Reading this thread has been fun. I enjoy case studies in the terminally obtuse.
Tam, you wanted to know why we spent $1 mil on surveillance? Simple. They wanted to figure out who Weaver was talking to. The real reason for the entrapment was that ATF wanted contacts inside the white supremacist movement. Getting an agent inside is difficult as finding an honest politician. But Weaver already had contacts (although he was not a member). So, after the entrapment, he was "invited" to roll over and become a gov't agent. He declined, not wanting to get his family killed. So, they spent a year and $1 mil trying to make it happen with or without his cooperation.
As for telewinz,
Your concept of what constitutes evidence is really funny. A gov't report is nigh irrefutable and deserving of credence, while reports from other sources are completely without regard. I'll let you in on a secret: most gov't reports aren't automatically admissible in court. In fact, keeping them out is rather easy when the gov't is a party to a case. They are inherently biased, often mistaken, not peer reviewed, and filled with hearsay and opinions. Basically, they all too often aren't worth the paper they are printed. I read enough of them (and have had enough kept out of court) to know that.
As for the credibility of the agents upon whom the report was based, we know . . . actually, that should read KNOW that they perjured themselves as to the shot on Vicki Weaver ("I never saw her" gets kind of hard to maintain when you're after action report clearly has her in view and yes, that drawing was part of his after action report by the gov't's own admission. Explains why they tried to block its production and only sent it by 4th class mail when the judge ordered it produced) and the tear gas at Waco ("no flammable cannisters were fired" "Oh, those things the Rangers found? Whoops. Forgot about them" Guess no one checks the ordnance locker on the way home.)
Tam, you wanted to know why we spent $1 mil on surveillance? Simple. They wanted to figure out who Weaver was talking to. The real reason for the entrapment was that ATF wanted contacts inside the white supremacist movement. Getting an agent inside is difficult as finding an honest politician. But Weaver already had contacts (although he was not a member). So, after the entrapment, he was "invited" to roll over and become a gov't agent. He declined, not wanting to get his family killed. So, they spent a year and $1 mil trying to make it happen with or without his cooperation.
As for telewinz,
Your concept of what constitutes evidence is really funny. A gov't report is nigh irrefutable and deserving of credence, while reports from other sources are completely without regard. I'll let you in on a secret: most gov't reports aren't automatically admissible in court. In fact, keeping them out is rather easy when the gov't is a party to a case. They are inherently biased, often mistaken, not peer reviewed, and filled with hearsay and opinions. Basically, they all too often aren't worth the paper they are printed. I read enough of them (and have had enough kept out of court) to know that.As for the credibility of the agents upon whom the report was based, we know . . . actually, that should read KNOW that they perjured themselves as to the shot on Vicki Weaver ("I never saw her" gets kind of hard to maintain when you're after action report clearly has her in view and yes, that drawing was part of his after action report by the gov't's own admission. Explains why they tried to block its production and only sent it by 4th class mail when the judge ordered it produced) and the tear gas at Waco ("no flammable cannisters were fired" "Oh, those things the Rangers found? Whoops. Forgot about them" Guess no one checks the ordnance locker on the way home.)
