FBI POST-FIRE DISINFORMATION
Jack Zimmermann laments, "Within 35 minutes, the Justice Department announced
from Washington that two `cultists' confessed to starting the fire.
That Monday night. . .the truth was released: No one had confessed to any
such thing. How many heard the retraction?"2/ And indeed this
was reported on CNN while the fire was still smoldering: "A spokesman for
Attorney General Janet Reno says that. . .two of those cult members have
admitted that they are the ones who started the fire." This was just
one of many examples of self-serving FBI and Justice Department disinformation
released immediately after the fire.
During SAC Bob Ricks' April 19th pre-fire press briefing and post-fire
press conference and SAC Jeff Jamar's April 20th press conference the agents
spewed forth some of the most outrageous disinformation. These included
already described lies that Koresh never intended to write his book, Steve
Schneider threw the phone outside the building, Davidians fired hundreds
of rounds at tanks, the FBI was unable to fix the phones, agents watched
Davidians start the fire, Davidians confessed to starting the fire, and
Davidians shot those trying to escape.
Ricks also asserted that Koresh "wanted to have as many people killed as
possible. That's why it was called Ranch Apocalypse." Ricks
said Koresh "was demanding provocation to get in a fight with us. . .We
believe they were preparing for another armed standoff." Ricks repeatedly
speculated that "the children had been injected with some kind of poison
to ease their pain."
Ricks also contradicted himself. During the morning briefing Ricks
stated that Davidians worldwide, as well as those who had left Mount Carmel,
assured the FBI there would be no suicide pact. Right after the fire
Ricks revealed for the first time that Davidians had discussed a suicide
pact on March 2nd.
Ricks claimed that Koresh had "lied" when he supposedly had told the FBI
that the children were safe in bunkers. "His last act to America
was yet another lie." But several minutes later Ricks stated the
contrary, "They bunkered down the kids the best they could. . .we believed
they were inside the cinder block room to protect themselves from the gas."
Ricks described the last big tank smashing deep into the building so that
the FBI could put gas into the cinder block room: "We finally made entry
into that area and gassed it." But just a few minutes later he denied
this was any kind of "assault." "We never went in."
In his press conference Jeff Jamar claimed David Koresh was not writing
his book, that three people observed Davidians starting the fire, that
Koresh had had the children killed, that Davidans killed others trying
to escape. Ricks and Jamar both falsely claimed that FBI agents
saved escaping Davidians from suicide. They claimed Renos Avraam
stayed on the roof until he caught fire and was saved by FBI agents--even
though video footage clearly shows him jump off and walk away unharmed
and and unaided. And they claimed that Ruth Riddle's attempt to escape
FBI agents was a suicidal attempt to re-enter the burning building.
Ricks and Jamar sent their lies up the chain of command through then-Assistant
Director of Criminal Investigation Larry Potts. FBI Director William
Sessions repeated Ricks' and Jamars' disinformation in April 19 and 20th
CNN, ABC-TV and other interviews. However, Sessions stressed that
FBI experts and David Koresh himself had told the FBI "he did not intend
to commit suicide," and the fire and the suicide were a "surprise."3/
During the 1993 House Judiciary Committee hearing FBI officials and agents
continued the disinformation campaign, repeating these stories and others.
At that time Ricks added the new charge that when a released child heard
his father and Koresh were dead, he said, "I don't care. No more
beatings." Ricks said the children had asked if their new home had
a "beating room." However, social workers have not revealed any such
child's statement.
While the FBI has forbidden its agents to speak to the press, in August,
1993 Bob Ricks charged at a private meeting that Steve Schneider had shot
Koresh out of anger. "In the end, he probably realized he was dealing
with a fraud. After [Koresh] had caused so much harm and destruction,
he probably now wanted to come out, and Mr. Schneider could not tolerate
that situation."4/ All this disinformation convinced the public the
Davidians were the suicidal maniacs the FBI wanted Americans to believe
they were.
On April 21, 1993 on "Larry King Live," Davidian David Thibodeau's attorney
Gary Richardson criticized the FBI's disinformation campaign: "I've dealt
with the FBI before, having been a former U.S. attorney. I've worked
with them and I've worked against them, and the thing I do know. . .is
that they are going to do everything they possibly can to try to convince
the public that they are justified in their actions. . .They do things,
and as a former U.S. Attorney I can tell you, they do things and then they
sweep them under the carpet and try to come out looking lily white."
RENO/CLINTON DISINFORMATION AFTER THE FIRE
In the days after the fire, Attorney General Janet Reno, President Clinton and their representatives all emphasized "humanitarian" reasons for the assault, ones that presumably would play well with the public. However, they also blamed everything on David Koresh.
Reno Disinformation
Janet Reno began a media blitz where she explained the prime reasons for
the assault were the "fatigue" of the hostage rescue team and ongoing evidence
that "babies were being beaten." However, in an April 20th briefing
for reporters FBI Director William Sessions said his agency had "no contemporaneous
evidence" of child abuse during the siege.5/ Reno quickly buckled
under and confessed she had erred.
And she falsely claimed Davidians would not report on the childrens' welfare.
On April 19th, on ABC's "Nightline," Janet Reno claimed that despite the
FBI's sending in video tapes, "We did not receive verification that the
children were okay." She refused to admit what the Justice Department
concedes, such tapes were sent out on March 8 and March 28.
Reno repeatedly asserted in her press conference and on several television
programs: "I approved the plan. I am responsible. The buck
stops here." Dick DeGuerin told a reporter, "I'm very pleased that
we have an Attorney General, finally, after 12 years, who will accept responsibility.
But it's so refreshing, it's such a shock to have that, that when she grabbed
the blame for herself, it deflected any other inquiry. . .[However, Reno]
said, `I'll take the blame, but it's all Koresh's fault.' Well, that's
not really taking the blame."6/
Janet Reno's public relations effort was extremely successful. Justice
Department spokesperson Carl Stern asserted that while on April 19th the
reaction from those who contacted the Justice Department was 10 to 1 against
the assault, on April 20th, 8 out of 10 said they agreed with Janet Reno!7/
Two USA Today/CNN/Gallup polls taken right after the April 19th fire reflect
the public reaction. In the first, only 13 percent of those responding
objected to the February 28, 1993 BATF raid; 52 percent supported the raid.8/
And 93 percent of respondents backed the FBI's assault on the Branch Davidians,
despite the fact that it ended in "an apparent mass suicide by fire."9/
Clinton Disinformation
The press and public's harshest criticism of Bill Clinton was his not taking
responsibility as quickly and definitively as did Janet Reno. According
to Elizabeth Drew in her book On the Edge: The Clinton Presidency, Clinton
originally tried to give the impression that he had heard about and approved
the gassing plan only the day before it occurred. In fact it was
days earlier, Wednesday, April 13th when Nussbaum and Lindsey told Clinton
about the plan, before Reno even had approved it.10/
During his April 20th press conference Clinton finally took responsibility,
and like Reno, he emphasized, "It's because of the children. They
have evidence that those children are still being abused, and that they're
in increasingly unsafe conditions."11/ Of course, by the time Clinton
made this statement, the children were all dead.
Clinton attacked Koresh. "The bureau's efforts were ultimately unavailing
because the individual with whom they were dealing, David Koresh, was dangerous,
irrational and probably insane. . .Mr. Koresh's response to the demands
for his surrender by Federal agents was to destroy himself and murder the
children who were his captives as well as all the other people there who
did not survive."12/
During the press conference Clinton growled that Janet Reno should not
have to resign "because some religious fanatics murdered themselves."
At a press conference two days later he asserted, "I do not think the United
States government is responsible for the fact that a bunch of fanatics
decided to kill themselves." According to Elizabeth Drew, Clinton
tried to intimidate the press from asking any more questions about the
FBI's actions when he belligerently answered one reporter's question: "We
know that David Koresh had sex with children. Does anybody dispute
that? Does anybody dispute that? Where I come from, that's
child abuse."13/
After the Oklahoma City bombing, Clinton again attacked Davidians, charging
on the April 23, 1995 CBS-TV episode of "60 Minutes," "Before that raid
was carried out, those people murdered a bunch of innocent law-enforcement
officials who worked for the federal government. . .And when that [April
19th] raid occurred, it was the people who ran their cult compound at Waco
who murdered their own children. Not the federal officials.
They made the decision to destroy all those children that were there."
Justice Department outside expert Alan A. Stone, M.D. criticized Clinton's
statement, saying, "President Clinton seemed to argue on '60 Minutes' that
the ultimate fate of the Branch Davidians weeks later, during the final
gas assault by the FBI, was somehow morally justified by what happened
to the ATF agents who were killed in the botched initial surprise assault."14/
Why Have Reno and Clinton Supported the Coverup?
In its October 12, 1993 editorial, "The Waco Whitewash," the New York Times
wrote, "the report is silent on the most glaring deficiency of the tragic
episode: the lack of judgement at the top and the reasons for it."
As the top law enforcement personnel in the nation, it is likely Clinton
and Reno supported FBI officials' rationale--the maintenance of "law and
order." Columnist Paul Craig Roberts commented, "If the Branch Davidians
could hold out, others might get the same idea. Heavens, people might
stop paying their taxes. There was too much rebellion in the defiance
of authority."15/
Moreover, Clinton and Reno doubtless needed to cover up their own inexperience
and incompetence in dealing with aggressive and devious FBI officials and
agents. Former Black Panther Eldridge Cleaver writes: "The sin of
Clinton and Reno is not that they conceived and perpetrated this dastardly
carnage, but that their response to it was that of weak rulers who are
captives of the power they are supposed to wield, as opposed to the masters
of power, who would have pulled the plugs, kicked ass from Washington to
Waco, and rolled bureaucratic heads for days. Clinton and Reno closed
ranks with their culpable underlings, as is the wont of tyrants, even though
these particular underlings were hangers-on from the Reagan/Bush regime.
They sided with the power perpetrators against their weak and powerless
victims."16/
Finally, we cannot discount the possibility BATF, and especially the FBI,
intimidated both Clinton and Reno into covering up for their crimes.
The FBI probably has a good deal of "dirt" on Bill Clinton and his friends.
Treasury Department reviewer Henry S. Ruth, Jr., a former Watergate prosecutor,
told a national television audience that the FBI has not been "held accountable,
in the way other agencies have been held accountable. And part of
this again goes back to the magic of J. Edgar Hoover and the mystique he
created and the fear he created among the political apparatus in Washington."17/
FBI AND BATF CRIME SCENE COVERUP
The FBI's disregard for preserving the "crime scene" only increased after the April 19th fire. BATF was deeply involved in this coverup.
April 19th Destruction of Evidence
By now it seems clear that the FBI's gas and tank attacks themselves were
a successful effort to cause massive destruction and destroy evidence.
The FBI claims that once the fire started it held back the fire engines
in order to protect fire personnel from Davidian gunfire. However,
it is more likely that they wanted to ensure that Mount Carmel--and all
its bullet-pocket walls and roofs--was completely burned and destroyed
before allowing fire trucks near it.
Just to make sure no evidence survived, FBI tanks plowed it into the fire.
CNN news footage shows tanks pushing the last standing two story wall into
the fire. Network footage replayed in both "Waco, the Big Lie" videos
clearly shows several tanks equipped with bulldozer blades repeatedly and
systematically pushing the remaining debris into the flaming rubble.
Despite questions from the press and attorneys, the FBI has never bothered
to give the American people an explanation for this systematic destruction
of evidence. In response to a defense attorney's question at trial,
R. J. Craig explained that at one point he was "dragging burning timber
out of the area" of the buried bus in case anyone was trying to escape
down into it.18/
FBI and BATF Really Controlled the Crime Scene
While Texas Rangers, who had been deputized as federal marshals by U.S.
Attorneys, were technically in control of the "crime scene" after the fire,
it is clear FBI agents were really in control. News footage shows
FBI and BATF agents and other uniformed personnel all over the scene right
after the fire. At trial Texas Ranger David Byrnes, who was in charge
of the investigation, revealed that Rangers started taking over the scene
"around 3:00 p.m.," two hours after the fire was over.19/
The Justice report admits the FBI provided substantial assistance to the
Texas Rangers in combing through the crime scene and collecting evidence.20/
The Justice report reveals that one BATF firearms and explosives experts
collected evidence after the fire; the Treasury report mentions several.21/
At trial Texas Ranger Fred Cummings acknowledged the BATF bomb squad was
there on April 19th and 20th. Cummings also revealed FBI "laboratory"
people helped him decide what evidence was significant enough to be collected,
as opposed to being thrown in the big trash dumpster. Cummings revealed
the trash was hauled off before defense attorneys had the opportunity to
inspect it.22/ During CNN coverage of Bob Ricks' afternoon press
conference, a live video feed from the site showed a large "U-Haul" truck
pull up to the smoking ruins. At trial this was revealed to be an
FBI-rented truck for removing evidence.23/ We only can wonder how
much important evidence of BATF and FBI crimes ended up in the dumpster
or the U-Haul truck.
Texas Rangers were not sufficiently careful in overseeing collection of
evidence. As we have seen, some evidence, like half of the two front
doors and the phone line, was never found. The small building next
to the water tower was not checked for evidence until April 25th, six days
after the fire--and after Graeme Craddock told authorities he had left
a possibly live grenade there. Another allegedly live grenade was
found in clothing left by Davidians an entire day after yet another allegedly
live grenade was found in nearby clothing.
FBI or BATF agents even stole valuables from the ruins. Texas Ranger
Johnny Waldrip confirmed that after the fire Rangers found an unopened
church safe containing more than $50,000 in cash, gold coins, spools of
platinum and personal valuables. Rangers turned the safe over to
the FBI--but it never showed up on the FBI evidence list.24/
Defense attorney Dan Cogdell commented that it was mere "window dressing"
to have the Texas Rangers put in charge of the criminal investigation.
"It's stretching it to say they are bringing any kind of true independent
judgement. They are in charge, but Federal agents are dissecting
the crime scene and cross-checking all the evidence."25/
Whatever little separation there was between state and federal officials
quickly ended. The New York Times reported that in "an apparent shift
in policy" the evidence from Mount Carmel would be shipped to FBI laboratories.
The Times noted that originally officials conducting the fire investigation
"said that they were using private laboratories in an effort to avoid any
appearance of conflict of interest that might arise from a Federal laboratory
making conclusions about evidence in a case in which Federal agents' actions
were being questioned." The Texas Ranger spokesperson told him "if
you are concerned about a conflict of interest, you should talk to the
U.S. Attorney's office." However, when he tried to do so, Justice
Department spokesperson Carl Stern told him, "All the shifts in police
(sic) I know of, are the ones you invented."26/ At trial, FBI weapons
expert James Cadigan conceded that the Texas Rangers did in fact have facilities
adequate to analyze all information.27/
May 12, 1993 Bulldozing of Remaining Evidence
Two weeks after the release of the "independent" fire investigators' report,
but before Branch Davidian attorneys could send in their own fire investigators,
bulldozers rolled across the burned rubble of Mount Carmel Center.
SAC Jeff Jamar defended this action. "They're just filling holes
so people won't fall in the pits. That's just part of taking care
of the scene." Texas Rangers said bulldozing was necessary so the
Texas Health and Water departments could begin work at the site.
However, the Department did not do the work until the summer of 1994.
Bulldozers also smashed and crumbled the concrete room, destroying evidence
that a roof cave-in killed several people, and moved around what little
evidence remained. Attorney Jack Zimmermann said, "I guess what it
does, it forever prevents any checking on the ATF's rendition that the
fire was intentionally set."28/ Defense Attorney Jeff Kearney told
reporters, "Government can say what they want now and there's little physical
evidence to dispute it."29/
July, 1994 Clean Up of Property
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission delayed cleaning up
Mount Carmel, including removing several inches of topsoil allegedly contaminated
with lead from bullets, until mid-1994. In the spring of 1994 KPOC-TV
investigators discovered that the autopsy reports of forty-eight Davidians
revealed lethal doses of cyanide. Noting that cyanide is a by-product
of burning CS gas, Davidians obtained a court order allowing them to obtain
soil samples from Mount Carmel just days before the soil--possible evidence
of FBI crimes--was to be removed. Details of the findings were not
available at publication.
FIRE INVESTIGATION COVERUP
The Justice report asserts that Texas Rangers assembled a team of "independent" fire investigators to determine the cause of the fire.30/ However, at trial Captain David Byrnes, head of the Texas Rangers investigation, testified that he himself did not put the fire investigation team together. Considering that he was deputized by and working for the U.S. Attorneys office, we must assume someone in that office actually chose the fire investigation team.31/
Head of Team Was BATF Sympathizer
The head of the supposedly independent fire investigation team was Paul
C. Gray, Assistant Chief of the Houston Fire Department. However,
Gray had close ties to BATF. He had served as a member of BATF's
National Arson Response Team and taught classes for BATF agents.
And his wife was a secretary in BATF's Houston office. Not surprisingly,
BATF officials recommended him for the job.32/ At trial fire investigator
Bill Cass stated he also had worked with BATF in previous fire investigations.33/
Attorney Jack Zimmermann revealed, "From 1982 to 1990, [Gray's] office
was on Imperial Valley Drive, in the ATF office. . .He carried a card that
identified himself as a special agent of ATF. He handed that card
out to people when he interviewed witnesses."34/ Finally, Gray had
socialized with BATF agent Steve Willis, who was killed February 28th,
and attended his funeral.35/
Zimmermann writes that Paul Gray asked Zimmermann and Dick DeGuerin to
aid in his investigation. The attorneys told Gray that because of
his close ties to BATF they could not participate unless Texas Rangers
asked them to do so. Otherwise, "Dick DeGuerin and I would not lend
our credibility to the anticipated report." In response, Gray called
an unscheduled press conference for that same day and announced that the
fire was started by the "cultists."36/
Zimmermann immediately criticized Gray's conclusion that Davidians set
the fires. "Until I see the evidence from an independent, impartial
expert, I choose to believe the firsthand account of eyewitnesses who were
in the center who said there was no fire started by the Branch Davidians."37/
Gray Withheld Evidence from Other Investigators
At trial Bill Cass, one of the three fire investigators called to the stand,
revealed that Paul Gray actually had withheld from other members of the
fire investigation team important evidence that a fire started in the gymnasium.
Gray showed investigators infrared video taken only from noon on, evidently
not showing them the 11:59:16 a.m. photograph which displays an obvious
heat plume in the gymnasium. Cass acknowledged that he had not noticed--and
Gray had not pointed out to other investigators--the 12:08:17 and 12:08:22
flashes in the window of the gymnasium's dog run. Gray also withheld
from investigators the fact that the official FBI log entries revealed
that FBI observers reported seeing fire at the back of Mount Carmel Center
right after tanks collapsed the gymnasium.38/
Cass revealed that Gray, who took responsibility for investigating the
flammability of CS gas, did not tell other investigators that manufacturers
warn the gas is flammable. The Fire Report, based on Paul Gray's
"research," repeatedly mis-identifies the gas used as the more toxic "CN"
gas. And Gray asserts, "We are of the opinion that this fire was
not caused by nor was it intensified by any chemicals present in the tear-gassing
operation."39/
Cass confessed that he personally had not made a time study of the fire's
start or progression and relied on Gray's interpretation.40/ Gray's
withholding evidence suggests that the government believes it was the action
of its tanks that started the fire in the gymnasium.
Under cross-examination fire investigator Andrew Armstrong conceded that
he took Gray's word for it that clothing, wood, carpet and other samples
he tested for flammables did in fact come from the area Gray claimed they
did.41/ Finally, fire investigator James Quintiere confessed that
while he met with other investigators right after the fire in Waco, he
did not read any of their reports or use them to draw his conclusions about
the spread of the fire. He did not reveal if this was because Gray
withheld such information from him.42/
Gray never directed investigators to interview fire survivors, something
done routinely in other fires. At trial fire investigator Bill Cass
admitted he had not spoken to any survivors, including David Thibodeau
or Derek Lovelock, two fire survivors who were not under indictment.
However, he did speak to Davidian Donald Bunds who was cooperating with
authorities, but was not at Mount Carmel during the siege or fire.
When asked if he had spoken to survivors, investigator James Quintiere
said, "absolutely not."43/
Fire Report Distorted Evidence
Despite the video footage of the damage to the building done by tanks and
the extensive survivor testimony to their attorneys about people being
trapped by falling debris, blocked stairways, caved-in walls, and rapidly
spreading smoke and fire, the Fire Report concludes: "Considering the observable
means of exit available, we must assume that many of the occupants were
either denied escape from within or refused to leave until escape was not
an option."44/
The Fire Report notes that fuel containers were found in the ruins, and
flammble liquids were found on survivors shoes and clothes, without mentioning
that Davidians were dependent on flammable fuel after the FBI turned off
electricity and that it was spilled during the April 19th raid. It
infers that any flammables found at the scene were present only for purposes
of arson.45/
The Fire Report attempts to debunk what it calls "another theoretical explanation
reported by the media," i.e., that tanks rupturing "a propane cylinder
or flammable liquid container" started the fire. It does not reveal
that survivors' blamed tanks knocking over lanterns. The Fire Report
claims, "if this had happened, an immediate vapor air explosion or flash
fire would have occurred involving the vehicle itself. It did not
happen."46/ However, the report ignores the possibility that tanks
smashing down walls and pushing around debris could knock over a lantern
without coming into contact with any fire caused by the accident.
The report states, "This investigation establishes that these fires occurred
in areas significantly distant from each other and in a time frame that
precludes any assumption of a single ignition source or accidental cause."47/
In his April 26, 1993 press conference, Gray told reporters, "We believe
it was intentionally set by persons inside the compound."48/
However, Gray and Fire Report deny the obvious: that a last barrage of
tank attacks occurred in separate locations within the three minute period
during which the fires began; that even one 50-ton tank smashing deep inside
a rickety wooden building filled with dozens of lighted lanterns could
start two or three fires in separated parts of a building; and that one
fire could have raced around a flammable-laden building filled with natural
flues. At trial fire investigator Bill Cass admitted he never before
had to take into consideration the effect of several 50-ton tanks smashing
repeatedly into a home within a five minute period.49/
During his press conference, Paul Gray claimed, "I do believe that a person
could have survived the fire. I could speculate that there was ample
room in the open pit area for everybody to have gotten into."50/
However, this statement directly contradicts what Gray put in his own report
regarding the buried bus that served as a tunnel to the open pit or tornado
shelter: "It is also possible that the escape route planned included the
aforementioned tunnel system accessible through an opening in the floor
at the west end of the building. A significant amount of structural
debris was found in this area indicating that the breaching operations
could have caused this route to be blocked."51/
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT COVERUP
Justice Department officials--especially Attorney General Janet Reno and Webster Hubbell--were involved much more deeply in the disastrous decisions at Waco than were their Treasury Department counterparts who approved the original BATF raid. And their actions resulted in far more deaths--76 people, 23 of them children. Moreover, President Clinton approved the April 19th assault "on the record" and may have had "off the record" communications with Webster Hubbell and others. Therefore, the Clinton White House and the Justice Department were motivated to conduct a much more systematic coverup of errors and crimes than was the Treasury Department.
Possible Coverup of Clinton's Role
As mentioned previously President Bill Clinton's close friends Assistant
to the Attorney General Webster Hubbell, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury
Roger Altman, White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum and Deputy Counsel Vince
Foster all were involved in Waco decision-making. Vince Foster committed
suicide in July, 1993. The other three have resigned because of investigations
into possible illegal Clinton fundraising and business dealings associated
with the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan Association and the Whitewater
Development Corporation--the "Whitewater" affair.
Despite several indepth media investigations of Foster's death, it was
not until May of 1995 an FBI interview was released in which Foster's widow
admitted that the standoff in Waco had caused Foster "a great deal of stress,"
that he was "horrified" by the outcome and that he thought it was "his
fault." This puts a new light on his claim that "the FBI lied in
their report" to Janet Reno, since he may have been referring to their
tricking her into approving their gassing plan. It also raises questions
about whether any Waco-related files secretly were removed from Foster's
office after his death.52/
In the summer of 1994 it was revealed that Roger Altman had alerted his
close friend Bill Clinton to the status of "Whitewater" investigations
as early as March, 1993--despite his earlier assertions to Congress that
he knew nothing about efforts to alert Clinton until late 1993. Because
so many believed Altman lied to Congress to cover up for his crony Clinton,
he resigned his Treasury Department position in August, 1994. Clinton
then gave Altman a low visibility White House job.53/
On December 6, 1994 Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr announced that Webster
Hubbell had pled guilty to defrauding Rose law firm clients, including
two government agencies, of $390,000 through "phony expenses and inflated
fees." Facing up to 10 years in prison for his crimes, Hubbell cooperated
with the Independent Counsel in the separate Whitewater investigation.
FBI background checks on Hubbell before his confirmation, which were ongoing
during the siege at Waco, supposedly turned up nothing about the law firm's
allegations against Hubbell--even though these were several months old.
The FBI "will likely do an internal review" as to why the background check
did not reveal this information. We must wonder if this is some of
the "dirt" FBI agents or officials held back to bully Hubbell and Clinton
into condoning and covering up for the massacre of the Davidians.54/
Presidential Advisor Bruce Lindsey, who also was involved in Waco decision-making,
was a senior partner at a law firm which received hundreds of thousands
of dollars in bond counsel fees from the Arkansas Development Finance Authority.
Allegedly doing business with the Authority was a form of "payoff" for
Clinton supporters. Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr
considered, but declined, to indict Lindsey for violating federal bank
laws.55/
Many suspect that Clinton-Altman-Hubbell-Foster-Lindsay cronyism might
extend to covering up errors or crimes related to the massacre of the Davidians,
such as: whether Altman conveyed any secret messages from BATF raid leader
Bill Buford to Clinton; whether Hubbell had some outside-the-chain-of-command
contact with Clinton throughout the siege and on April 19th; whether Hubbell
helped withhold David Koresh's April 14th promise-to-surrender letter from
Reno; whether Hubbell, Foster and Lindsay had any improper role in Waco
decision-making; whether Hubbell knew about possible Davidian plans to
pursue a fiery defense against tanks; and whether Hubbell approved the
decision to proceed with the demolition that led to the April 19th fire.
Justice Department Attempted to Forgo Full
Investigation
President Clinton appointed Phillip B. Heymann, a Harvard Law School professor
who had been nominated to be Deputy Attorney General, to lead the Justice
Department investigation. However, in May, 1993 the New York Times
reported that the not-yet-confirmed Heymann told an interviewer that investigators
would not look at the decision to assault Mount Carmel with tanks and tear
gas and that "Department officials have not yet decided whether even to
pose questions to Ms. Reno." Heymann stated the report would not
"be the ultimate truth about what happened." Other unnamed officials
"concluded that nothing could be gained by looking more closely at her
order to carry out the assault."56/
The day after the story appeared, and after several congressional representatives
criticized this revelation, the Justice Department contended that Heymann
"had erred" and that there would be a full investigation. The most
revealing reason given was that Heymann's "remarks reflected a division
within the Justice Department about how closely it should look at the events,
with some high officials arguing forcefully that the inquiry should be
more limited, to focus only on what should be done in future cases."57/
Review Team and Outside Expert Conflicts of
Interest
It is questionable whether Deputy Attorney General Heymann or Assistant
to the Attorney General Richard Scruggs, working as they did under Attorney
General Janet Reno, could do any independent investigation of errors in
Justice Department or FBI decision-making or actions. The most noted
conflict of interest was Heymann's appointing another former head of the
Justice Department's Criminal Division, Edward S.G. Dennis, Jr., to be
the chief reviewer of the government's procedures, decisions and actions
in Waco. (Dennis also oversaw the investigation of the Philadelphia
police department's bombing of MOVE in 1985.) This choice came
under scathing attack by William Safire who noted that Dennis was in charge
of the botched investigation of Banca Lavoro and its relation to Iraq-gate:
"Ms. Reno's Criminal Division directed Atlanta prosecutors to shoot down
the explosive case with a plea bargain, avoiding a public trial that would
have exposed the machinations of the Bush-Thornburgh-Dennis crowd.
How could Ed Dennis not be grateful? His judgment about the Waco
fiasco: `there is no place in the evaluation for blame, and I find no fault.'
One hand whitewashes the other."58/
No Testimony Taken Under Oath
Deputy Attorney General Phillip B. Heymann told reporters the review group
did "not have the authority to issue subpoenas or grant immunity but could
refer findings of wrongdoing for criminal prosecution."59/ Presumably,
this means that agents and officials were not interviewed under oath.
The Justice Department report makes no reference at all to these issues.
Some of the FBI agents or officials who testified before congressional
committees were not sworn in and still could be prosecuted were it proved
they had lied to Congress.
Review Team Withheld Information from Outside
Experts
The Justice Department review team withheld damaging information from the
Justice Department's panel of ten outside experts and even from its chief
overseer, Edward Dennis. This included, of course, all and any previously
mentioned missing physical evidence and withheld audio and video tapes.
This also included information about CS gas, the early March memoranda
prepared by FBI experts Smerick and Young advising the FBI not to harass
the Branch Davidians, and David Koresh's April 14, 1993 promise-to-surrender
letter.
Alan Stone complained to one reporter that when he asked for information
on CS gas, the FBI provided him only "ambiguous and irrelevant material.
. .even after the fact, the FBI and the Justice Department have never acknowledged
the true import of the C.S. dangers."60/ On the May 15, 1995 "McNeil
Lehrer News Hour," he spoke in stronger terms, charging: "I feel
the FBI has stonewalled me. . .I believe they haven't been candid with
me. . .I asked for material and I got nothing by gobblygook."
Only experts Nancy Ammerman and Alan Stone even mention the March, 1993
Smerick and Young memorandum. However, Nancy Ammerman learned of
them from speaking personally with Peter Smerick. And Alan Stone,
who withheld his report until he received all the information he requested,
refers to the Justice Department originally withholding them from outside
experts when he writes: "The evidence now available to me indicates that,
contrary to my previous understanding and that of the other panelists,
the FBI's Investigation Support Unit and trained negotiators possessed
the psychological/behavioral science expertise they needed to deal with
David Koresh and an unconventional group like the Branch Davidians. . .Panelists
may have been misled, as I was, by FBI officials at the original briefings
who conveyed the impression that they considered David Koresh a typical
criminal mentality and dealt with him as such."61/
It is clear that Koresh's promise-to-surrender letter also was never shown
to the outside experts. Only Nancy Ammerman refers to the letter.62/
However, she notes that she got her copy from Dr. James Tabor, not from
the Justice Department.63/
In his report, Lawrence E. Sullivan, Director of Harvard's Center for the
Study of World Religions, quotes at length from Koresh's April 9th and
10th letters to the FBI, trying to find evidence that Koresh would have
come out--yet he never mentions the April 14th promise-to-surrender letter.
He also quotes extensively from an earlier, defiant letter, which he was
given at a Justice Department briefing of the experts. "In the briefing
the letter seems to play the role of a last straw, measuring Koresh's intransigence
and provoking the FBI to escalate their interventions."64/ If that
letter was presented as the "last straw," doubtless it was also presented
as the last letter.
The Justice Department evidently even withheld the letter from the review
team's chief overseer, Edward Dennis. In his lengthy report Dennis
refers only to the April 9th and 10th letters and Koresh's April 14th phone
call.65/
Failure to Report to Congress on Tampering
with 9-1-1 Tapes
For the June 9, 1993 House Appropriations subcommittee hearing, an FBI
agent gave a committee staff member an excerpted tape of the 9-1-1 calls
between Lieutenant Larry Lynch and Davidians Wayne Martin, David Koresh
and Steve Schneider.66/ The tapes had been edited into a 30 minute
tape which Waco police said gave a "false impression of how the events
occurred."67/
If one compares the transcript of the tape in the hearing record to the
Treasury Department's minute-by-minute February 28th chronology, one finds
the tapes actually have been re-sequenced. The section where Wayne
Martin complains about helicopters shooting at him, at approximately 10:05
a.m., has been moved until after David Koresh calls 9-1-1 at 10:34 a.m.--after
the helicopters withdrew from the scene. This might be evidence that
someone wanted to discredit Martin's claims and cover up BATF's illegal
shooting.
No Fault Finding for FBI or Justice Department
Errors or Crimes
At the October 8, 1993 press conference where the Justice Department released
the report, chief reviewer Edward Dennis stated, "I find no fault in the
performance of law enforcement during the standoff and the tear gas assault."
He asserted "speculation regarding them coming out is irresponsible."
Likewise, Deputy Attorney General Phillip Heymann said, "We can't come
out with a scapegoat when there's no severe blame to be placed."68/
Reporters at the press conference asked Heymann if the Justice report was
a "whitewash," especially compared to the Treasury Department report.
Heymann answered that the Treasury report found "recklessness (in the initial
raid) followed by a coverup." He asserted that in the FBI and Justice
Department's handling of the Davidians, the "underlying facts are different,"
i.e., there was no recklessness and coverup.69/ Attorney General
Janet Reno said: "I'm always concerned about the perception of a white-wash.
But I don't go out to seek mea culpas and I don't go out to seek [a report
that says] we didn't do anything wrong. I go out to seek the truth."70/
Outside expert Alan A. Stone disagreed, writing: "There is a view within
the FBI and in the official reports that suggests the tragedy was unavoidable.
This report is a dissenting opinion from that view."71/ Nevertheless,
a number of newspapers, including the New York Times and the Washington
Times labeled it a "whitewash."72/
Failure to Discipline or Prosecute Agents or
Officials
The Justice Department has taken no official action against agents or officials
related to their actions at Waco. FBI Director Sessions was fired
for other reasons in mid-1993. In late 1993 the FBI quietly replaced
FBI Hostage Rescue Team commander Richard Rogers. Several other high
officials have retired or been moved out of Washington as Freeh replaced
them with his own team. However, while Freeh suspended Assistant
FBI Director James Fox for violating repeated judicial admonitions to refrain
from commenting on the World Trade Center bombing to the news media, he
has taken no action against FBI agents involved in the deaths of 76 Davidian
men, women and children.73/ It seems Freeh places a higher value
on bureaucratic control than on human life.
Failure to Recommend Prosecutions in Weaver
Case
There has been more press and congressional criticism of the FBI's handling
of the Randy Weaver case for several reasons: there was less publicity
surrounding the Weaver case and therefore less anti-Weaver government disinformation;
there was no attorney general like Janet Reno to assume the blame, even
as she effectively blamed the victims; there was no way to pin the killing
of Vicki Weaver on Randy Weaver; and the FBI and Weaver prosecutors made
sloppier mistakes in covering up evidence of federal agent crimes.
Despite this criticism, the Justice Department and the FBI could not afford
to prosecute, or even harshly discipline, the FBI agents and officials
in charge of the Randy Weaver siege because these were the same individuals
in charge at Waco: former FBI Director William Sessions, former FBI Deputy
Director Floyd I. Clarke, Assistant Director for the Criminal Investigative
Division Larry Potts, and HRT commander Richard M. Rogers.
In July, 1993 the Justice Department began an investigation into possible
criminal misconduct on the part of FBI agents and officials. Some
members of the Hostage Rescue Team, including Richard M. Rogers, refused
to cooperate with investigators. Larry Potts, the senior FBI official
who would have had to approve the new rules of engagement, told FBI investigators
he did not remember giving Rogers a clear go-ahead to change them.
However, in the Justice Department report Eugene Glenn, the FBI's on-site
commander, swore to investigators that Mr. Potts did approve the rules
of engagement, as did Richard Rogers.74/
Released in December, 1994 the 300 page report recommended criminal charges
against the responsible agents, i.e., Richard Rogers and sniper Lon Horiuchi
who shot Vicki Weaver. The report stated: "The rules of engagement
not only departed from the FBI's standard deadly force policy, but also
contradicted the Constitution of the United States." However, the
Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility reviewed the
report and concluded that the agents had not committed crimes and should
face only disciplinary action. Janet Reno consulted the department's
civil rights division which similarly concluded criminal prosecutions were
not warranted. This was despite the fact that Idaho prosecutor Randall
W. Day was considering prosecuting Potts, Rogers, Horiuchi and Federal
Marshals Arthur Roderick and Lawrence Cooper for murder.75/
The Justice Department turned the matter over to Louis Freeh for consideration
of disciplinary measures. On January 6, 1995 Freeh announced that
12 agents and officials would be disciplined with measures ranging from
letters of censure to a maximum of 15 day suspensions. Larry Potts
received a letter of censure for his "failure to provide proper oversight
with regard to the rules of engagement." HRT commander Richard Rogers
received a letter and 10 day suspension. Lon Horiuchi was not disciplined
at all. It has been noted widely that the letters of censure are
the same reprimand that Louis Freeh gave himself for losing his FBI cellular
phone. Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick approved Freeh's decision.76/
In May, 1995 FBI Director Freeh, with the approval of Janet Reno, promoted
Potts to Deputy Director, the second highest position in the FBI.
This disturbed many members of the public, press, Congress--and even of
the FBI. Senator Larry Craig of Idaho said, "I expressed concern
that to promote a person whose failure to act in a constitutionally appropriate
way resulted in the loss of life. . .flew in the face of public sentiment.
This relates to public concern about government agencies being responsible."
And FBI Salt Lake City FBI chief Eugene Glenn, the Weaver site-commander,
immediately wrote a letter to the Justice Department challenging the FBI's
investigation and Pott's veracity. The Justice Department agreed
to investigate further.77/ However, it remains unlikely that Janet
Reno's Justice Department will prosecute for the Weaver murder those who
are covering up the even more damning massacre of the Branch Davidians.
DAVIDIAN TRIAL CONTINUED THE COVERUP
The January- February 1994 trial of eleven Branch Davidians for conspiracy
to murder federal officers and weapon charges was yet another coverup of
federal crimes against the Davidians. The judge was under investigation
by the Justice Department for the first half of the trial. Federal
prosecutors, appointed by and under the ultimate control of Attorney General
Janet Reno and Associate Attorney General Webster Hubbell, repeatedly withheld
evidence from the defense, condoned BATF's and the FBI's tampering with
or destroying evidence and improperly influenced witnesses.
Despite the judge and prosecutors' best efforts to stifle the Davidians'
ability to present an adequate defense, the jury found all Davidians completely
innocent of the most serious charges, conspiracy to murder, and aiding
and abetting murder of, federal officers. Three were found completely
innocent and released. However, the judge's faulty instructions,
faulty juror forms and juror error resulted in eight Davidians being convicted
of crimes resulting in a total of 240 years imprisonment.78/ Davidians
are appealing the verdicts and sentences.
Prejudiced Judge Frustrated Defense Efforts
U.S. District Judge Walter J. Smith, 54, presided over the trial.
Smith has a reputation for being pro-prosecution and imposing the maximum
sentence on defendants. Something sure to make Smith even more pro-government
is that during the trial he was under investigation by the Justice Department
for allegedly lying under oath during a civil suit trial. Smith had
testified for the defendant, a newspaper and broadcasting company being
sued for libel by a political opponent, former McClellan County District
Attorney Vic Feazell. In July of 1993, Feazell filed a formal complaint
against Smith for perjury because two "facts" to which Smith testified
were proved to be false. These potentially career-ruining charges
were hanging over Smith through the first half of the trial. In early
February, 1994 the Justice Department "exonerated" Smith of the charges.79/
After this episode, Smith doubtless felt he was indebted to the Justice
Department.
Defense attorneys charged that because Judge Smith allowed prosecutors
to try defendants together, supposedly to save money, some defendants could
not get a fair trial. Such "group trials" overwhelm the defense attorneys
of usually indigent clients so they cannot present an adequate defense.
Prosecutors swamp juries with "conspiracy facts" so they will not look
at the paltry evidence against each defendant.
Judge Smith took the improper and possibly illegal step of restricting
public access to the names of all potential jurors in the federal jury
wheel for the Western District of Texas, a total of 16,000 individuals.
He acknowledged his fear members of the Fully Informed Jury Association
(FIJA) would send potential jurors their literature about jury rights--including
the right of the jury to find defendants innocent if they disagree with
the law or feel that the government acted improperly. Smith admitted
he had heard "an organization" planned on distributing leaflets to potential
jurors about "how they should ignore the law and follow their conscience."80/
Judge Smith took the unusual, but not improper, step of sending out questionnaires
to 300 eligible jurors and then, based on their responses, choosing from
those the 80 who would be subjected to questioning and challenge by attorneys.81/
Smith inquired about potential jurors' religious beliefs and asked: "Do
you believe persons other than law enforcement officers should be permitted
to own firearms?" Smith would not allow defense attorneys to see
jurors' answers to this and other leading questions, telling them questionnaires
would be bundled and could be reviewed only during appeals.82/
Declaring he would "not allow the government to be put on trial," Judge
Smith forbid defense attorneys from mentioning self-defense, or asking
questions, presenting evidence or calling witnesses who could prove self-defense.
This was despite the fact the Davidians primary defense against all charges
was that under statutory and common law BATF's excessive force on February
28, 1993, gave the Davidians the right to use armed force in self-defense.
Only in closing arguments did Smith allow mention of self-defense.
Jury forewoman Sarah Bain complained to a reporter about the withholding
of evidence of self-defense, "I feel that we were improperly used."83/
Judge Smith repeatedly squashed defense efforts to introduce important
evidence, including about the Davidians' legitimate fear of attack, their
peaceful pre-occupations, BATF's flawed raid plan, Kathryn Schroeder's
testimony that other Davidians told her they heard firing from helicopters,
Jaime Castillo's statements to a Texas Ranger that he did not shoot on
February 28th, portions of the 9-1-1 tape where Davidians refer to helicopter
attacks and their right to defend themselves.84/
Judge Smith put up procedural roadblocks to prevent defense attorneys from
calling the BATF and FBI agents most knowledgeable about and responsible
for the aggressive BATF and FBI assaults on the Davidians. And he
restricted David Koresh's gun dealer and business partner's testimony to
a written statement "stipulated," i.e., approved, by prosecutors.85/
Defense attorneys declined to call their most important witnesses, the
defendants themselves. They knew the judge would not allow them to
answer questions about BATF's attack on them and their attempts to defend
themselves, so the only answers they could have given would have been self-incriminating.
Prosecutors Helped Plan Assaults
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Bill Johnston, 34 and John Phinizy, 46, were prime
motivators of the original BATF investigation. The Treasury Department
report alleged Johnston insisted BATF use a paramilitary raid against the
Davidians. The subject of whether he too should be a witness and
whether his desire to cover up his own errors might lead to prosecutorial
misconduct was a frequent subject of debate early in the trial.
Ray Jahn, 50, who was named lead prosecutor, was formerly a special counsel
to, and had been good friends with, FBI Director William Sessions.
The Justice Department had consulted with Jahn regarding their plans to
gas Mount Carmel. Attorney Mike DeGeurin was so disturbed by this
fact that he asked for Jahn to be dismissed as a prosecutor because he
was a potential witness. The judge refused his request.86/
Prosecutors Withheld Important Evidence
In several motions for mistrial defense attorneys accused the government
of repeatedly violating the Brady and Jencks rules, which require prosecutors
to give defense attorneys adequate opportunity to inspect all evidence
before it is presented in court. Prosecutors remained unfazed by
evidence lost, destroyed or tampered with by BATF, the FBI or other government
agencies. The most flagrant examples include:
*
BATF and the FBI claimed they could not find one of the two steel double
front doors which might have proved that BATF shot a first barrage of bullets
at the unarmed David Koresh, critically wounding the unarmed Perry Jones.
*
The medical examiner claimed that Perry Jones' only gunshot wound was to
the mouth, despite Davidian claims--including those alluded to by prosecution
witness Kathryn Schroeder--that the unarmed Jones was mortally wounded
by BATF gunshots as he stood at the front door.
*
Despite BATF officials' initial claim that BATF agents had taken video
of the first minutes of the February 28th raid, prosecutors supported BATF's
claim that in the first minutes of the raid BATF equipment both in the
undercover house across the street and in the helicopters not been operated.
*
Prosecutors did not tell the defense in advance that several BATF agents
had changed their testimony from that first given defense attorneys, including
regarding whether anyone had yelled search warrant, had seen David Koresh
in the door or had shot dogs in the first minutes of the raid. Their
new testimony was much more damaging to the Davidians.
*
Prosecutors did not tell Livingstone Fagan's attorney in advance that two
agents would testify that Fagan had shot at them. Only after BATF
agent Evers testified that Livingstone Fagan had shot him did prosecutors
turn over to Fagan's attorney evidence that cast doubt on that testimony--a
copy of the photo lineup Texas Rangers had shown the agent in March of
1993. Next to the photo of Fagan, Evers had written, "unsure if identified
from shooting or TV." Even Judge Smith criticized the prosecution
for withholding this evidence.87/
*
Prosecutors disclosed only on the morning of Kathryn Schroeder's testimony
that Texas Rangers had a transcript of her original March, 1993 statement
to them. Her statement clearly was different from testimony prosecutors
gave defense attorneys. Schroeder then admitted on the stand that
she had lied to authorities.
*
Prosecutors would allow a defense attorney's weapons expert to inspect
allegedly illegal machineguns only by looking at them through their plastic
wrappings. The government has proved to no one outside of law enforcement
that these weapons were illegal. This adds to suspicions that prosecutors
and FBI weapons experts falsely claimed that some or all legal weapons
were illegal ones--or that agents converted some legal weapons to illegal
ones in BATF or FBI laboratories.
Prosecutors Intimidated and Influenced Witnesses
Prosecutors intimidated two Davidian women, Kathryn Schroeder and Marjorie
Thomas, into testifying against other Davidians. They threatened
to use the (often dubious) accusations of Davidian Victorine Hollingsworth,
an elderly woman from England who turned against David Koresh after leaving
Mount Carmel in March, 1993. Hollingsworth claimed Thomas, who was
badly burned in the fire, carried a weapon during the siege. (No
other Davidian facing only that accusation was prosecuted.)
Hollingsworth claimed that Schroeder carried a gun during the February
28th raid. Prosecutors also told Schroeder they had a BATF witness
who would testify to seeing gunfire coming from her room. Fearful
this evidence would lead to a life sentence, and separate her forever from
her four children, Schroeder cooperated with prosecutors. At this
point Hollingsworth and the agent withdrew their allegations against Schroeder.88/
Prosecutors obviously coached Hollingsworth at trial. She testified
with confidence that she had seen various individuals carrying guns during
or after the February raid. However, when one attorney read aloud
her statement to Texas Rangers taken shortly after she left Mount Carmel
in March, the transcript showed that Hollingsworth was very confused and
unsure about who was carrying guns or of the difference between a handgun
and a rifle.89/
Prosecutors may have influenced witness Bradley Rogans, a 23-year-old serving
three eight-year sentences on drug-related charges. Rogans testified
he befriended defendant Renos Avraam for almost a week at a Texas jail
and that Avraam made incriminating statements about carrying and aiming
an automatic weapon. Later it was revealed that Rogans had spent
only one day at that facility and was paroled the next day.90/ During
closing arguments Carroll inferred that Rogans had lied, calling him "an
evidence-tampering, three-time felon, 23 years old, paroled the next day."91/
Defense attorneys accused prosecutors of coaching prosecution witnesses,
in part to cover up their own misdeeds. Early in the trial FBI agent James
Cadigan made the dramatic statement, "I have not seen that many firearms
or that quantity of ammunition outside a firearms munitions plant."
An angry defense attorney asserted that his testimony had been "rehearsed."
Cadigan admitted, "I have discussed my testimony with the prosecution."92/
While prosecution witnesses all met at least once with prosecutors, twenty
or more federal agents scheduled to testify attended a November, 1993,
pre-trial meeting with prosecutors.93/ Doubtless they received more
coaching, plus a subtle reminder that they must all hang together--or some
might hang separately.
Paltry and Questionable Evidence Against Convicted
Davidians
Most, but not all, of the Davidians identified as carrying a gun on February
28, 1993 were prosecuted. Those who only were accused of having carried
a gun during the siege, including David Thibodeau, Rita Riddle and Derek
Lovelock, were not prosecuted. Besides the not entirely credible
evidence presented by the three Davidian prosecution witnesses, federal
agents and a "jailhouse snitch," the most significant evidence against
three defendants was their own truthful testimony to Texas Rangers after
they left Mount Carmel. There was no credible testimony that any
Davidian carried an illegal automatic weapon on February 28th or during
the siege; Kathryn Schroeder did allege she herself carried one.
What follows is listed the paltry and dubious evidence against eight Davidian
prisoners, mostly related to self-defense against the 76 BATF agents who
shot machineguns, threw dangerous flash-bang grenades and even fired from
a helicopter on February 28, 1993.
Renos Avraam, 31, a British business-man of Greek heritage, joined the
Davidians in 1991 and escaped the fire. Evidence presented against
him was: Marjorie Thomas saw him with a gun during the siege; Kathryn Schroeder
alleged Avraam told her he fired a gun February 28th and manned a .50 caliber
gun during the siege; Bradley Rogans alleged Avraam confessed that he had
a fully automatic weapon, that he was a good shot and that he had aimed
his gun; an FBI agent testified he saw Avraam drop a pistol off the roof
as he was escaping, but a Texas Ranger said he found no such pistol anywhere
near where the gun would have fallen.94/
Brad Branch, 36, a Navy veteran and technician and frequent visitor to
Mount Carmel, left during the siege. Evidence presented against him
was: Marjorie Thomas said she saw him with a gun on February 28th and heard
him claim he had shot someone; Victorine Hollingsworth said she heard Branch
say "something like. . .One nearly got me and I got one," but that he was
defending the women and children.95/
Jaime Castillo, 27, a California musician, joined the Davidians in 1988
and escaped the fire. Evidence presented against him was: Marjorie
Thomas saw him with a gun February 28th; Kathryn Schroeder saw him with
an AK-47 during the siege but did not know if it was automatic; Texas Ranger
Gary de los Santos testified Castillo said he had three different guns
on February 28th; a BATF agent testified Castillo kept a gun pointed on
her and other armed agents as they helped a wounded agent in the court
yard. (The judge would not allow jury to hear that Castillo also
told the Ranger that he had hid on the floor during the gun battle, he
had seen Winston Blake dead on the floor or that he did not point his gun
at the female agent.)96/
Graeme Craddock, 34, an engineer from Australia, had been at Mount Carmel
a year and escaped the fire. Evidence presented against him
was: Kathryn Schroeder saw him with a gun on February 28th; Marjorie Thomas
saw him with a gun during the siege; his testimony to a Texas Ranger and
a grand jury that he had a gun on February 28th but did not fire it and
that David Koresh gave Craddock what he said was a live grenade; his admission
he left the grenade in the concrete building next to the water tower.97/
Livingstone Fagan, 37, a British minister and father of two, left during
the siege to be spokesperson for the group. His wife Yvette and mother
Doris died during the fire. Schroeder saw him with a gun February
28th; Hollingsworth claimed Fagan said he shot an agent who was shooting
at him; two BATF agents gave questionable testimony Fagan had shot at them
outside the building. However, Hollingsworth testified she saw another
black man, now deceased, in the place where agents claim they saw Fagan;
two defendants similarly could have testified that man was not Fagan, had
it not been a group trial; a BATF agent said the black man shooting looked
like a large man--Fagan is a small man.98/
Paul Fatta, 35, a Hawaiian business-man, father of one and long time Davidian,
was at a gun show in Austin on February 28th. Evidence presented
against him was: government allegation two guns Fatta purchased had been
converted to illegal automatics; Kathryn Schroeder's testimony other Davidians--but
not Fatta--later converted some guns to illegal machineguns.99/
Ruth Riddle, 31, a Canadian member for several years, who escaped the fire
with David Koresh's first chapter of the Seven Seals. Her husband
Jimmy Riddle died on April 19th. Thomas and Schroeder saw her with
a gun February 28th; she admitted to authorities she gave her rifle to
another Davidian during the shootout.100/
Kevin Whitecliff, 33, a father of two from Hawaii, had been at Mount Carmel
a year and left during the siege. Evidence presented against him
was: Marjorie Thomas said he claimed he said he had shot someone; Kathryn
Schroeder alleged he told her he shot at helicopters which Davidians say
were firing on the building.101/
Judge's Faulty Instructions Led to Convictions
Judge Smith gave the jurors a sixty-seven-page "Court's Instruction to
the Jury" setting out the charges and the specific rules of law which they
should use in determining innocence or guilt. Jury forewoman Sarah
Bain complained after the trial that Judge Smith had never informed the
jury that they might request relevant evidence that had not been presented.
She said, "If I knew we could ask for missing evidence, I would've done
so then." She particularly was concerned that prosecutors had presented
only the search and arrest warrants at trial, and not the affidavits.
She said jurors had looked for them among the "ton of paperwork," but never
found them.102/
On February 26, 1994 jurors found all eleven Davidians innocent of the
First Count of the indictment, conspiracy to murder federal agents, and
of the Second Count, aiding and abetting murder of federal agents.
Three Davidians were acquitted of all charges. Judge Smith did find
sufficient evidence that Davidians had acted in self-defense to allow defense
attorneys to bring it up in final arguments and to include self-defense
as a defense against the charges of murder of federal agents. Jurors
believed Davidians did in fact act in self defense. Jury forewoman
Sarah Bain said the one hour 9-1-1 tape--which jurors specifically asked
to hear again in the jury room--was the most impressive evidence to jurors
that Davidians had acted in self-defense.103/ One juror told a reporter,
"When we heard all that testimony, there was no way we could find them
guilty of murder. We felt provocation was pretty evident."104/
Unfortunately, with the agreement of defense attorneys, Judge Smith had
added a new charge to the Second Count--aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter.
(Most Davidian defendants did not find out about the new charge until just
before verdicts were read and were angry about its being added.105/)
Despite defense attorneys requests that he do so, Smith did not instruct
the jury on any grounds by which defendants might be found innocent of
this charge, i.e., self-defense. Sarah Bain admits that the lack
of any defense instruction forced jurors to find five Davidians--Renos
Avraam, Brad Branch, Jaime Castillo, Livingstone Fagan, and Kevin Whitecliff--guilty.
She said jurors believed aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter was
a minor charge that would earn them little time beyond that served.106/
In fact, the maximum sentence is ten years.
In his instructions to the jury, Judge Smith twice explicitly tied Count
Three, using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to the commission
of a crime of violence, only to Count One, conspiring to murder federal
agents. However, the jury did not read the instructions very carefully
and the connection between the charges was not specified on the verdict
form on which the jury relied. Confused jurors thought they were
finding seven Davidians--Renos Avraam, Brad Branch, Jaime Castillo, Graeme
Craddock, Livingstone Fagan, Ruth Riddle and Kevin Whitecliff--guilty of
carrying a weapon during the crime of aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter.
Again, jurors thought this was a minor charge for which Davidians would
receive short sentences.107/ In fact, the maximum sentence is 30
years. Sixty-nine-year-old juror Jeanette Felger told a reporter,
"I would never have voted that way if I had known it was connected to Count
One."108/
Smith admitted to defense attorneys this weapons verdict was inconsistent,
but refused to send the jury back to reconcile the verdicts, insisting
"that portion of the verdict simply cannot stand. . .So, the Court will
set that finding aside." Prosecutors did not object.109/ Because
Smith set the finding aside, defendants did not exercise their right to
"poll" the jury and see if each one did in fact support the final verdict.
However, on February 28, 1994, prosecutors asked Smith to reinstate the
weapons verdicts. On March 9, 1994, in his Memorandum Opinion and
Order, Judge Smith did so, citing previous case law. Smith argued
he only had spoken "prospectively in terms of a future written order" about
setting the verdict aside, since he was unsure of the law in this area.
Jurors also found Graeme Craddock guilty of possession of an unregistered
hand grenade despite the fact thate grenades was found six days after the
fire. Despite the lack of any evidence that Paul Fatta was involved
in illegaly converting weapons, jurors believed the government's testimony
that the guns bought by Fatta had in fact been converted to illegal machineguns,
and found him guilty of manufacturing and conspiring to manufacture machineguns.
Afterwards jury forewoman Sarah Bain acknowledged that she herself was
beginning to wonder if prosecutors and government weapons experts lied
about the weapons.110/
Judge Imposed Maximum Sentences
Despite the jurors' belief Davidians should get little time for the "minor
charges" on which they convicted them, and letters from two jurors requesting
leniency, Judge Smith threw the book at the Davidians. Smith claimed
that Davidians did indeed engage in a conspiracy to cause the death of
federal agents, shot first at BATF and murdered other Davidians--effectively
rejecting the jurors' finding that they were innocent of any such conspiracy.111/
Smith gave the five convicted Davidians the maximum sentence, 10 years.
Smith also agreed with prosecutors' arguments that the government can argue
someone carried a machinegun, even if it was not part of the original indictment.
They cited the "fortress theory"--that a defendant found in a place where
a large number of weapons have been accumulated can be assumed to have
had access to all those guns, legal and illegal. Until this time
the fortress theory only had been used in drug cases. Judge Smith
found that all defendants had "constructive possession" of automatic weapons
and sentenced seven Davidians to a total of 170 years.112/
Final sentences were: Renos Avraam, 40 years; Brad Branch, 40 years; Jaime
Castillo, 40 years; Graeme Craddock, 20 years; Livingstone Fagan, 40 years;
Paul Fatta, 15 years; Ruth Riddle, 5 years; and Kevin Whitecliff, 40 years.
Prosecution witness Kathryn Schroeder later received a three year sentence.
Davidian Appeals for Justice
Six Davidians, Renos Avraam, Brad Branch, Graeme Craddock, Jaime Castillo,
Paul Fatta, and Kevin Whitecliff, immediately appealed the verdicts and
sentences. All retained their original attorneys except Jaime Castillo
who engaged weapons expert Stephen Halbrook. Halbrook helped win
the June, 1994 Staples vs. the United States court case which protects
gun owners who unwittingly come into possession of an illegal weapon.
Ruth Riddle, who had received a reduced sentence of five years, did not
appeal, fearing judges might comply with any prosecution request and increase
her sentence. Livingstone Fagan, who faced a rigged trial with government
witnesses who lied about him and a judge who effectively prevented witnesses
from testifying on his behalf, expressed his contempt by refusing to appeal
his 40 year sentence. (However, should other Davidians' appeals succeed,
in part or in full, Riddle and Fagan would have avenues of legal recourse.)
Five Davidians are appealing for new trials or dismissal of verdicts for
the aiding and abetting manslaughter charge based on: the judge's failure
to instruct the jury as to any defense for the manslaughter charge; presentation
of insufficient evidence to justify the verdicts. They are appealing
for dismissal of the weapons charge based on: the fact that Title 18 924(c)(1)
clearly specifies that the defendant must be "convicted" of the first crime
(i.e., conspiracy to murder in the Davidians' case) before they can be
convicted of using a firearm in relation to the crime; the fact Judge Smith
stated he would "set aside" the charge and then reinstated it, a possible
case of double jeopardy. If those arguments fail, they ask for reduced
sentences based on: the fact that Davidians were not indicted for or convicted
of possession or use of machineguns; the lack of evidence any Davidians
carried illegal weapons; the sentences' inconsistency with the June, 1994
Staples vs. U.S. case which holds that the government must prove an individual
knew he or she was in possession of an illegal weapon. Two Davidians
are basing their call for dismissal of the grenade and automatic weapons
charges against them on insufficient evidence.
After the verdicts were announced, jury forewoman Sarah Bain went on a
number of radio talk shows to protest Judge Smith's actions in the case.
Bain told one reporter, "The federal government was absolutely out of control
there. We spoke in the jury room about the fact that the wrong people
were on trial, that it should have been the ones that planned the raid
and orchestrated it and insisted on carrying out this plan who should have
been on trial."113/
1.
Brad Branch interview, CNN, April 19, 1993.
2.
Jack B. Zimmermann, Esq. paper, "The Legacy of Waco: The Demise of ATF
and Justice Department Integrity," 1993.
3.
William Sessions interview, CNN, April 19, 1993; ABC-TV Special "Waco:
The Decision to Die," April 20, 1993.
4.
"FBI Agent Suggests Koresh was killed by vengeful aide," Dallas Morning
News, September 5, 1993.
5.
Stephen Labaton, "U.S. Opens Up to Avoid Backlash on Cult Attack," New
York Times, April 22, 1993, B13.
6.
Steve McVicker, July 22, 1993.
7.
Stephen Labaton, April 22, 1993, B13.
8.
"Poll: Most supported first raid," USA Today, April 21, 1993, A3.
9.
Mark Mayfield, "Poll: 93% blame Koresh," USA Today, April 21, 1993, A1.
10.
Elizabeth Drew, On the Edge: The Clinton Presidency, (New York: Simon &
Schuster), p. 131.
11.
Stephen Labaton, "Officials Contradict One Another on Rationale for Assault
on Cult," New York Times, April 21, 1993, A1.
12.
Federal News Service transcription of April 20, 1993 press conference.
13.
Elizabeth Drew, p. 133.
14.
Jerry Seper, "Reviewer disputes Clinton on Waco," Washington Times, April
27, 1995.
15.
Paul Craig Roberts, "Rallying Round Reno," Washington Times, May 7, 1993.
16.
Eldridge Cleaver, "Waco: Bill Clinton's Bay of Pigs," in James R. Lewis,
Editor, pgs. 235-36.
17.
"American Justice" program, "Attack at Waco," August 3, 1994.
18.
Trial transcript, p. 5539.
19.
Ibid. p. 610.
20.
Justice Department report, pgs. 308-09.
21.
Ibid. p. 228; Treasury Department report, p. 128.
22.
Trial transcript, pgs. 1080-81, 1087-88.
23.
Ibid. p. 617.
24.
James L. Pate, July, 1994, p. 49; trial transcript, p. 6847.
25.
Michael deCourcy Hinds, "Arson Investigators Say Cult Members Started Fire,"
New York Times, April 27, 1993.
26.
Michael deCourcy Hinds, April 28, 1993, A16.
27.
Trial transcript, pgs. 1244-7.
28.
"Cultist's lawyer calls bulldozing of site a cover-up," Washington Times,
May 13, 1993.
29.
Sue Anne Pressley and Mary Jordan, April 21, 1993.
30.
Justice Department report, p. 329.
31.
Trial transcript, pg. 602, 668.
32.
J. Michael Kennedy, "Waco Cult Set Fire, Texas Officials
Say," Los Angeles Times, April 27, 1993, A7;
Michael deCourcy
Hinds, April 27, 1993.
33.
Trial transcript, pgs. 5852-55.
34.
James L. Pate, October, 1993, p. 75.
35.
James L. Pate, November, 1993, pgs. 74-75.
36.
Jack B. Zimmermann, Esq. paper, 1993.
37.
Associated Press wire story, April 27, 1993, 04:10 EDT.
38.
Trial transcript, pgs. 5839-46.
39.
Justice Department report, Fire report, p. 8.
40.
Trial transcript, pgs. 5836-37, 5847, 5859-62, 5869.
41.
Ibid. p. 5748.
42.
Ibid. p. 5932.
43.
Ibid. pgs. 5811, 5816, 5834, 5951.
44.
Justice Department report, Fire report, p. 9.
45.
Ibid. p. 3.
46.
Ibid. p. 9.
47.
Ibid. p. 3.
48.
Hugh Aynesworth, "Koresh followers set fires," Washington Times, April
27, 1993.
49.
Trial transcript, pgs. 5819-22.
50.
"Cultists had tunnel to escape fire, arson prober says," Washington Times,
May 1, 1993, A5.
51.
Justice Department report, Fire report, p. 10.
52.
Jerry Seper, "Foster felt Waco was 'his fault," Washington Times, May 23,
1995, A1, A13.
53.
Frank J. Murray, "Altman gets close to the heat," Washington Times, March
3, 1994, A1, A10; Susan Schmidt, "Altman Testimony Disputed," Washington
Post, July 24, 1994, A1; "Act 2," John McCaslin, Washington Times, September
23, 1994.
54.
Jerry Seper, "Hubbell pleads guilty to fraud," Washington Times, December
7, 1994, A1, A16; Sharon LaFraniere and Pierre Thomas, "Surprised Colleagues
Discover 'a Webb Hubbell nobody knew'," Washington Post, December 7, 1994;
Susan Schmidt, "Hubbell Pleads Guilty to Fraud Charges," Washington Post,
December 7, 1994, A1, A18.
55.
Jerry Seper, "Whitewater probe grows to include state agency," and "State
agency Major Source of funds for Clinton backers," Washington Times, January
24, 1994, A1, A9.
56.
Stephen Labaton, "Inquiry Won't Look at Final Waco Raid," New York Times,
May 16, 1993, A20.
57.
Stephen Labaton, "Justice Inquiry Will Now Examine Assault on Cult," New
York Times, May 18, 1993.
58.
William Safire, "Waco, Reno, Iraq-gate," Washington Post, October 14, 1993.
59.
Michael deCourcy Hinds, "Toll is Lowered for Sect Dead to Around 72," New
York Times, April 30, 1993, A12.
60.
Jerry Seper, "Reviewer disputes Clinton on Waco," Washington Times, April
27, 1995.
61.
Alan A. Stone, M.D. report to Justice Department, 1993, p. 12.
62.
Nancy Ammerman report to Justice Department, 1993, p. 8.
63.
Nancy Ammerman, private communication, February, 1994.
64.
Lawrence E. Sullivan report to Justice Department, October 8, 1993, p.
5-6.
65.
Edward S. G. Dennis, Jr. report to Justice Department in Recommendations
of Experts for Improvements in Federal Law Enforcement after Waco, October
8, 1993, p. 26.
66.
June 9, 1993, House Appropriations subcommittee hearing, pgs. 99-129.
67.
Associated Press story, "FBI tape of Waco talks probed," Washington Times,
June 17, 1993.
68.
Jerry Seper, "Tragedy Blamed on Cult: Reno Says Report is Not A Whitewash,"
Washington Times, October 9, 1993.
69.
Michael Kirkland, "Justice Department rejects charges of Waco `whitewash,'"
United Press International, October 14, 1993; "No sanctions expected in
Waco raid," Washington Times, October 14, 1993.
70.
Michael Isikoff, October 9, 1993, A10.
71.
Alan A. Stone, M.D. report to the Justice Department, 1993, p. 46.
72. "The truth about Waco, still untold,"
Washington Times, October 13, 1993); "The Waco Whitewash," New York Times,
October 12, 1993.
73.
Kirk Lyons, private communication, June, 1994; Michael Isikoff, "FBI Director
Suspends Head of New York Office," Washington Post, December 22, 1993.
74.
David Johnston and Stephen Labaton, "F.B.I. Shaken by Inquiry into Idaho
Siege," New York Times, November 25, 1993; "Senior FBI official disputes
Potts over orders in Weaver shootout," Washington Times, March 6, 1995.
75.
Jerry Seper, "Craig hits holdup on probe report," Washington Times, November
22, 1994, A3; Pierre Thomas, "FBI to Consider Disciplining Agents in '92
Idaho Shootout," Washington Post, December 1, 1994, A1, A24; Jerry Seper,
"Five federal agents could face murder charges in Idaho raid," Washington
Times, December 25, 1994, A3.
76.
Jerry Seper, "FBI disciplines 12 in Weaver case," Washington Times, January
7, 1995, A5; Jerry Seper, "FBI official called unfit," Washington Times,
April 14, 1995.
77.
Jerry Seper, "Reno Promotes Censured FBI boss," Washington Post, May 3,
1995; Ruth Marcus, "FBI Chief Gets His Man for No. 2 Post," Washington
Post, May 7, 1995, A6; Pierre Thomas, "Probe of FBI Siege Questioned,"
Washington Post, May 12, 1995.
78.
This section is a condensation of a much longer, fully footnoted version
and has been selectively footnoted.
79.
Hugh Aynesworth, "Waco judge" `Smart' and `vindictive.'" Washington Times,
January 30, 1994, A6; Hugh Aynesworth, "Waco judge cleared of lying in
opponent's trial," Washington Times, February 6, 1994.
80.
Lone Star FIJA Press Releases, January 3, 1994 and January 11, 1994.
81.
Jack DeVault, p. 41; January 6, 1994 trial transcript, pgs. 5, 6, 13.
82.
Jack DeVault, p. 43; Jack Devault, private communication, November, 1994;
January 6, 1994 pre-trial transcript, pgs. 15-16.
83.
January 6, 1994 trial transcript, pgs. 45-46; January 10, 1994 trial transcript,
pgs. 4-5, 81-83; defense attorney Steven Rosen on CNN Court News, January
10, 1994; Egon Richard Tausch article, 1994; Benedict D. LaRosa, "The Branch
Davidian Trial: An Interview with Sarah Bain, Forewoman," Fully Informed
Jury Association News, June 24, 1994.
84.
Transcript, pgs. 410-11, 457-58, 579, 3058-61 3269-70, 3379, 3396, 4115,
4628-29, 6359, 6359, 6362, 6479-85.
85.
Trial transcript, pgs. 4826-28, 6841-44, 7262.
86.
Ibid. p. 754.
87.
Ibid. pgs. 1657-68.
88.
Ibid. pgs. 4126-27, 4240; "Koresh Follower Pleads Guilty to Resisting Officer,"
New York Times, September 12, 1993.
89.
Trial transcript, pgs. 4157-58.
90.
Ibid. pgs. 6083-92.
91.
Ibid. p. 7166.
92.
Ibid. pgs. 1199-2001, 2768.
93.
Ibid. pgs. 2503, 2988.
94.
Majorie Thomas testimony, November 17-18, 1993, pgs. 56-57;
trial transcript, pgs. 4517, 4492, 5379-80, 5450-52,
6086-92, 7166.
95.
Majorie Thomas testimony, November 17-18, 1993, pgs. 45, 48-51; trial transcript,
pgs. 574, 579, 4099, 4153.
96.
Majorie Thomas testimony, November 17-18, 1993, pgs. 45; trial transcript,
pgs. 2972-77, 4500-01, 3058-60, 3096.
97.
Majorie Thomas testimony, November 17-18, 1993, p. 46; trial transcript,
pgs. 4502, 6076, 6352, 6375, 6390-92.
98.
Trial transcript, pgs. 1541-42, 1590-92, 2641-42, 2548, 2683, 4129.
99.
Trial transcript, pgs. 1170, 1179-82.
100.
Majorie Thomas testimony, November 17-18, 1993, p. 45; trial transcript,
pgs. 4387, 4496, 5507.
101.
Majorie Thomas testimony, November 17-18, 1993, pgs. 48-51; trial transcript,
p. 4515.
102.
Benedict LaRosa, June 24, 1994.
103.
Sarah Bain, private communication, June, 1994.
104.
Dick Reavis, "Waco: Justice Takes a Holiday," Soldier of Fortune, October,
1994, p. 39.
105.
Livingstone Fagan paper, August, 1994, p. 20; private communication with
five Davidian prisoners, June 19, 1994; Jack DeVault, p. 182-83.
106.
Associated Press, "Cult Jurors Rip Government's Action in Raid," Austin
American Statesman, March 1, 1994, B3; Sarah Bain, private communication,
June, 1994; Sarah Bain, June, 1994, letter to Judge Walter J. Smith.
107.
Benedict D. LaRosa, June 24, 1994; Sarah Bain, private communication, June,
1994.
108.
Dick Reavis, October, 1994, p. 39.
109.
Trial transcript, pgs. 7409-10.
110.
Benedict D. LaRosa, June 24, 1994; Sarah Bain, private communication, October,
1994.
111.
June 17, 1994 trial transcript, pgs. 201-02.
112.
Ibid. pgs. 205-19.
113.
Dean M. Kelley, "Waco: A Massacre and Its Aftermath," First Things, May,
1995, p. 37.