[IPSM] John Graham Defense, Feb. 23, 2005

[Macdonald Stainsby]

Dear friends and supporters,

We ask you to support us now, at this critical time for John
Graham. It is so important that Canada's Minister of Justice Irwin  Cotler
-- and the public at large -- hear from all those opposed to  the
extradition of John Graham.

In light of what has been revealed in the recent extradition
hearings -- the US government's reliance on non-existent
evidence, negligent and/or intentional inaccuracies, the apparent  use of
coercion, etc.-- our goal is to flood the desk of Minister  Cotler's
officewith letters expressing opposition to John's
extradition.

WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW!

We hope you will act now by sending a letter to Minister Cotler,
and also to every newspaper in your area (major and independent
papers, independent publications, and internet-based websites
and forums).

We have prepared some tips for letter writing, as well as topics
which you can consider for your letters. While your own words are 
optimal, please feel free to use our prepared text eitherfor
inspiration, or "as is".

We will also be modifying the sample letter on the John Graham
Defense Committee website for your use, as well.

Thank you for your urgently needed action at this critical time.
Together, we can turn the tide towards truth and justice.

Matthew Lien
www.matthewlien.com
John Graham Defense Committee
www.grahamdefense.org


Tips for Letters to Editors

- Begin your letter with a clear statement opposing the extradition  of
the First Nation and Canadian citizen John Graham.
- Determine the maximum word count for the newspaper you are
sending to; most have a limit of about 250 words.
- Use your own words, even if you modify the text we have
provided.
- If you are relying mostly on our text,consider writingthe first 
paragraph in your own words.
- Request a response at the end of your letter.
- Include your name, address, e-mail (if sending by e-mail), and
telephone number.


Key Points For Letters to Justice Minister Cotler

- Begin your letter with a clear statement opposing the extradition  of
the First Nation and Canadian citizen John Graham.
- Use your own words, even if you modify the text we have
provided.
- If you are relying mostly on our text,consider writingthe first 
paragraph in your own words.
- Request a response at the end of your letter.
- Include your name, address, e-mail (if sending by e-mail), and
telephone number.

For letters to the Minister, the most effective forms of
correspondence are in the following order:
1) Letters sent by mail; or faxes
2) Letters sent by e-mail

- Address your letter to:
Honourable Irwin Cotler, Minister of Justice and Attorney General  of Canada

Mail to:
Honourable Irwin Cotler
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
284 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1A 0H8

E-mail to:
webadmin at justice.gc.ca

______________________________________________

Suggested Topics and Text for Letters
______________________________________________


Flawed Certification of Evidence

The U.S. has either negligently or deliberately failed to disclose 
glaring inconsistencies between the certified evidence and the
actual evidence.

One alleged witness, Al Gates, had been dead for nine months
from the time the U.S. certified him as being available for trial.  When
asked in an interview how the U.S. had certified a dead
witness, U.S. Attorney Jim McMahon simply replied, “I’m not sure
how long he’s been dead.”

Frank Dillon, another witness to whom John Graham allegedly
confessed, told a Grand Jury that he did not make the statement
attributed to him in the certified evidence, and that he did not hear  any
such confession.

Arlo Looking Cloud, the only potential alleged eyewitness, says
detectives plied him with alcohol and drugs to coerce his
testimony from him. He has since recanted his entire testimony,
and has issued an affidavit refusing to testify should John Graham  be
brought to trial in the United States. He recently demonstrated  this
refusal to testify before a Grand Jury.

While U.S. Attorney Jim McMahon has refused to comment on the
impact of losing the testimony of Gates, Dillon, and Looking
Cloud, we can easily see that the entire case has no substance. If  the
U.S. provides a certified summary of evidence which is proven  to be
largely inaccurate with key elements that no longer exist
(and perhaps never did), it would be blatantly negligent of the
Canadian Government to extradite its citizen under such
circumstances.

Concern for Canadian Sovereignty

Canada's very sovereignty comes into question when a
requesting country is not required to disclose its evidence to the 
Canadian court, and when Canada's Supreme Court Justice is
reduced to the level of a rubber-stamping bureaucrat.

Furthermore, if the Canadian government represents the
requesting country, who then will defend the constitutional and
legal rights of the Canadian being sought?

In the case of John Graham, his lawyers are providing their
service without adequate financial compensation. As a result, they  are
unable to devote the time such a complex case requires.
Meanwhile, the United States is able to rely on its vast resources  and
the resources of the Canadian government.

Considering the United States' disregard for international law and  fair
treatment of prisoners, Canadian citizens should be deeply
concerned for their sovereignty which has apparently been
surrendered by their own government.

The Historical Relevance of Leonard Peltier

We can look to the handling of the Leonard Peltier extradition as a 
shameful precedent. In 1976, Canada extradited AIM member
Leonard Peltier to the U.S. on the basis of two affidavits signed by  the
Lakota woman Myrtle Poor Bear, who claimed to have
witnessed the shooting of two FBI agents. Myrtle Poor Bear later
testified that FBI agent David Price frightened her into making
false statements.

Arlo Looking Cloud, the only alleged eyewitness in the case
against John Graham,is described by his attorney, Terry Gilbert
of the Centre for Constitutional Rights in New York, as "a
homeless alcoholic for more than 20 years, vulnerable to
manipulation by the detective in Denver.”

Myrtle Poor Bear was a single mother also struggling with
alcoholism and depression. Hotel receipts show that between
February 19 and 23, FBI agents David Price and William Wood
held her in a hotel room in Nebraska, where Poor Bear says she
was scared into signing the affidavits against Peltier.

Her first affidavit, from February 19, alleges she was Peltier’s
girlfriend and that he confessed to her. The two affidavits signed  four
days later claimed she witnessed the murders first hand.
Canada’s Crown prosecutor Bill Halprin presented only the last
two versions to the Canadian court.

Poor Bear later testified that she had been coerced, that she had  not
witnessed the shootings, had not been Peltier’s girlfriend, and  had never
met him. “I was forced to sign those papers,” she said,  claiming Price
and Wood showed her pictures of the dead Anna
Mae Aquash. “The agents are always talking about Anna Mae 

about the time she died.”

A year later, in Canada, she said that Agent Price “showed me
pictures of the body and said that if I don’t cooperate, this is what  may
happen to me.” She claims that agent Wood “said that they
could get away with killing because they were agents.”

Judge Donald Ross, during Peltier’s appeal in 1977, said the
Myrtle Poor Bear affidavits show “the United States is willing to  resort
to any tactic in order to bring somebody back to the United  States from
Canada.”

Former Canadian Minister of Indian Affairs, Warren Allmand,
declined to intervene in the Peltier extradition on the advice that, 
“justice would take its course.” Mr. Allmand now feels “betrayed
and insulted” by the FBI’s “deliberate use of fraud.”

In 1992, fifty-five Canadian MPs filed a brief to a U.S. court
affirming that Canada had been duped into extraditing Peltier.
This is a case directly related to the parties and the events
involved with the John Graham extradition case.

In an apparent attempt tocoerce John Graham into testifying,
agents visited John Graham in the Yukon in 1989, urging him to
accuse others of murdering Anna Mae Aquash. “They told me that
if I didn’t cooperate, they’d go after me.” In 1995, former BIA
policeman Bob Ecoffey visited Graham in Whitehorse with an
RCMP officer present. Ecoffey offered Graham “immunity,” if he
cooperated. “Immunity from what?" Graham replied, insisting he
had no need for immunity, as he was not guilty of anything.

In another display of apparent coercion, the only video-taped
statement by Looking Cloud was recordedwithout his lawyer
present, and while he was under the influence of drugs and/or
alcohol. Even if this video-tape was considered to bereliable, it  could
not be admitted as evidence under U.S. law because
Looking Cloud has refused to testify in person.

Leonard Peltier has recently sworn an affidavit describing how an 
investigator paid by the FBI, Robert Branscombe, visited Peltier in 
prison where he offered  Peltier his freedom in return for false
testimony against John Graham. Leonard declined the offer,
saying that he did not want to be another Myrtle Poor Bear.

Unanswered Questions

Why did the FBI cordon offthe scene where the body of Anna
Mae Aquash wasfound, on a reservation where they had no
authority?No such attention was afforded numerous other violent
deaths on the reservation during the “reign of terror” in the 1970s.  The
FBI claimed the Major Crimes Act gave them jurisdiction.
However, they had determined the cause of death was exposure
— not a "major crime" at all.

Why did the FBI choose to conduct their own private autopsy,
during which they failed to detect blood-stained clothing, blood-
matted hair, a point-blank bullet wound in the back of the head,
and a bullet lodged in the cheek? All this was apparently
overlooked by the FBI's sanctioned pathologist, while Agent David  Price
looked on. And yet, these features were immediately
observed in a second independent autopsy after Anna Mae's body
was exhumed due to suspicions that the FBI were concealing the
truth about her death.

Why was Agent David Price unable to identify Anna Mae in the
autopsy, even though he had interrogated her at length not long
before, and had listed her as "wanted" by the FBI?

Why did the FBI order the unusual procedure of having Anna
Mae's hands chopped off and sent to Washington, D.C. in jars of
formaldehyde for identification? FBI Regional Supervisor Norman
Zagrossi said he was not familiar with the technique of severing
hands for identification.

Why did the FBI have Anna Mae’s unidentified body hastily buried
without a death certificate or burial permit?

The documented evidence pertaining to the autopsy and burial of
Anna Mae Pictou-Aquash justify an investigation into the FBI’s
handling Anna Mae's death. The case against John Graham
should not be allowed to distract attention away from a critical
examination of how the FBI and other government agencies acted
during the climate of racism and the 1970’s “reign of the terror” in  the
Pine Ridge area.

- end -



--
Macdonald Stainsby
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
In the contradiction lies the hope.
--Brecht.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/ipsm-l/attachments/20050223/6dfbc89f/attachment.html>