-Caveat Lector-

www.okcbombing.org/html/gj_rsp.htm


IN RESPONSE TO THE OK COUNTY GRAND JURY
FINAL REPORT
Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee
By Cate McCauley, Executive Director
January 1, 1999
On December 30, 1998, after being in session for 18 months, the
OK County Grand Jury issued their final report. The jurors were
charged by the citizens of Oklahoma to investigate who planned
and carried out the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building on
April 19, 1995.
The grand jurors interviewed 117 witnesses, the last of whom
was FBI agent Jon Hersley. The report did not include any
indictments against Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, the Fortiers
or any other co-conspirators. One indictment was handed down
regarding a charge of jury tampering.
REVIEWING THE EVIDENCE
The grand jurors worked for 133 days. And while everyone
deeply appreciates their sacrifices and how this impacted their
lives, it's still a fraction of the time this committee and others
involved in the bombing case have spent researching the
evidence. Reviewing this massive amount of information available
takes months, if not years, to sort through.
Throughout my time here, I have discovered a fundamental
difference between what the OKBIC is trying to accomplish and
what the grand jury had to consider. There is a huge gap between
what makes common sense and what is considered legally
relevant: Similar to the difference between a reporter covering a
story and a lawyer working on the case.
Some have accused us of trying to make everyone a part of some
evil conspiracy plot. That is not true. We have refuted many of
the so-called conspiracy theories and tried to be objective and
not to jump to any conclusions.
OVERVIEW:
The grand jury report includes a complete rundown of the federal
government's case against Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh,
almost word for word. I won't get into every detail at this time,
but I do want to point a few items, which were proven not to be
true according trial testimony.
1) The key found in a nearby alleyway, which reportedly
belonged to the Ryder truck, had none of McVeigh's fingerprints
on it and did not turn the truck's lock.
2) The FBI reported that ammonium nitrate residue was found on
McVeigh's shirt, according to the grand jury overview. This is not
true. According to testimony, no ANFO was found on
McVeigh's shirt, hair, fingernail scrapings, on his boots or his car.
3) They concluded that Terry Nichols robbed Roger Moore to
finance the bombing. Even the federal jurors did not believe this
to be true. It's all in the transcripts. By Moore's own testimony,
the robber did not fit Nichols' description, he did not help the
robber load weapons, and was never untied by the suspect. Let's
not forget this supposed robbery took place after the alleged
bomb components were purchased.
4) The grand jurors made no mention of the perjured testimony of
Karen Anderson, Moore's girlfriend. She wrote Moore's gun list,
which included serial numbers, back in January of 1993.
However, this list contained a gun purchased by Terry Nichols in
November of 1993. Clearly Ms. Anderson is either clairvoyant
or someone helped her create this gun list after Nichols' property
had been seized.
5) Jurors said a drill bit taken from Terry Nichols' home matched
the markings on a lock found at the scene of a quarry robbery. In
fact, the judge did not allow any such testimony, only an opinion
that it might be ``consistent with" that drill bit. There was no
match.
6) The report relied heavily (almost exclusively) on the testimony
of Michael and Lori Fortier despite the fact that almost everyone,
including the judge and juries, had real problems with their
reliability and motivations. They are admitted liars and drug users,
but somehow their testimony was believed when other decent
people are presumed to be lying.  It is worth noting the Fortier's
were never subjected to any lie detector examinations.
7) A phone call these jurors claim was made to Nichols from
McVeigh on 4/15/95 did not show any connection, a duration of
0:00 seconds. They said this call somehow proves Nichols was
lying when he told the FBI he had had no contact with Timothy
McVeigh for one or two months before Easter Sunday.
A. JOHN DOE II
One of the most confusing aspects of this case is the eyewitnesses
and the John Doe sightings. I completely understand their
frustration over this part of the case. It's a mess. The problems
with the Elliott Body shop and the identity of ``Bob Kling" will be
looked at closely in our upcoming report. But even Vicki Beemer
testified someone was with Kling.
There is a real problem trying to make all these descriptions fit the
mysterious ``John Doe #2." It may miss an important point. What
if there was more than one John Doe?
The jurors reported that a woman taking her child to the doctor
was driving the brown pick-up truck that became the subject of
the original all-points-bulletin. There is a very reliable witness who
saw middle-eastern men in a similar truck. She explained this on
KFOR shortly after the bombing. This person never testified at
the grand jury.
The grand jurors left open the possibility of a John Doe. That's
good.
B. CONSPRIACY/PRIOR KNOWLEDGE
Much has been said about this and going over each point is not
necessary at this time. What we have always said is there was a
``state of heightened alert." That is well-documented. 475 victims
families, including a bombing victims spokesperson who is
constantly criticizing us, think they have a case and want to file a
civil suit.
Trying to insinuate this committee thought everyone knew the
building was going to blow up and they allowed their fellow
Oklahomans to die. This is NOT true. Despite years of trying to
correct this misconception, local spokespeople keep misquoting
Charles Key as one who believes this.
We understand many bomb threats come into law enforcement all
the time: Some threats are taken more seriously than others. We
just want to know what specific warnings may relate to what
happened in Oklahoma City. That's not an unfair question.
C. ELOHIM CITY
On this subject, I tend to agree with the grand jurors with one
exception: Aside from the phone call on 4/5/95, Timothy
McVeigh did receive a traffic ticket on 10/12/93 at 2:40 AM
near Elohim City on highway 59.
There are still some concerns over why Andres Strassmeir was
not detained earlier� or at all for that matter. There are some
compelling reasons to interrogate this person about his
knowledge and/or his motives for living at Elohim City.
Was Carol Howe's warnings part of that overall ``state of
heightened alert"? Why did the government charge her of crimes
(which she was acquitted of) prior to the McVeigh trial for the
very activities the ATF had hired her to do? The way the
government handled this situation and their subsequent behavior
casts a long shadow.
Concerns remain over whether there any connections to the
so-called mid-west bank robbers, who also frequented Elohim
City prior to the bombing. Although I do not believe there is a
direction connection, when you hear one of the Kehoe brothers
say in open court that his brother was aware a bombing would
occur, it makes you wonder. We have nothing about that since
his proclamation. Looking into that aspect of this case, one can
see through a porthole into a world of crime motivated by distrust
for the government, which created a hotbed of illegal activities.
The Elohim City situation is a perfect illustration of what was
happening throughout the country following the siege on Waco:
extreme dissatisfaction and distrust of the government; as well as
FBI and ATF agents or provocateurs who seemed to encourage
people to act against their government. But all of this is not
proven enough to take into the legal realm. We accept that for
now.
D. STING
Again, I would just point to that ``state of heighten alert." Indeed,
all the evidence they examined may be pure speculation and not
provable to legal standards the grand jurors required.
E. TELEPHONE CALLS
I want to thank the jurors on this category. Our committee did
not have the authority or ability to track phone calls. The jurors
had that power. They cleared up some serious confusion by
reviewing these records.
One point I would like to clarify is the call to Walter Reed Army
Hospital mentioned in the grand jury report. First, we never went
public with this information even though we knew about it since
November of 1997. Because the caller mentioned the Governor
of Oklahoma's office, we do not believe this proves the Governor
knew. Therefore, this news was not released because we knew it
would be taken that way.
We are not sure from the reading the report if telephone records
were ever double-checked. However, the grand jury confirms
this call did take place. Our main concern remains who on Earth
would telephone this facility prior to the bombing and inquire
about ``triage for blast overpressure victims."
G. SOME HAVE CLAIMED THAT LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND RESCUE WORKEERS
ARRIVED TOO SOON AFTER THE BOMBING
The grand jurors provide a reasonable and thorough explanation
of the local law enforcement response. They responded in a way
that should make all Americans proud. Our question has always
been over the reported federal presence so quickly after the
blast, not the local police, fire, rescue workers, medical personnel
or citizens. No one on this committee has ever tried to ``twist this
into something evil." As we have stated repeatedly, there are a
large number of law enforcement officers who support what this
committee has tried to do.
H. ELEVATORS
Frankly, I don't care who was in the building, or where they
were. However, considering the elevator maintenance supervisor
and members of the General Services Administration say it
absolutely could not have happened as described and they have
photos that prove that fact. We are all left wondering why the
jurors chose to believe agent Schickendanz. Even the lead federal
prosecutor in the McVeigh's trial, Joe Hartzler, admitted to one
bombing victim that the government would not continue to claim
the agents were in the elevator. Well, so be it.
I. UNIDENTIFIED FINGERPRINTS
This conclusion, if we can call it that, is woefully short of a
reasonable explanation. Indeed it is a perfect example of FBI
double-speak. What do the jurors mean by saying the prints will
be matched ``if future evidence warrants it"? Does cold-blooded
murder warrant finding everyone? The FBI's excuse of trying to
match fingerprints to ``known" suspects is unacceptable. Isn't it a
basic principal to use this technology to find the suspects you
don't know? Why do we have a data bank of 35 million
fingerprints if we're not going to use it to find all those involved?
J. THE MORE THAN ONE BOMB THEORY
We will explore the science in our up-coming report. It's a
lengthy analysis of the government's own reports, no hearsay will
be necessary. I only wish the jurors had heard from the expert
with 30 years of NASA experience. This is a highly complicated,
scientific issue that really deserves reasonable public debate.
K. THE SHERIFF'S BOMB TRUCK
We have no comments at this time.
L. WAS MORE THAN ONE RYDER TRUCK USED IN
THE BOMBING OF THE ALFRED P. MURRAH
BUILDING
This category is a real mystery. The Nichols' jurors said they
believed more than one truck was used. I have studied the
testimony and believe some of these sightings were real, but
certainly not all. Why did people see a Ryder truck at the
Dreamland before the bomb truck was rented? There is no
mention of this their report.
As for the Geary Lake sightings, many have doubts this bomb
was even built at the lake. But if it was, and the FBI wanted to
know about all the sightings and asked people to come forward,
and they did after news accounts, why discount those witnesses
for doing their civic duty? That's not fair.
If hearing of news reports is their criteria for discounting
witnesses, then they would have to discount the testimony of
those involved in the ammonium nitrate purchases, the
nitro-menthane purchase in Texas, the quarry robbery, as well as
bombing victims Germaine Johnson and Daina Bradley.
IN CONCLUSION:
Judging from what I have read and heard regarding the grand
jury's report, I can tell you with the absolute certainty that the
grand jurors did not read the trial transcripts. Indeed, I remember
a local television news report months ago saying members of the
District Attorney's office were reviewing the testimony. The DA's
office is NOT the grand jury nor are they objective bystanders.
Therein lies the fundamental problem many have with the grand
jury report: They never studied the case fully. The mistakes
contained in the grand jury report prove that to be true. For if
they had, other items of interest would have stood out and
hopefully piqued their interest. They would also probably still be
in session because it would take a very long time to review and
analyze all that information.
After a lengthy court battle to gain access to the federal case
work and federal agents, only one agent was ever called to
testify. It is doubtful, given the six week the grand jurors had
these ``massive" files, that there was time to review them
thoroughly.
Are the grand jurors part of some grand conspiracy? No, not at
all. It is disgusting to suggest anyone with serious questions should
be automatically labeled as having such beliefs. I believe this is
simply a case of good people trusting and relying on their legal
advisors. They most likely told them the government's case had
no flaws and there was no need to investigate it any further since
the prosecutors had already done that in the federal trials. It's not
a farfetched assumption to assume the jurors depended on that
advice.
The grand jury's legal advisors were biased. I witnessed that
myself while I was before the grand jury. That's not too difficult to
comprehend either, for it's OK District Attorney Bob Macy, the
legal advisors' employer, who plans to try both defendants in
Oklahoma. And if anyone can convince me that any prosecutor
can keep their opinions to themselves for 18 months, I'll eat my
shoes without salt or pepper.
Just for the record: I have spent about 500+ days, oftentimes
12-18 hours a day, looking into this case, studying the transcripts
and documents, and still have only scratched the surface. Charles
Key has been deluged with information (both reliable and
unreliable) over the three and half years he has struggled with
trying to uncover the truth.
We have nothing but the greatest sympathy for anyone trying to
make heads or tails out of this case. The layers one has to dig
through go very deep indeed. But as I said before, there are
major differences between reporting, investigating, finding the
legal relevance necessary to take something into court and the
whole truth.
I ask everyone to please stay tuned, for in 30-60 days we plan to
release our own report. I would not dare claim our report will be
the final word on the OK bombing case, but we are working very
hard on making this case clearer to for everyone to.

[

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to