at from that angle......
Because when it comes right down to it....
Its REALLY about the DISSOLUTION of the CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES WE ALL HOLD TRUE......

originally posted by: butcherguy
Whatever really happened, we have a precedent set.
A group, WLM, may form and use the slogan, 'Hands up! Don't shoot!'.
Right?

Is you be kiddin?

That would be racist first of all. Second of all, his hands weren't up and he wasn't asking not to be shot, that was coming from an eye witness that ain't seen it happen. How in the world would we get away with such a thang???

originally posted by: bandersnatch
The Group Brushed off the Feds under constitutional law......Commonly understood that the County Sherriff is the ultimate law officer for any county, and can even deny the Feds access to the county to some extent......
Look up Constitutional Sherriffs and see what they say....

You are 100% correct. The Sherifff is the ultimate authority in their jurisdiction, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Mack/Printz v USA.

I think they shot the # out of LaVoy Fincum because he was probably what they considered the most dangerous (to the feds) because he was dedicated and smart and could actually be the best communicator to the rest of America ....

Again, I agree. Mr. Finicum was the unofficial spokesman from what I understand. Apparently, he was doing a good job.

The actions of the group are far more comprehensible from a pure constitutional standpoint.....and their actions and motives should be far more understandable when looked at from that angle......
Because when it comes right down to it....
Its REALLY about the DISSOLUTION of the CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES WE ALL HOLD TRUE......

Yes -- thank you!

From CNN:

Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore said Ammon Bundy called his wife, Lisa Bundy, from the back of a police car on Tuesday night and said Finicum was cooperating with police when he was shot, according to The Oregonian.

Fiore has been a vocal supporter of the Bundy family. Fiore's account couldn't be independently corroborated.

A representative from the Joint Information Command Center in Harney County said authorities had no comment on the claim that Finicum had his hands up. He said more information would be released Wednesday.

I find this statement odd: "Fiore's account couldn't be independently corroborated." Are they intending to question if Assemblywoman Fiore is lying about being told this? Or are they trying to say Ammon Bundy's account couldn't be corroborated? Because it sure seems to me that the statement casts doubt on Fiore's honesty and integrity, not the truth of the story itself.

originally posted by: Boadicea


You are 100% correct. The Sherifff is the ultimate authority in their jurisdiction, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Mack/Printz v USA.

Can you cite the relevant portion of Printz V United States that establishes that "The Sherifff is the ultimate authority in their jurisdiction"?

Here's a link to the case, to be helpful to you ... Printz v. US, FindLaw

I was wondering why there wasn't any video. All police cars have cameras don't they?

I just found this.

The girl talking was in the car who witnessed LaVoy Finicum being shot 6 times.

The video is only a little over 12 minutes long. the women that is the eyewitness name is Victoria Sharp

The mainstream propaganda media is lying about how many shots were fired.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: Boadicea


Can you cite the relevant portion of Prinz V United States that establishes that "The Sherifff is the ultimate authority in their jurisdiction"?

D'oh! No, I can't... darn me!!! I clicked on the link and as soon as I saw Montana I knew it wasn't the case I was thinking of, because that was Sheriff Mack of Arizona. It's been a few years since I read about it and I totally misremembered, obviously, and now I can't find what I thought I knew...

So I accept my claim is not supported therein. Please skool me. I couldn't read all that right now if I tried!

a reply to: Boadicea

LOL ... I knew you'd want to be accurate in your citations ...

Printz re-iterates that there is a Dual Sovereignty in the United States under the Federal Constitution, i.e. the Federal Government and the individual State governments both have legal authority over the citizens of the United States who are also citizens of a given State. If a matter is not ceded to the authority of the Federal government, it is the given State's primary jurisdiction.

(And honestly, jurisdiction is a LOT MORE COMPLEX AT TIMES than this, but generally, this is my understanding.)

The matter of Printz turns around certain provisions of the Brady Bill that required Sheriffs (among others) to process certain paperwork and policies related to background checks for firearms purchases.

SCOTUS stated clearly that the Congress does not have Constitutional authority to impress State and other Civil authorities into their service nor the execution of the Federal laws.

The offices of the Sheriffs are established in the State Constitutions. There are differences throughout the States BUT IN GENERAL you are correct, the Sheriff is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in their given jurisdiction but only if the matter is not determined to be within Federal jurisdiction at which point Federal law (and officers) supersede (Supremacy Clause).

ETA: That is not to say that the County Sheriffs are not powerful, or, under many circumstances, the ultimate legal authority. In fact, in Georgia, the only individual that can arrest a Sheriff is the County Coroner (and only under certain circumstances).

This matter in Oregon is clearly within Federal jurisdiction; the FBI did not need any Sheriff's leave to act (and it is my understanding that the road stop was a joint action of the Oregon State Police and the FBI).

(However, they did not have the right to execute anyone either. If that is what happened (and that is far from being proven), the responsible parties will be brought to justice (I hope.) )

I listened to her testimony as well.....
It seems that Fincum didn't try to flee till after the LEOs opened fire (and missed him)
He then drove around the stopped vehicles and was stopped a short ways down the road by a another group of LEOs.
At that point he exited the vehicle and was walking towards the officers hands on the air....
They opened fire and he was struck down to the ground and they pumped several more rounds into him as he lay.....still with his hands up.....
As well as shooting the truck(many times) with the girls in it.....
This appears to me to be a targeted killing of this man because they feared his presence and his ability to communicate to the rest of America.... the truck could also have been targeted to kill off any witnesses......
It looks suspiciously like an assassination to me....just my take....b
Were any federals charged at WACO ....or Ruby Ridge ....Wounded Knee 2....

Whether you back the protestors or back the feds, one thing is certain.

Right now there are a lot of sweaty hands on a lot of triggers.

Everywhere.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Whether you back the protestors or back the feds, one this is certain.

Right now there are a lot of sweaty hands on a lot of triggers.

Everywhere.

For once, I agree with your sentiments.

May we find our collective sanity again, soon.

originally posted by: bandersnatch
At that point he exited the vehicle and was walking towards the officers hands on the air....
They opened fire and he was struck down to the ground and they pumped several more rounds into him as he lay.....still with his hands up.....This appears to me to be a targeted killing...

I don't think this was a targeted killing...

This sounds more like a targeted execution to me.

I suspect that these LEO's were most likely acting on orders from higher up the chain.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Thank you for skooling me so nicely. I appreciate it! And I do remember that now. And I do hate being wrong in my facts. (Self-righteous indignation is so much more fun when you're actually right!)

I'll look up Mack specifically again too and read that decision -- when I'm not so wound up. It was a big deal here in Arizona when the decision came down with lots of analyses from experts (and not so experts).

(However, they did not have the right to execute anyone either. If that is what happened, the responsible parties will be brought to justice (I hope.) )

A prosecutor I think very highly of lives by the motto, "Get the truth out and justice will take care of itself." I sure hope it proves true here. All I ask -- demand! -- is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. (not much, eh?)

a reply to: Informer1958

What I found interesting is that the eyewitness said their phones weren't working and they didn't have reception while they were being shot at.

However, the first vehicle that was stopped 200 yards behind Lavoys pickup did have reception Ammon Bundy called his wife after he was arrested. Which seems like a localized cell jammer could have been used.

From the HAM radio recording in the below video, residents stated that the entire surrounding area was on military lockdown with all exits closed off. Another resident stated that they were blocking cell phones through out the area.

Why not ......Obamas pen has lots of ink left......
These protesters may have misjudged the Spirit of freedom left in the American Peoples...but then again....
You can only kick a dog so long before he will turn on you.....