LaVoy Finicum’s last ride
By Gary Hunt -- February 6, 2016



This is the first of a series of articles about the events surrounding the investiture of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge administration buildings by a group headed by Ammon Bundy, son of Cliven and Carol Bundy. The Bundys are well known for the events in Nevada that played out in April 2014. In that incident, the Bundys, along with hundreds of other patriotic Americans, went beyond “civil disobedience” and entered the realm of “civil defiance”, defying, with arms, the intrusion of the Bureau of Land Management into the long time operation of the cattle part of the Bundy ranch operation - denying rights that had existed for years and denying them their pursuit of the family business.

Though this writer only spent five days in Burns, he was able to meet many of the key players on the side of the patriots, some townspeople from Burns, and some of those who gathered, on one side or the other, to observe, or attempt to affect, the ongoing activities.

As the world knows, the events neared completion when the motorcade, on a peaceful mission to a community meeting in John Day, Grant County, Oregon, met the undue wrath of the federal government, and local and state law enforcement, resulting in the death of Robert “Lavoy” Finicum and the arrest on rather interesting charges of 11 participants of the activities at the refuge.

In an effort to be as factual as possible, many witnesses still have to be interviewed to ensure that what will be written is as factual as possible. Due to the rampant, and most often unsubstantiated, rumors in social media, those stories that will follow should finally put to rest many of those false claims.

Every effort will be made to corroborate the factual aspects of these stories, which will result in each story only “going to press” after exhaustive research and interviews have been completed.

Due to the nature of the interdependence of some activities, conjecture may be used to bridge gaps. This is deemed necessary as the government, at all levels, is notorious for misrepresentations, omissions, concealing evidence under the guise of “ongoing investigation”, or simply to cover their misdeeds. Absent available facts, though circumstantial evidence tends to support conclusions of that interdependence, such conjecture will be appropriately indicated.

If subsequent evidence becomes available, the original article will have an addendum, at the online site, rather than revision of the original story.

LaVoy Finicum’s last ride

“I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” —Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

Note: Times given are referenced to the aerial time stamps, minus eight hours. Quotations are based upon the best recollection of the witnesses.

I had lunch with Ammon Bundy while the Sharp family sang. It was the first time I had met Ammon, and we went over the articles I intended to write about the events that led up to the actions of January 2, 2016, with the investiture of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge administration complex, since renamed the Harney County Resource Center. The subjects for the articles were the misunderstanding of the people of Burns as to what source resulted in the fear and anxiety then extant in the town of Burns, and the information available in the “public” records contained in the filing cabinets at the refuge that might show the use of subterfuge in the obtaining of land to extend the federal “ownership”, not only in the Refuge, but throughout Harney County.

Ammon also indicated his pleasure for the upcoming meeting in the Grant County town of John Day, expecting to get additional support from Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer. As we discussed, it was to the backdrop of the Sharp family’s vary harmonious singing.

.......................................................

http://canadafreepress.com/article/lavoy-finicums-last-ride

Original at:
http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1328

LaVoy Finicum's Funeral Procession:

Two statements from the Finicum family
By Gary Hunt -- February 5, 2016

LaVoy Finicum’s family knew him and what he stood for. Following is their response to the tragedy that has struck there family.

STATEMENT FROM THE LAVOY FINICUM FAMILY 1-29-2016

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 rereviewing 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 gutwrenching 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.

A PDF of the document that was posted by the family is available at Outpost of Freedom
http://canadafreepress.com/article/two-s...-finicum-family

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Finicum Family first put out a family statement on January 29, 2016. This is a supplement to that statement, and is explained in the first paragraph. I have confirmed, with the family attorney that both of these documents were prepared by them.


SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT FROM THE LAVOY FINICUM FAMILY 2-2-2016

The purpose of this statement is to supplement the statement we issued earlier. It does not contradict our previous statement, but only serves to supplement, support and add detail to our previous position.

At this point, based on the additional information we have now received, it is our position that not only was the shooting death of LaVoy Finicum completely unjustified, but that the FBI and Oregon State Police may also be engaging in a cover-up, and seeking to manipulate and mislead the media and the American public about what really happened.

We realize this may sound like a bold statement, but now that Shawna Cox, who was a passenger in LaVoy’s vehicle, and an eye witness, has been released from custody, we have now had the opportunity to hear yet another account, and the ability to start cross- referencing all currently available information to figure out what really happened. This has shed important additional light on the whole ordeal—especially when Cox is given the opportunity to essentially narrate what is happening in the video, from an eye witness standpoint.

It is our position that under the guise of claimed transparency, the FBI was very quick to release a very grainy, edited video, along with their interpretation of what they claimed it showed, without any audio overlay, in an effort to attempt to try to make the first impression on this issue, and seek to sway public opinion from the outset.

Based on Shawna Cox’s account, coupled with the account of Victoria Sharp, and comparison to the video released by the FBI, we now desire to make the following additional observations: