Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire FBI YouTube video of traffic stop of Occupiers from aircraft perspective...

Armchair Matlocks at the 'fire, TFF.....

For some of us, it's not that we don't care - it's that we take the video in the context of the witness statements.....some of which are absolutely ridiculous.

Some new bystander video of the arrest

“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.”

Please provide some clarity for the rest of us. Which statements are ridiculous? How did that help you to interpret what you saw on the video?

Seriously? You really need me to explain it?

Let's start with a witness who claims she can see what's going on while ducking for cover. The same one that said bullets were - in her words - "bouncing off the window". Why would I believe a word she says contradictory to others or to what I see?

That's all the help I care to give you. You're on your own for the rest. It's there for you to find if you curb your bias.

And another account I haven't seen before: http://koin.com/2016/01/27/witness-lot-of-shooting-during-militia-arrest/

You're not challenged, you're asking questions that need answering. THE questions that need answering. Without the answers to those questions, we DO NOT KNOW what happened.

The one's that don't care about precisely those questions, for the sake of accuracy, have drunk the guv Koolaid and can be ignored.

Here is a link to the testimony of the young girl that I heard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSwAeVI1abc She does say that they stayed low as they left the initial stop because they were being shot at. She goes on to describe the road block, swerving off the road, and the shooting of Lavoy. Why is it inconceivable that she lifted her head at some point to see what was happening? If she doesn't describe lifting her head does that mean it didn't happen?

Here is another link to the testimony of Shawna Cox with much better audio. http://www.freecapitalist.com/2016/...mbush-and-murder-of-lavoy-finicum-video/
The interview begins at 12:30. Again, she describes hunkering down as they left the initial stop, as they approached the roadblock, and again after they went off the road. This is not necessarily incompatible with never lifting her head enough to see something. She says that she saw Lavoy leave the car with his hands up. Interestingly, she does not see him get shot. Maybe she was lying low at this point? She says that the others saw him get shot. She does describe "bullets" bouncing off one of the windows while breaking others. I'm not sure what to make of this, but does that make her a liar?

I think if you listen to both accounts you will agree that they are consistent. It doesn't mean they aren't wrong or even lying about some things. I don't see anything that makes it obvious we should dismiss as not being credible. Like anybody else, I have my biases. I don't claim to know what happened in Oregon. I just don't think we can say for sure based on that video. Perhaps you should have a look at your own bias too? I watched the other video that was posted, and I found that less helpful. It appears that the witnesses arrived after the shooting had already taken place.

This witness describes what he calls a shootout. He says that he can't be sure how many shots came from the vehicle.

Here is a link to the FBI statement. http://www.ktvz.com/news/full-statement-of-fbi-update-on-refuge-takeover-shooting/37697288
It doesn't describe any shots fired from the vehicle, but it doesn't say they didn't fire either.

Looks like the waters just get muddier.

Consistent with what? Shawna Cox claims several times that the agents wanted them dead. So why aren't they? She says they had laser dots all over them while bullets were flying. Are the OSP and FBI such poor shots that they can't hit a target their lasers are on? And bullets bouncing off the window. She also resorts to a lot of "I don't know", "I guess", "my guess is...", and the like in the interview - while some of the time she is describing what she sees in the video that she didn't see in real time. Heck - she can't even get what she sees in the video right. She describes Finicum's body laying on the snow with his right hand on his chest and his left hand extended - exactly the opposite of what is plain to see. Oh - and don't forget...when she says he has no gun, she is describing the video - not her own eye witness account. I can't tell if he has a gun in his hand or not by the video. Can you?

My bias - if I have one - is actually towards the feds abusing their authority. Yet, I can't ignore that Ms. Cox seems to have succumbed to perception skewed by panic, ignorance, and her own bias. Therefore, I believe my eyes more than her.

Victoria claims Finicum's hands were up when he was shot and they were still up after he was dead on the ground. I invite you to look again at the video. She is just flat wrong about that. She seems to be claiming that Finicum was shot six times on the ground, which contradicts Cox's statement - but I'm not sure about that (the girl's statement is largely incoherent). And then there are the "ton of LEO vehicles". "Forty vehicles". I'm at a loss there. Where are all those other vehicles? In the trees in the deep snow?

Clearly, Victoria's perception is questionable as well.

Cox claims that the agents shot up the vehicle heavily after they exited it. When did they do that? For the 10+ minutes of the unedited video after they left the vehicle, the pickup is fairly surrounded with LEO who are clearly not shooting but attending to other business. They're not ducking for cover. So when did the truck annihilation begin?

I'm sure we are all dying to see detailed close-range photos of the vehicle after the action, but at this point, I have a hard time believing much of either of the women's accounts.

So much for the usual cry of “If they only had video, we’d know what happened.”

Also, does anybody know if there is cellular coverage along the route? If so, there probably is a LOT of audio of the “occupiers” stored on digital media.

If you listen to Shawna's testimony (link above), she claims that it occurred in an area void of cell coverage. She seems to think that this was the result of deliberate planning.

I would say they are consistent in that they both tell basically the same stories. They both say that the police fired at Ryan Payne without warning at the initial stop and that the firing continued after they left. They both say that were shot at many times after the car went off the road. They both describe the police firing what sounds like tear gas. Victoria describes the shooting of Lavoy while Shawna does not claim to see it herself.

If the police actually fired that many shots, is it unreasonable that Shawna felt like they wanted them all dead? Is the question of right arm versus left arm really a critical detail that destroys the credibility of the rest her story? Couldn't this be an honest mistake or an error of memory regarding an insignificant detail? Shawna claims that there was no gun in Lavoy's hand. Does anyone, including the FBI, claim that he was successful in drawing a weapon? I haven't heard it. You said that you can't tell yourself if he had a gun in his hand in the video. How does this destroy her credibility?

Yes, Victoria said Lavoy's hands were still up while he lay on the ground. So what? One arm was outstretched on the ground. The other appears to be on the body. Does this mean she is a liar? Does this really mean that the police didn't fire an unprovoked shot without warning at the first stop? Maybe they are lying. I don't know, but I don't see anything in the video which contradicts the important points of their story.