C.S.I.

Forward:

Near midnight on March 2, 1993, while scanning commercial and government
satellite TV transmissions, the author, Ken Fawcett, stumbled upon a “refeed”
of the raw video footage from the botched Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms’ raid on the Branch Davidian Mt. Carmel Center. What he saw so
shocked Ken that he called the Oklahoma City TV station whose test pattern,
or logo, had come on screen during the feed. Ken asked station personnel to
repeat the transmission. Unfortunately, they didn’t know what Mr. Fawcett was
talking about. Several minutes passed before the transmission was, in fact,
repeated, though it’s source remains a mystery to this day. This second feed
was more heavily edited than the first, but Ken was ready this time and
proceeded to record the raw footage. Raw footage is film or tape that has not
been edited or reproduced in such a manner as to alter the original audio
tracks, in other words, there is no announcer, narrator or “voice-over.”

This raw footage has since been used by Greg Sali, a former emissary to
China, Linda Thompson, an attorney from Indiana and others to produce
stunning video documentaries about how the government and the media failed to
report the truth about this tragic incident. But that is only a small part of
the story.

It was painfully obvious from viewing and listening to this footage that the
Branch Davidians were not murderers. In one scene, a black man wearing
glasses is seen in a doorway near the sect’s chapel waving a white flag and
begging for peace. He is greeted with ATF gunfire as an agent says
sarcastically, “I got one now, yeah peace!” Ken spent the next several weeks
trying in vain to awaken the public to the horrible perversion of facts that
was being pandered by the FBI to a “cooperative” news media.

On March 5, after being told by Charles Serafin, the news director of the
region’s leading news radio station, KRLD 1080, that they were “cooperating
with the FBI by not reporting all events as they occurred from the Mt.
Carmel area,” Ken found Ron Engelman on his AM radio. Mr. Engelman, a talk
show host at Dallas station KGBS 1190, along with special guests Nancy Larosa
and Eric Lyghter were attempting to communicate with the besieged Branch
Davidians. Unfortunately, while the media had reported earlier in the week
that the telephone company was at the scene laying in more lines for the
talkative fanatic David Koresh, the FBI was in reality cutting off all lines
of communication from the complex to the outside world. This included cutting
landlines, cellular phones, and even disabling the group’s “ham” radio tower.

Ken, still monitoring the commercial feeds, called the station with an idea.
He was put on the air with Ron “live” and asked David Koresh to move the Mt.
Carmel satellite dish that had, up to that point, remained stationary
throughout the siege. This was to be a signal, that yes the Davidians did
indeed need outside assistance. Ken watched the screen in astonishment as the
large black dish antenna began to move. A communication link had been
established and was used over the next several days until on Tuesday, March
9, Davidian Rita Riddle hung the first of what would become many “banners”
out of the top window in the four story tower of the complex. It read, “GOD
HELP US, WE WANT THE PRESS.”

Together, Engelman and Fawcett, began reporting what was actually happening
at the so-called “compound” to Engleman’s radio audience. On March 26, Ken
confronted Virgil Teter, the vice president of news at KWTX-TV 10, a CBS
affiliate in Waco, about releasing all of the raw video of the botched ATF
raid to the public. Mr. Teter, who had been summoned to the convention center
to try and prevent Ken from releasing raid footage to the gathered media,
told Fawcett that the footage  was “in a safe place, being held by the proper
authorities.” Ken had obtained a press pass a few weeks into the stand-off
and met with journalists from CNN, CBS and ABC in Waco trying to convey to
these reporters that there was another side to the story. Sadly, he was met
again and again with the same skeptical reply, “How do you know? You weren’t
actually there on February 28th.”

Mr. Fawcett vowed not to allow that kind of “cop-out” journalism to prevail
as the San Antonio trial, the next important chapter of this international
incident, finally, got underway January 10, 1994. Armed with his press
pass and a letter of intent from a Las Vegas radio station, Fawcett attended
every day of the proceedings, and gave nightly and weekly trial reports to AM
and shortwave radio listeners.

The trial is now history but the full extent of the story continues to
unfold. The full truth that Ken continues to seek did not come out in the San
Antonio courtroom. Still, for those willing to search and research, look and
listen, clues and revelations to the Mt. Carmel mystery abound in these
pages. Ken Fawcett has promised that one day he will chronicle all that he
learned and experienced throughout his investigation of this event, but for
now his effort will be confined to that portion of the saga for which he has
first hand, eyewitness knowledge: the trial.

As you read this book, try to imagine that you are serving on the jury. And
if you believe that these people were not criminals, but victims of an agency
out of control, then please call or write your congressman. Tell them that we
won’t tolerate anything less than a full, independent investigation of Waco.

This book is dedicated to the following people whose support ranged from
providing Ken with a place to stay in San Antonio, contributing money for his expenses there, to giving him moral support or a place to sit in the “press
room.” Thanks and may God bless you always;

Ida and Ronald Pfeifer,
E.Z. “Easy” Haynes,
Tom and Sue Johnson,
Jack and Marolyn Fawcett,
Dr. Ben White,
Ruth Mosher,
Lou Epton,
Tom Valentine,
Tom Donahue,
Rosemary Kinder,
Mark Domangue,
William “Bill” Grisham,
Myrtle Riddle,
Anthony Hilder,
John Gallaher,
Daniel Villareal,
Tom Cook,
Marion Thompson,
Dick J. Reavis,
Dewey Millay,
and most of all the woman who tolerated it all, Stephanie.


Chapter 1

The cast of players:

Presiding Judge Walter Smith Jr. is 53 years old and lives in Waco, Texas. He
was appointed to his current position in 1984 after serving as McLennan
County Republican Party chairman from 1970 to 1979. A graduate of Baylor
University Law School, Smith has a reputation of handing down harsh
sentences. The ruddy faced jurist appears easily annoyed. He has thin white
hair but otherwise appears more youthful than 53.

Prosecuting attorneys:

W. Ray Jahn, (pronounced Yawn) is 50 years old from San Antonio. He served as
special counsel to FBI Director William Sessions while the Iran-Contra
hearings were in progress, and prosecuted the highly publicized trial of the
assassin of U.S. District Judge John Woods. Mr. Jahn is somewhat overweight,
and has a bushy red mustache.

LeRoy Jahn, also 50, is the wife of prosecutor Ray Jahn. She assisted in the
Woods case and most recently headed the appellate section of the U.S.
Attorney’s office in San Antonio. Except for the straight black hair, she
looks much like her husband.

Bill Johnston is 34 years old and lives in Waco. He is chief of the U.S.
Attorney’s office in Waco. He has served as an assistant U.S. attorney since
1987. He was a former McLennan County assistant district attorney until that
time. He has worked with agents investigating the Branch Davidians since at
least 1992. Johnston is very tall, thinly built with thick black hair and a
pale complexion.

John Finizy, 46, a former Texas Department of Public Safety employee, joined
the U. S. Attorney’s office in 1992 after 12 years as a Bell County assistant
district attorney.

John Lancaster is an assistant U. S. attorney in the Waco Office.

Davy Aguilerra, is an ATF employee and former Texas Department of Public
Safety officer who grew up in San Antonio and coached high school football
there. He was recruited into the ATF by long time friend and fellow DPS
worker undercover agent Robert Rodriguez. Aguilerra spearheaded the
investigation of David Koresh and participated in the February 28 raid. He is
not an attorney, but has been designated as the “overhead projector operator”
and team assistant by the government.
Defense Attorneys

Douglas Tinker, 59, from Corpus Christi is a 1969 graduate of the University
of Texas Law School, representing Brad Branch. Mr. Tinker has a very laid
back, jovial style. With his thin white hair and thick white beard and
mustache he could pass for Santa Claus.

Richard Ferguson, 43, of Waco, is a 1989 graduate of the Baylor University
School of Law, also representing Brad Branch. Ferguson is a quiet type who
always seems deep in thought.

Steven R. Rosen, 38, of Houston, is a 1980 graduate of South Texas College of
Law, representing Kevin Whitecliff and Livingstone Fagan. Mr. Rosen is known
by his middle name “Rocket” that he got for being born on the fourth of July.
He is a flamboyant personality with a confident outspoken style.

Dan Cogdell, 35, from Houston and a former associate of Richard “Racehorse”
Haynes, is representing Clive Doyle. This young counselor, has the stern look
and mannerism of a high school principal. His style is that of relentless
attack.

Jeff Kearney, 45, of Fort Worth, is a 1972 graduate of Baylor University Law
School, representing Jaime Castillo. He always has the same confident smile
that seems to say, “I’ve got a secret.” He is the classic, methodical, logic
based orrator in the courtroom.

Chadwick R. Richardson, 28, of Fort Worth, graduated in 1992 from the
University of Tulsa Law School and is assisting Mr. Kearney.

Mike DeGeurin, 50, of Houston, is the brother of Dick Deguerin, one of two
attorneys allowed into Mt. Carmel during the siege. The 1972 graduate of
Texas Tech University Law School is representing Paul Gordon Fatta. Mr.
DeGeurin is a plodder. He oftentimes stumbles or knocks things over on the
lectern. Much like the fictional TV detective “Columbo,” DeGeurin uses his
bungling style to catch his opponents napping, and to finagle latitude from
an overbearing judge.

E.G. Morris, 41, of Austin, is a 1977 graduate of the University of Texas Law
School, representing Woodrow Kendrick. Mr. Morris is also a quiet type. He
appears to at times place more credence than warranted into the testimony of
law officers.

Tim Evans, 50, from Fort Worth, is a 1969 graduate of Texas Tech University
Law School, representing Norman Allison.

Stanley Rentz, 55, of Waco, is a former McLennan County judge and a 1967
graduate of Baylor University School of Law, representing Graeme Craddock.

John F.Carroll, 32, from San Antonio, is a 1986 graduate of St. Mary’s Law
School, representing Renos Avraam. Mr. Carroll appears brash, but his
confident and methodical style are those of a seasoned lawyer.

Joseph Andrew Turner, 39, of Austin, graduated from the University of
Texas Law School, and represents Ruth Ottman Riddle. Mr. Turner has a quiet,
freindly style.

Terrence W. Kirk, 43, also from Austin, is a 1982 University of Texas Law
School graduate assisting Mr. Turner.

Michael Bernard, 36, is a 1987 graduate of St. Mary’s Law School, also
representing Norman Allison.

The defendants:

Four defendants are charged with four counts of conspiring to
murder federal officers, (because four ATF agents were killed in the raid)
four counts of possessing a firearm during commission of a violent crime, and
one count of aiding and abetting the murder of federal officers.

The four are:

1. Brad Branch, 34, is an aircraft mechanic with a record of driving-
while-intoxicated convictions. He has an associate of arts degree
from Hallmark Institute of Technology in San Antonio, where he
lived in the early 1980s. He was most recently employed at Chrysler
Technologies in Waco, and is a former employee of E-Systems in
Greenville, Texas. He left the complex March 19.

2. Kevin Whitecliff, is a 32-year-old former prison guard from Hawaii
who left the complex with Branch. He had left the sect only to return a
month before the devastating ATF attack.

3. Clive Joseph Doyle, 52, survived the April 19 fire that
allegedly claimed the lives of more than 80 sect members, including
his daughter, Shari. He suffered second- and third-degree burns on
about 5 percent of his body. Clive is a printer formerly employed by the
government of Australia.

4. Jaime Castillo, 25, survived the fire after reportedly
falling from a rooftop and having to be dragged to safety as
he tried to run back into the burning building. Jaime aspired to be a
drummer in Koresh’s rock band.

The other defendants are:

* Livingston Fagan, 34, of Nottingham, England, is charged with
two counts of conspiring to murder federal officers, two counts of
possessing a firearm during the commission of a violent crime, and
one count of aiding and abetting the murder of federal officers.

Fagan left the complex March 23. His wife and mother died in the
fire.

* Paul Gordon Fatta, 35, formerly of California, was an alleged
procurer of firearms for the Branch Davidians. Federal officials
have charged Fatta with one count of conspiring to murder federal
officers, one count of possessing a firearm during the commission
of a violent crime, one count of aiding and abetting the murder of
federal officers, one count of conspiracy to manufacture and
possess unregistered machine guns, and one count of unlawful
possession of machine guns.

Fatta was not at the complex at the time of the raid. Initially he was told
by authorities to leave the area. A week later a warrant was issued for his
arrest, but he remained at large, fearing for his life, until he
surrendered in Houston a week after the fire.

* Norman Washington Allison (also known as Delroy Nash), 29, of
Jamaica, and Woodrow “Bob” Kendrick, 63, are charged with one count of
conspiring to murder federal officers, two counts of aiding and
abetting the murder of federal officers, and one count of
possessing a firearm during the commission of a violent crime.

Allison was arrested the afternoon of Feb. 28 when agents
setting up sniper posts outside the complex came upon three alleged
Davidians. There was a brief exchange of gunfire, officials
claimed, though no one in the press corp heard any shots.

* Woodrow “Bob” Kendrick, 63, joined the sect in the mid-1950s when the
group was called simply the Davidians and still was headed by its
founder, Victor Houteff.

Kendrick and his wife, Janet, have been married 39 years and,
since joining the sect, have lived either at or near the sect
headquarters.

Kendrick was with Allison, but was not noticed by the
agents because, Kendrick said, he was lying down in tall
grass. He was arrested a week later at a nearby trailer house owned by
sect member Mary Belle Jones.

The body of a third man, Michael Schroeder, was found several
days later in an overgrown area not far from where the shooting
took place. He suffered seven gunshot wounds, mostly in the back.

Former ATF information officer Daniel Conroy had originally
reported to the press that the three men broke out of the complex on
the evening of the original ATF assault, and began firing automatic
weapons at agents and SWAT teams. Conroy and four other ATF employees
were asked to leave the agency for lying to the public and superiors
during the stand-off, and for repeatedly lying to Congress in June 1993
hearings.

* Graeme Leonard Craddock, 32, of Australia is charged with one count of
conspiring to murder federal officers, one count of aiding and
abetting the murder of federal officers, one count of possessing a
firearm during the commission of a violent crime, one count of
possessing an unregistered destructive device, and one count of
conspiring to possess an unregistered destructive device.

* Renos Avraam, 29, a British citizen, is charged with one count of
conspiring to murder federal officers, one count of aiding and
abetting the murder of federal officers, and one count of possessing
a firearm during the commission of a violent crime.

* Ruth Ottman Riddle, 30, a native of Canada whose husband Jimmy was
killed the day of the fire is also charged with one count of
conspiring to murder federal officers, one count of aiding and
abetting the murder of federal officers and one count of possessing
a firearm during the commission of a violent crime.

Avraam, Craddock and Riddle also survived the fire, receiving minor
injuries. Riddle suffered a broken ankle and burns.

The conspiracy to murder charge carries a sentence of up to life
in prison. Aiding and abetting the murder of federal officers carries a
penalty of up to 20 years.

Possessing a firearm while committing a violent crime carries a
mandatory sentence of 5 years in prison that must be added to
the sentence for the violent crime itself.

All other charges against the Branch Davidians carry a maximum penalty of
five years.

* Kathryn Schroeder, who authorities have accused of being the
women’s leader and drill sergeant in the sect, has agreed to plead
guilty to one count of impeding federal agents with a deadly
weapon and to “cooperate fully” with government officials.

In exchange for the plea, government attorneys agreed to drop all
other indictments against Schroeder, including conspiracy to
commit murder, and five counts of aiding and abetting the murder
of federal officers.

Schroeder, a 31-year old mother of four, if convicted, could have
received life in prison. Conviction in the plea agreement carries
a sentence of up to 10 years in prison.

Schroeder’s husband, Michael Schroeder, 29, was killed by agents
February 28, 1993 in a brief gun-battle about a quarter mile from
the complex. Schroeder’s four children were released during the
early days of the siege.

Officials believe that Schroeder left out of fear she might
lose her children permanently. The father of the oldest three
children (he and Schroeder were divorced) had been granted
custody by the courts in March of 1993.

In December Judge Smith signed a gag order that prohibits defense
attorneys, prosecutors and potential witnesses from commenting
to the media.
The Federal Courthouse in San Antonio will be filled with members
of the national and international media and ringed by television
vans and satellite trucks as another chapter opens in the
story of the tragic federal police action. Nearly 100 news agencies;
newspapers, magazines, radio and television stations, have requested
credentials, some seeking multiple passes.

The story leapt onto front pages and television screens around
the world Feb. 28, 1993 when over 100 agents from the U.S. Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms stormed the church complex near Waco.

The ensuing incident took a chilling toll - four ATF agents dead
and 13-28 reported wounded, and at least six Branch Davidians dead and an
unknown number wounded.

Security will be enhanced, with additional people brought in.
Jo Simpson of the U.S. Marshals’ service is in charge
of the media or press room which has been set up in training
facilities adjacent to the courthouse. In addition to the 30 seats
allowed in the courtroom for journalists, 50-60 seats will be
available in the press room which will have courtroom audio “piped” in.
A “blue pass” will be required of anyone wishing to gain entry to the press
room. “Yellow passes” will have first choice of media seating in the
courtroom itself.

Attorneys say an “optimistic” estimate on the length of the trial is eight
to 10 weeks. It was moved to San Antonio on a change of venue because of
adverse publicity in Waco and McLennan County. U.S. District Judge Walter S.
Smith, Jr. of Waco on Thursday, January 6th denied a motion filed on behalf
of Branch Davidian Paul Fatta, to keep the religious group from being called
a “cult” in front of jurors. Defense attorneys had hoped the judge would bar
prosecutors and witnesses from describing the defendants as cult members.
They’ve indicated their case will hinge, in part, on trying to show the
Davidians as everyday, educated people with atypical religious beliefs.

A motion on behalf of defendant Woodrow Kendrick, to dismiss the charges
against him because Judge Smith had said that statements he made during a
detention hearing in April were not admissible in court, was denied on Friday
Jan. 7.


Chapter 2

Week One

A Positive Start
San Antonio- The first week of proceedings in the trial of eleven Branch
Davidians ended on a positive note Friday, when prosecution witnesses
admitted under cross examination that the crime scene may have been tampered
with before the Texas Rangers were allowed in to collect evidence. Texas
Ranger Fred Cummings could not explain how a portion of the front door came
up missing when the Rangers and Department of Public Safety officials
conducted their search after the April 19 fire. Lawyers for the defense
contend that the front door would prove the Branch Davidian’s contention that
ATF fired the first shots in the alleged February 28 shoot-out.

Earlier in the day, Texas Ranger Ronny Griffith admitted under cross
examination that a photo of a bullet hole above the driver’s door of one of
the ATF pick-up trucks, depicted in all likelihood, damage from “friendly
fire.” Amid prosecution objections, defense attorney Doug Tinker repeatedly
raised the question of friendly fire, and established that the ATF had placed
their vehicle in direct line of fire with ATF snipers posted in an undercover
house about 200 yards away. Also, an FBI agent admitted that some of the more
than 200 weapons submitted into evidence on Thursday were actually left on
the scene by the ATF in the original attack. FBI ballistics expert James
Cadigan had earlier presented the jury with a videotape depicting some of the
Branch Davidian rifles being fired at the FBI test range in Quantico,
Virginia. The weapons appeared to be in remarkable condition given the
intensity of the April 19 blaze that melted kitchen appliances and metal
doors.

When proceedings opened Monday it was clear that more representatives of the
media were present than could possibly be accommodated in the courtroom. A
media pool consisting of 5 members of the press was allowed inside. They
were Gigi Shamsi of ABC TV, Teresa Talerico from the Waco Tribune Herald,
Rene Haynes of Reuters wire service, Alex Marriott, sketch artist of CNN, and
I Ken Fawcett, representing KLAV radio. Approximately 80 members of the jury
pool underwent final questioning during voir dior, as about 50 protesters
representing the Fully Informed Jury Association (F.I.J.A.), and the
Libertarian party demonstrated outside. Because Judge Walter Smith has
ordered an anonymous jury, prospective jurors were referred to by number
designation rather than by name. Judge Smith explained to the jury that he
had “no indication that any of the defendants or their families would ever be
a threat to jurors.” On Tuesday 12 jurors were seated and 6 alternate jurors
chosen, 8 women, 4 men.

Among them were juror panelist #54, a Hispanic female, who expressed concern
about arranging care for her three week-old baby during the trial. She used
to work as a security guard and believes only law enforcement should have
handguns. Panelist #97, a white female, about 60 years old said she served on
a criminal jury before. It was a theft trial, which resulted in a not guilty
verdict. She too, felt that only the police should be allowed to possess
handguns. Judge Smith told her not to be ashamed of that position, that
“more and more people everyday have that same attitude”, i.e. that handguns
should be illegal. She said she didn’t have time to watch TV, so she won’t be
biased by the media coverage. Panelist #10 a white male, about 80 years old,
is retired from Seaboard Oil Company. He says he last used a firearm in World
War II. He says he has never been on a jury and claims to be a conservative.
Panelist #274, a Hispanic female about 24 years old, says she thinks the
media was unfair to both the Branch Davidians and the ATF. “They never tell
the whole truth,” she said. Though not an American native, she has earned an
associate’s degree, and works in TV and VCR repair. She expressed fear of
being on a case this big. She says she is not familiar with the system and
her “responsibility” as a juror. Panelist #289, a Hispanic female, has served
on a civil case. She thinks the media was unfair to the government but fair
to the defendants, but now she is confused. Panelist #34, a Hispanic male,
said he has numerous relatives in law enforcement. His wife is a legal
secretary for a practicing attorney, and his brother-in-law is a policeman.
He also said that some of his family had been in trouble with the law, and
that he was a witness in a child molestation case three years ago. He has
applied to the police department, but is not yet hired, and thinks the media
has been unfair to the government.

After the jury was seated Judge Smith explained how they must consider each
defendant and charge separately and how all are tried at once to save money.
He instructed the jury not to associate guilt or innocence. Smith also
explained self-defense and used an example of a man on the street with a gun
being attacked by another man with a gun, then said he hopes no one on the
jury panel would ever carry a gun on the street. He cautioned the jury about
media inaccuracies, using as an example a San Antonio newspaper report
listing his age as 54 but he’s only 53. “The media can’t be cross-examined.”
He said.

By Tuesday afternoon Rev. W.N. Otwell of God Says Ministries, Pastor Aubry
Vaughn of Grace Baptist Church, and a small but persistent group of
followers, had assembled several very large, hand held signs right in front
of the courthouse exit. One read, “THE BLACK BOOTED, BLACK SUITED, BLACK
HELMETED, MACHINE-GUN TOTIN ATF GESTAPO, ARE GUILTY OF KILLING CHILDREN AND
HOLDING WOMEN HOSTAGE.” Police reinforced their ranks as the prosecution
team exited amid chants from protesters including Dallas based Waco justice
advocates Rick Donaldson and Mark Lucas. There was no violence or arrests.

In addition to the 6 U.S. Marshals stationed in the courtroom, there are
two Federal snipers perched atop the twelve story Federal building next
door, and a contingency of agents patrolling the parking and press areas. No
recording devices of any kind are allowed into the courtroom or press room.
Cellular phones and pagers will be forbidden as well.

Next week the Government will resume examining some of the more than 150
witnesses they are expected to call. Among them are; Neil Amadeo; Rod
Aydelotte (Waco Tribune Herald); Wade Brown; Don Bunds; Mark Bunds; Robin
Bunds; Dan Burrus; Sam Cohen; Fred Cummings; Ray Cuommo; Tim DeBree; Mark
England (Waco Tribune Herald); Charles Euroso; George Frazier; Victorine
Hollingsworth; Doyle Huntley; Jean Kilpatrick; Roger Kilpatick; Kenneth King;
Jim LeJahn; Dan Malohney (KWTX-TV 10); Darlene McCormick (Waco Tribune
Herald); John McLemmore (KWTX-TV 10); Henry McMahon; David Millen; Dana
Okimoto; Jerry Ortowski; Marvin Richardson; Dana Rogers; Clem Stokes; Doyle
Stone.

Mike Degeurin requested that the word compound be barred from the trial.
Smith denied his request. The defense also requested the use of video-tapes
and the ability to draw parables with the Randall Weaver stand-off: also
denied.

As a veteran court watcher, I have reservations about the appropriateness of
ATF agent Davy Aguilera being a part of the prosecutorial team… Couldn’t he
be called in as a witness if the validity of probable cause in the original
search warrant comes into question? It was Mr. Aguilerra who spearheaded the
investigation of David Koresh, and prepared the text in the government’s
affidavit.

Chapter 3

Week Two

Government Line Falls

Testimony of ATF agents involved in the botched February 28 raid on Mt.
Carmel was delayed Tuesday, as Judge Walter Smith Jr. cautioned jurors not to
read Fully Informed Jury Association pamphlets that may have been received by
as many as 6 jurors over the weekend. He also instructed the jury not to
read signs or posters on the way into or out of the courthouse.

The prosecution opened the morning session with the testimony of Spcl. Agent
Rolland Ballesteros, a 5-year ATF employee at the time of the raid.
Ballesteros detailed his attempt to assist fellow agent Steve Steale in
battering in and storming through the church door. As he exited the cattle
trailer Ballesteros said he heard “popping” sounds, like those made by a .22
caliber weapon, but could not determine the source of the sounds. As he ran
toward the front door he heard screams coming from the upper floors of the
church. With a frontal photo of the assault displayed on the wall behind him,
agent Ballesteros pointed himself out as the armor clad agent just to the
right of the front door. “I was closest to the door in this photo,” he
elaborated. Ballesteros explained he had his Remington short-barrel 12 ga.
shotgun fully loaded with six shells and aimed in the general direction of
the front door, and before he could reach the front door David Koresh opened
the door, “smirked,” and then slammed the door. He said he never saw any
bullets come through the door and that there were two additional unarmed
individuals standing behind Mr. Koresh. Much of Ballesteros testimony was
unclear or conflicting, but around this time, he went on, he was hit in the
left thumb by buckshot and dived over a chicken wire fence into the dog pen.
Agent Steve Steale was also hit by buckshot according to an interview he gave
THE EAST TEXAN in April 1993.

Under intense cross examination from defense attorneys Steve Rosen, Doug
Tinker and Dan Cogdell, Ballesteros admitted that his story had changed three
times since being interviewed by the Waco Police Dept. and the Texas Rangers
in March, and that a shooting incident review team was never formed contrary
to ATF regulations.

Attorney Joseph Turner, representing Davidian Ruth Riddle, attempted to get a
clarification on the rules of engagement with respect to any special rules
that might be in effect given the expected large number of women and children
inside the center. Ballesteros said he didn’t know what the rules of
engagement are, but agreed that any firing should have been limited to a
specific target and that failure to do so could escalate the hostilities.
Ballesteros expressed disenchantment with ATF communications, answering a
question about provided communications devices he quipped, “supposedly,
everything available.”

Ballesteros claims that most of the agents, including himself, received only
3 days in training for the raid at Fort Hood, practicing the assault 3 times.
He never received a written plan, briefing, notes or saw the arrest warrant.
He referred to the ATF snipers as “cover teams,” and acknowledged some of
them were stationed in a house some 200 yds. across the street. When attorney
Doug Tinker displayed a series of photos of the raid, Ballesteros admitted
the photos depicted agents firing at the building, but no people or guns were
visible in the windows of the church.

Under cross examination from Jeff Kearney, representing Jaime Castillo, agent
Ballesteros described people inside crying, “just go away, leave us alone…
just leave.” He also said that the word “ambushed” was never used by him to
describe the incident until after he rehearsed his testimony with
prosecutors about a month ago in Waco.

Spcl. Agent Eric Evers, a 2-year ATF employee, was next to testify for the
prosecution. Evers, a tall man about 23 with bushy black hair and mustache,
testified he works in the same Houston ATF building as independent arson
investigator Paul Gray’s wife. Agent Evers was sitting in the passenger seat
of the lead pickup truck owned and driven by agent Dale Littleton. His
assignment was to contain the men working in the pit. He didn’t draw his
weapon because he thought he might get into a fist fight with one of them.

Evers testified he was looking down to avoid tripping on lumber, when as he
approached the pit and turned the corner at the rear of the building, he was
hit in the shoulder by gunfire and immediately fell face down to the ground.
The impact knocked his teeth out necessitating dental surgery. When he raised
himself off the ground, he saw two white males and one black male about 25
feet away. The black male had an AR-15 rifle. When answering attorney’s
questions, Evers turned to face the jury, a technique learned in ATF
training, according to defense lawyer Dan Cogdell.

When asked by prosecutor Bill Johnston if the black man was in the courtroom,
Evers identified defendant Livingston Fagan. Looking at the jury, Evers
pointed and said, “That’s the man that shot me.” Under cross examination
Evers defended his reason for not mentioning before September that he could
identify his assailant. He said he wanted to wait until after the fire to see
if any more black males came out so he wouldn’t appear to be racially
prejudiced. Defense attorneys noted however that when Evers was shown a photo
line-up in July, his notes on the photos indicated that he was not sure what
the source of his recollection of Fagan was.

Evers testified he too heard “popping” sounds as he approached the building.
His vest and t-shirt were submitted into evidence, as well as a .223 caliber
projectile recovered just below the skin in his chest. A photo of his
chest was admitted into evidence showing a jagged scar from the right
shoulder arcing across the collar bone, terminating at the sternum. Under
cross examination from attorney Steven “Rocket” Rosen, Evers conceded that he
didn’t see Fagan until after he was shot, and that in prior testimony he
never ID’d Fagan or made mention of popping sounds before. In fact he had
told the Waco Police Dept. that the first sounds he heard were explosions.

Agent Evers participated in only one day of training in which five or six
rehearsals were conducted, he said. He remembered a briefing in which they
were told a search warrant was going to be executed on a cult compound and
that a number of the people there wanted to be rescued. He too says that no
ATF shooting review team was ever formed.

On Wednesday afternoon 23-year ATF employee Dan Curtis of Allen, Texas
testified he was the driver and owner of the second pickup truck and was
wearing a red ballcap and farm jacket as a disguise. He never received any
training on “flash grenades” and didn’t know what they were. It was at this
point in Curtis testimony that the courtroom heard the first of many
deviations from the original ATF accounts concerning the death of Spcl. Agent
Steven Willis. According to Curtis, Agent Willis exited the cattle trailer
and ran to the porch area, then retreated to a position with other agents
behind a green and white Chevy van. Willis then participated in firing at the
building with his 9mm Sig-Saur pistol for 15 to 20 minutes before being shot.
This account, which was also affirmed by ATF Spcl. Agent Lowell Sprague,
radically departs from the version maintained by the ATF for months. In the
former version the government claimed that Willis had been shot “immediately
upon exiting his vehicle,” and that the fatal shot was among the first shots
fired on the botched raid.

Defense attorney Tinker used Curtis’ testimony to prove that bullet holes in
the front of his pickup truck could only have come from the cattle trailer in
front of them. Curtis said he “had no idea” who fired the first shot, and
doesn’t know why, if this was an “ambush,” that none of the agents who
remained in the open in front of the porch during the incident got killed or
wounded. Curtis’ testimony carried over into Thursday morning, when he was
asked about training for the raid. Curtis said he attended 3 days of training
for the raid wherein the raid was rehearsed 15 to 20 times. He said he fired
about 20 rounds from his AR-15, mostly at the windows and door. Though he
used this same type weapon in Viet Nam, Curtis testified he did not know if
the weapon’s .223 caliber ammo would penetrate walls. After the raid he joined
other agents who were setting up a sniper post in a barn at the rear of the
property.

At 11:00 AM, Thursday, Waco Tribune-Herald reporter Mark Masferrer was called
by the prosecution. Masferrer claims he remained in or near a ditch some 200
yds. from the complex and that he believes the first shots were fired by the
Davidians because of the sound of the gunfire, “popping”, and because he saw
splashes in the pond and birds fly up. An aerial photo was shown and
Masferrer detailed his location on the East side of a gravel road that runs
in front of the property.

Highlights of the cross-examination of Masferrer were that he had no prior
ballistics training, heard no announcement of ATF’s warrant, and observed
firing from the ATF undercover house across the street. He claims all the
Waco Tribune Herald photos were taken within the first 20 to 30 seconds.

Testifying Thursday afternoon were Agents Kris Mayfield with the “blue team”
from Houston and Agent Kevin Richardson who was in the second trailer armed
with a 9mm pistol. Mayfield said he didn’t hear an announcement and that the
door was opened about “three feet wide.” Mayfield says he tried to throw in a
concussion grenade to a lower story window, but it bounced back out exploding
in the yard beside him. He was successful in lobbing in a second grenade
however.

Agent Robert Champion, a 4-year ATF employee from El Paso, Texas, testified
that he along with fatality Steven Willis were assigned to the dog team. He
described agents firing into the windows and walls but doesn’t remember
bullets coming through the front door. He remembers agent Larry Shriver
hiding behind trailer # 2, shouting out instructions as to which window to
fire at, and remembers someone shouting to “lay some cover fire…” as
someone was crossing the yard.

On Friday morning, agent Clay Alexander testified that commanders decided to
use a fire extinguisher instead of mace on the dogs because the wind might
carry the mace into the face of agents. He claims he did not hear anyone
holler “Police, ATF!” There was some courtroom confusion because the red
Honda he claimed to have taken cover behind was not visible in photos or
aerial news footage filmed immediately after the botched raid. But saying he
wanted to be “fair” attorney Doug Tinker told Alexander he had found the red
Prelude in the photo. It was parked nearest the front door to the left of the
green and white van. Agent Curtis’ red and white pickup was blocking it from
view.

Alexander said he remembered no .50 caliber weapon sounds, and no falling
glass from upstairs windows. He also testified he shot at one dog with 12 ga.
buckshot. He didn’t hear any gunfire until he was all the way into the side
gate. Alexander said that in practicing the raid 8 times, assignments
were changed many times and Steve Willis was switched to the dog team on the
final day. He received buckshot injuries to the backside of both legs, and
remembers two four door white sedans that followed the trailers in. He
assumed they were ATF observers.

Also testifying Friday was Spcl. Agent Lowell Sprague from Tulsa, Oklahoma,
who was assigned to the Dallas special response team. Agent Sprague was able
to give heretofore unknown details about the death of Agent Willis and about
the shooting of Davidian Peter Gent on top the water tower. As Sprague
described his movements during the raid, he was asked to define what he
termed as “threats” that he fired at. He said he saw a pair of hands in a
window, so he fired at that. Then he saw a pair of arms so he fired at that.
Also, whenever he saw curtains moving, he fired at them. The weapon Sprague
carried was an MP-5 machine pistol, which depending upon what agent was
testifying, is either a short range 9mm pistol, incapable of penetrating
walls, or in the case of Sprague, a long range, high velocity sniper rifle
that he claims he used to shoot a man on top of the Sect’s water tower some
150 yds. from his position.

Agent Sprague described a large caliber projectile that pierced the side of
the green and white van about a foot in front of the left rear tire, maybe 24
inches high, exiting the rear door just left of the door handle. It was
shortly after this that he warned Willis to get down. Then, he testified,
Willis was struck above the left temple. Agent Sprague described in detail
the entrance and exit wound from the gunshot. He stated that as Willis
slumped backward another round penetrated Willis’ left cheek and exited into
the top part of Willis’ vest.

Agent Sprague testified that he didn’t participate in any training for the
raid. Attorney Tinker asked Sprague if it would not make more sense for
persons planning an ambush to remove screens and open windows before the
raid. Sprague agreed that would make more sense from an ambush standpoint.

The last agent to take the stand Friday was Barbara Maxwell. Ms. Maxwell, a
strikingly attractive woman in her 20s or early 30s, testified she was
unloading from the first cattle trailer when the shooting started. She and
another agent, Carla Bell, immediately retreated and took cover in a white
Ford van at the outer perimeter of the parking lot. She waited out the
incident even as bullets were hitting the van, without firing a single shot.
Maxwell said the contingency plan was that if firing started they were to
retreat and not return fire into the building because of the presence of
women and children inside. She agreed with defense attorney Joe Turner that
agents should not have been firing into the walls and windows without first
perceiving a specific threat and then properly acquiring a target. She said
some of the agents were confused about contingency plans that were practiced
during the two days of training she attended.

A diagram of the Mt. Carmel center was shown on the overhead projector, and
Ms. Maxwell was asked to draw lines from windows that she perceived fire
from. The only two windows she identified were upstairs on the second floor,
numbered as windows 3 and 4, Rita Riddle and Jaydeen Wendell’s windows.

At 12:30 PM court was recessed for the weekend.

Chapter 4
Week Three

Testimony Raises More Questions
The third week of this highly publicized case began Monday with the testimony
of ATF Agents Larry Shivers, Gerald Petrilli, and Tim Gaborie. It was
established that the Waco field office for ATF did not exsist until after the
February 28 raid, and that Agent Davy Aguillera has been assigned there
ever since. The most intensive testimony was given by Agent Gaborie, a medic
assigned to the Dallas special response team (SRT), who served in the Texas
Air National Guard as a medic. He says he was the last person in the first
row of cattle trailer number one (the lead trailer). As he exited the trailer
he says he heard footsteps and saw the ground “jumping” in front of him. He
immediately ran to his right taking cover behind a white van with agents
Claire Rayburn and Barbara Maxwell. Some minutes later he claims to have
fired a single shot at one of the dogs in a fence that was in his words, ”
barking in a threatening manner.” Gaborie said the dog also appeared to be
coming over the fence near a red El Camino, but upon cross examination, the
dog’s body is shown in an aerial photo to be sprawled in the middle of the
fenced yard nowhere near the fence or the El Camino.

Several minutes into the shooting he ran to the rear of Curtis’ red and white
pickup positioned in the area of the front door. He was carrying his green
and brown medical box (government’s exhibit #104) which was hit by gunfire as
he ran. Realizing the agent he was going to treat had died he drew his 9mm
pistol and proceeded to fire 50-60 rounds of ammo into the building without
looking. He testified that since he was not wearing a helmet he did not want
to raise his head over the side of the pickup bed so he extended his arm over
the side of the truck in a manner he described as “point and shoot.”

Under intense cross examination from defense attorneys Joseph Turner and Mike
DeGeurin, Gaborie admitted he hadn’t learned the technique in either the
Guard or the ATF. It was also shown that when asked by the Texas Rangers in
March to identify areas in the building where he perceived fire from he
circled only one window, identified as window #8, a second floor window at
about the middle of the building. After riding out of the driveway in the
back of an ambulance, Gaborie says he assisted two agents who were
administering CPR in the back of a black pickup to agent Conway LeBleu. He
also told the Rangers in March, that he almost shot the TV man because he
looked like one of the “bad guys.”

Government witness Agent Sam Cohen testified that he heard popping sounds as
he exited the trailer, and that a .38 caliber revolver stored in the pocket
of his bullet proof vest was hit and damaged by a bullet. He also said that
he didn’t remember any rounds hitting the cattle trailer he was in. He
attended several peer support sessions after the raid to “ventilate and
release anger.”

New Orleans ATF Agent Kenneth King, an elderly, bespectacled man with gray
hair, was a team leader of the “roof team” assigned to carry ladders, ascend
the roof and break into David Koresh’s bedroom within 30 seconds. Agent King
was shot 6 times while on the roof and was near agent Todd McKeehan at the
time McKeehan was fatally wounded on the roof. King says he then rolled off
the roof into the “courtyard” and waited about two and a half hours to be
rescued. None of this action was captured on videotape because his team was
assigned to go into a window on the other side of the chapel’s hipped roof (
away from the camera).

Under cross examination by attorney Doug Tinker, representing Brad Branch,
King was asked why they would still attempt to ascend the roof if they were
receiving gun fire? King replied that they had no other plan and that even if
the agents serving the warrant at the front door had gained peaceful entry,
they were still supposed to smash, break and rake the windows unannounced,
and neutralize David Koresh and the weapons room.

Attorney Jeff Kearney, representing Jaime Castillo, then successfully used
his cross examination of King to show to the court that the two “roof teams”
in all likelihood engaged each other in a gun-battle in the darkened room and
that ATF ammo was removed from at least one of the agents.

The prosecution then called ATF Agent Jerry Orchowski, who like Agent Eric
Evers also identified Livingston Fagan. On cross examination it was learned,
however, that Orchowski had told the Waco Police Dept. and the Texas Rangers
that he had seen a “black male wearing a stocking cap and ski goggles” and
that he was dressed in dark blue or black clothing. He said he watched this
man for about two and half hours, but never fired on him because he thought
he was an agent. Then in May he picked Livingston Fagan out of a photo line
up.

On Tuesday, Rocket Rosen requested on behalf of client Livingston Fagan, that
his case be severed from the others due to the fact that sect members Clive
Doyle and Kevin Whitecliff, co-defendants in the case, will testify that
Fagan was not outside at the time of the raid, and that they cannot testify
as witnesses if they are defendants in the case. Attorney Dan Cogdell said
his client, Clive Doyle would indeed testify that Fagan remained inside
during the raid, but he was advising him against it. Douglas Tinker added
that his client, Brad Branch, would testify that he saw the “black male” in
question and that it was not Livingston Fagan. Judge Walter Smith denied
Rosen’s motion.

Continuing the cross examination of agent Orchowski, responding that he didn’
t know the difference between Jamaican blacks, Haitian blacks, or blacks from
other parts of the world, snapped at attorney Steven “Rocket” Rosen, “I’m not
a racist…” Rosen calmly retorted, “no one here is accusing you of being a
racist, sir.” Orchowski also testified that he was never under the impression
that the investigating Texas Rangers were going to be independent.

Next up for the prosecution, Agent Bill Buford, was part of the team of
agents that went into the window shown on videotape throughout the world. He
said he saw a man in the room with an AK-47. As the man attempted to run away
he shot at him with his 9mm pistol. Buford testified he received fire the
entire time he was in the room, and was hit in the buttocks. He also said he
observed two pineapple type grenades on the gun-rack while he was in the
room. Attorney Dan Cogdell instructed the witness to read pages 37,38,43 and
44 in the Treasury Dept. report. It was pointed out to the court that the
story in the report was entirely different than what is now being presented
in the trial. Using a government blueprint of the layout of the two rooms
agents entered, Attorney Doug Tinker showed that the firing from inside the
room had to come from ATF agents.

With the jury out of the room it was illustrated that U.S. Attorney Bill
Johnston had been involved in the planning of the raid as far back as 1992,
and that Mr. Johnston would not approve of the raid unless it involved
“dynamic entry.” Judge Smith says that only facts relating to the February
28 raid are admissible, but Mr. Cogdell asserts that in order to prove the
conspiracy charges the government is allowed to go “way back” and what is
good for the goose is good for the gander. Buford said when the Rangers came
to interview him at the hospital they told him, “We have been asked by the U.
S. attorney’s office to try and make a case against the people that shot at
you.”

On Tuesday afternoon agent Keith Constantino from the New Orleans ATF office
took the stand. He testified that he was one of the agents who entered the
second story window shown in the video. He was not injured while in the room
but sustained a leg injury when he fell from the roof. He admitted under
cross examination that he probably fired the shot that struck one of his team
members in the arm. Agent Constantino said he fired 30-35 rounds while in the
room at three of the walls. He testified that the concern for women and
children was the reason he volunteered for the raid, but that supervisors
apparently did not share that concern when they went forward with the raid
even after the element of surprise was lost. He also testified that within a
week after the raid he identified the man who he and other agents had shot at
in the darkened room as sect member James Loyd Riddle Jr. He told
investigators at the time that he was certain that the man had been mortally
wounded.

On Wednesday, Attorney Dan Cogdell asked the government for all evidence in
support of the allegation on page 38 of the Treasury Dept. Report, that U.S.
Attorney Bill Johnston was involved in the planning of the raid. And further
requested that the original raid plan as well as the altered raid plan be
submitted to the court. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ray Jahn countered that the
Treasury Dept. report was in error about “any meetings between ATF and the U.
S. Attorney’s office.” U.S. Attorney Bill Johnston said, “The Treasury
Review is a book that was written for newspapers and the public to read, but
it is not intended for the ATF or the government to use.”

Attorney Doug Tinker continued his cross examination of ATF Agent Chas.
Euroso. He testified he and Agent Smith went into the sect’s gymnasium where
he fired at and “neutralized” a man he saw in one of the windows of the
chapel that appeared to be carrying a shotgun. After the raid he returned to
the scene to help agents set up a sniper position in the barn. Euroso also
testified that he saw numerous bales of hay in the gymnasium.

Testifying next for the government was ATF Agent Bernadette Griffin, a tall
attractive African American woman. She was in cattle trailer #2, and claimed
in her opening testimony that she was, “dodging bullets that were hitting the
ground at my feet as I exited the trailer.” Though it was learned on cross
examination that she didn’t mention any of this in her prior interview with
the Texas Rangers. She says she was assigned to “secure” an 80 year old
woman, believed to be Trudy Meyers, who was reportedly living in an old
silver travel trailer adjacent to the main building. She said she could hear
bullets hitting the top of the trailer, but when photos were introduced into
evidence, there were no bullet holes visible in the crumpled trailer. She was
asked by the defense if she had any personal vendetta against the woman who
owned the trailer and was there any reason she could think of why her ATF
comrades had found it necessary to smash the trailer with tanks during the
siege, and again with bulldozers after the April 19 fire.

Ms. Griffin then described an encounter she had with Davidian Jaime Castillo
during the cease fire. She had gone to the back of the building to retrieve
the injured Kenny King. Thinking King was still on the roof, she attempted to
climb up onto a wooden stove, when Castillo appeared in a doorway and told
her to get down off that stove and “get a ladder if you want to get on the
roof.” Defendant Renos Avraam was trying to keep from laughing aloud as she
described Castillo, who was armed with a rifle, telling her to, “get your
black ass back over here so I can keep an eye on you!” Once again, none of
this had been told to investigators prior to testifying.

Atty. Mike DeGeurin while questioning Agent Griffin added to the hilarity by
knocking the microphone off it’s stand in typical “Columbo” fashion. An
annoyed Bill Johnston finally assisted placing the microphone back. She said
she attended an injured agent at the back of an outhouse with two other
agents. Contradicting the testimony of other agents Ms. Griffin said the
ladder teams came out of the trailer first. True to form, she said she had no
idea what other teams on the raid were doing or their assignments.

Testifying for the government, Texas Ranger Gerardo De Los Santos, described
an interrogation he gave Davidian Jaime Castillo the day after the fire.
Castillo told him that he had received an AR-15 about two weeks before the
raid and that on the morning of the assault he couldn’t find a magazine that
would fit it. He went down through the cafeteria where he found an AK-47. In
cross examination it was learned that part of his statement was that Castillo
said he didn’t fire a shot during the botched raid. It was also noted that
Ranger De Los Santos did not tape the interview or have any witnesses present
during the interview.

When attorney Stanley Rentz asked Ranger De Los Santos what Jaime had told
him his duties were at Mt. Carmel, the prosecution objected vehemently. Rentz
tried to rephrase the question but another objection quelled the Ranger’s
response.

When Agent Kenneth Chisolm was called to testify, he got into a battle of
semantics with Mike DeGeurin over the phrase “flash grenades.” Agents prefer
to call them “diversionary devices.” DeGeurin pointed out that they do
explode and can cause injury or death as is written on the label. Chisolm
claims that he prefers to say “a rapid expansion of gasses” rather than
explode. Personally, I wish they would just bring one into court, detonate it,
and let the jury make up their own mind as to what they are.

The rest of Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning were filled with the
testimony of three of the pilots in the Texas Air National Guard helicopters
used on the raid. Guardsmen Jerry Seagraves, Doyle L. Stone, and Bryon
Dickens all testified that they arrived on the scene after the cattle
trailers, and that after taking fire they were forced to land in a field,
never getting within 1000 feet of the Mt. Carmel center.

Photographs and videotape shown to the jury when KWTX-TV 10 cameraman Dan
Mulohney testified, contradicted what the chopper pilots had said under oath.
Mulohney described the copters coming in very low and circling the building
three times at about 9:25AM, some 20 minutes before the cattle trailers
arrived. A video was shown that illustrated this event. Mulohney claims it was
filmed from a location a mile Southeast of the complex on Elk Rd. Then a
video of the raid was shown. Mr. Mulohney’s voice cracked as he described
being “verbally and physically” abused by the ATF after the raid. He was
asked if he had gotten in the way or impeded ATF at any time to warrant such
an attack. He replied no, he “cooperated fully” with them. He was asked if he
hadn’t assisted the ATF in locating one of the injured agents. His reply, “We
directed them to an injured, person.” He was asked by Jeff Kearney how long
he was on the scene, and replied 2 to 2 1/2 hours. He said he was trying to
save tape is why there is only 17 minutes of tape. When asked by DeGeurin who
edited that tape the response was, “I don’t know.”

Thursday, afternoon the prosecution called undercover Agent Robert Rodriguez
whose testimony carried over into Friday as well. Rodriguez described his
final meeting with the Davidians. He said he came over to show David the Waco
paper to see what reaction there might be to the “Sinful Messiah” series the
paper was running. The only Davidians present at the time were David Koresh,
Steve Schneider, and Sherry Jewell. Sometime during the meeting David
received a long distance call from England, and left the room. When he came
back he said, “They’re coming Robert, the time has come. The ATF and the
National Guard are coming. They got me once they’ll never get me again.”
Before he, (Rodriguez) left he could see the snipers and video equipment in
the windows of the undercover house across the street, so he knew sect
members could also see them. David shook his hand and said, “good luck
Robert” as he left.

He then recalled the one and only time he went to the complex to shoot
rifles. He said he passed a lot of spent .223 casings along the way. The only
sect members that accompanied him to the firing range were David Koresh,
David Thibodeau and Scott Sonobe, although Sonobe did not fire a weapon. He
also testified that about three weeks after the raid he retained a lawyer in
Dallas because he could see that ATF spokespersons were lying about the raid
and he felt they were going to make him the “scapegoat.” He did tell
supervisors at the undercover house and at TSTC (the command post) that raid
secrecy had been compromised, but the raid commenced anyway because the sect
was not arming themselves. Under sometimes emotional cross examination
Rodriguez responded to questions dealing with the group’s philosophies and
teachings. He was asked by Steven Rosen if he believed in home schooling, to
which he replied, “Sir, we have our laws.” He stated, “he was not truly
aware that the raid was going to involve climbing on the roof or smashing in
the windows.” He referred to his work as an infiltrator as being an “acting
job.” The long time friend of fellow agent Davy Agillerra stated that he
made eight trips into the center, and that in the bible studies at least, ”
Koresh knew what he was talking about.” He was asked if he was shown a film
by the Gun Owners of America called, “Breaking the Law in the Name of the
Law.” The prosecution objected to this question. But Smith allowed him to
answer that yes he had seen it.

He identified the other members of the undercover team as Kurt Tinker, O’
Flagherty, Jeff Orchowski, Wade Brown, Steven Steele and Wade Burgant.
Rodriguez said he was raised as a Catholic and “just about everything he
(Koresh) said, “didn’t make sense” to him. He went on, “I did not like
having to sit there and pretend that I believed in this man, and pretend that
I liked this man, it was just a big joke, I didn’t like it!” He said he
would come out and tell the other agents, “You won’t believe what I heard
this time!”

The rest of Friday afternoon was devoted to descriptions of the arrest of
Norman Allison after an alleged second shoot-out about 5 p.m. the evening of
the raid. A DPS officer was called and testified to having stopped three men
on Old Mexia Rd. shortly after the original shooting, about 12 noon he said.
The officer allowed the three men to continue onward because they didn’t
appear to be a threat, and were apparantly unarmed.

ATF Agent Wayne Appelt testified he was part of a sniper team set up in a
barn at the rear of the property. As the team was exiting the location they
moved about 300 yards onto a neighboring ranch whereby they engaged 3
individuals in a “gunfight” who were down in a ravine some one hundred yards
away. One, presumed to be Mike Schroeder, he shot in the leg. Another, Norman
Allison, was arrested. A third man, believed to be defendant Bob Kendrick,
escaped and was captured later. After Allison was arrested, Appelt
testified, the 14 agents left the area. Astonishingly, there was apparently,
no attempt to locate the injured man. About four days later, on a Thursday,
according to Appelt, the body of Schroeder was found. But how Agent Dan
Conroy was able to tell the press on Tuesday, March 2, two days prior to
Thursday, that one of the 3 assailants was shot and killed remains a
mystery. Photos introduced into evidence of the location the body was removed
from raised still more unanswered questions. There was only sparse “scrub
brush” in the area. The few trees were barren and the “ravine” was more of a
low spot in the open pasture. A body here would have been easily sighted from
the ground or the air.

Chapter 5

Week Four

New Details of ATF Investigation Emerge
The fourth week of the trial of eleven Branch Davidians charged with
murdering federal agents began with the continuation of testimony about the
sniping of sect member Michael Schroeder. Special Agent Charles Meyer
described the area and mobile home where Woodrow “Bob” Kendrick, who
allegedly accompanied Schroeder and Davidian Norman Allison on an attempt to
walk into Mt. Carmel the evening of the raid, was arrested several days
later.

Agents then testified that Schroeder was wounded in the leg in a second gun
battle on property bordering the eastern edge of Mt. Carmel acreage. Fourteen
ATF agents fired at Schroeder from a distance of about 100 yds., who was
allegedly armed with a 9mm pistol. Norman Allison was arrested near the
scene, but a third man, believed to be Kendrick escaped. The body of
Schroeder was left in the wooded area for several days. Department of Public
Safety officers recovered 75 ATF shell casings of various caliber from the
area and eighteen 9mm casings near the body of Schroeder. Agents say the body
was recovered March 4, using a Bradley armored vehicle for cover. The area
of the alleged skirmish is about a quarter mile from the Mt. Carmel building
and is completely invisible from the entire complex. It was not clear,
however, why agents believed they had jurisdiction to shoot at someone not on
Davidian property. Mike Schroeder could just as easily have been the owner or
custodian of the property in which case the agents, admittedly dressed in
camouflage “gilly suits,” were in fact, armed trespassers. Further, since
this location is not visible from Mt Carmel, why would an armored vehicle be
needed to recover Schroeder’s remains?

It was the story of two DPS officers and one Sheriff deputy in March that
Schroeder was identified on March 2, in a completely different location
northwest of the Mt. Carmel property. That location and date were affirmed as
well in a tape recorded interview with McLennan Co. Justice of the Peace
James Collier. It was reported Schroeder was shot several times. No agents
were reported injured in the incident.

Agents then took the stand to recount using two armored vehicles to search
and destroy the Mag Bag, an auto restoration facility six miles west of Mt.
Carmel, leased by the Davidians. Agents denied ever knowing that building
owner, Gary Welch, had offered to open the building with a key for the
agents. Nothing was found in the “shop” except six shotgun shells. Pictures
of the wrecked building were shown to the jury.

On Tuesday former Davidian Victorine Hollingsworth, a 60-year-old black
Briton, testified that she left the complex on March 21 and was immediately
hospitalized with a heart condition. Her testimony, often times inaudible,
centered upon events before and several hours after the botched February 28
raid. She identified several sect members who she saw armed several hours or
days after the ATF attack, but could not see if anyone in the group was armed
during the raid because she had to lay face down on the hallway floor to
avoid being shot. Hollingsworth also sketchily detailed a proposed suicide
plan she overheard two members planning in the event David Koresh succumbed
to his wounds.

The weight of her testimony was severely damaged by defense attorney Doug
Tinker when he read from the transcript of her taped interview with Texas
Rangers in March. Tinker stood next to the witness stand as he read. Ms.
Hollingsworth listened expressionlessly, “QUESTIONER: Did David have a gun?
ANSWER: I don’t know, can’t remember. Maybe. QUESTIONER: Was it a rifle?
ANSWER: Is that the long one? QUESTIONER: Yes the long one. ANSWER: You hold
it with one hand? QUESTIONER: No two hands like this. Is that what he had?
ANSWER: No, don’t think so. QUESTIONER: So it was a pistol? ANSWER: The short
one? QUESTIONER: Yeah. When did you first see him with the pistol? ANSWER:
Don’t know, can’t remember. Maybe at night.” Prosecutor Ray Jahn objected to
a partial reading of her deposition, but as Tinker continued reading the same
unsure, rambling, statement, it became clear that in March she had no useful
recollection of events surrounding the botched raid. At one point, an
animated Tinker looked up from the document and quipped at Jahn,”Is that
enough? You want me to read some more?”

Ms. Hollingsworth testified under cross examination that the tanks the
government brought in made her “more afraid” of coming out, and that she and
others were constantly fearful of another ATF attack.

The remainder of the day was filled with the testimony of several gun and gun
part dealers called in by the prosecution from as far away as Washington
State. The dealers read from order forms and ‘4473s’ detailing purchases made
by sect members between Jan. 1991 and Aug. 1992. None of the purchases were
illegal however. The government paid round trip airfare, accommodations and
food allowance for over 40 gun, book, video, and gun parts dealers to make
the trip to San Antonio.

On Wednesday the government continued to call more gun dealers to the stand.
Again, none of the purchases were illegal, and Mike DeGeurin, representing
Paul Fatta, successfully demonstrated that the Davidians were, in fact,
buying wholesale with the intent of reselling the merchandise at gun shows.

Finally, Wednesday afternoon, the long anticipated testimony of Kathy
Schroeder commenced after a lengthy, well written, motion for mistrial was
read into the record by attorney Dan Cogdell. Judge Smith, to no one’s
surprise, denied the motion, which accused the government of repeatedly
violating the Brady rule. This rule specifies guidelines for evidence
discovery, allowing the defense access to evidence before it is presented in
court.

Mrs. Schroeder testified she came to Mt. Carmel in 1989 with husband, Mike
and her three children. At that time she divorced Michael, so she could become
one of David’s wives. She said some Davidians often got into trouble for
simple things like “eating in the rooms” or “walking the perimeter.”

She claimed that on the morning of the attack, she began preparing to serve
the 6 a.m. breakfast at 5 a.m., which was the normal time for breakfast
at the center. After breakfast she heard someone say, “hurry up and get back
to the rooms because Robert (the undercover agent) is coming over.” After
Robert left she heard a message in the hall for everyone to meet in the
church. Leaving her children in the room, she waited in the church for about
20 minutes before Koresh came into the church, walked about half way up the
aisle, and said, “what are ya’ll doing in here? Go back to your rooms and
watch.” She said David was wearing a black vest and carrying an AK-47 rifle.
On the way to her room she saw Livingston Fagan with a gun and wearing a
black vest also.

As she watched from her first floor window she described men going back and
forth between the two houses across the street, and described a vehicle being
moved from one house to the other. She saw the two cattle trailers coming
down the road about 9 a.m. She could only see the top half of the trailers
as men in dark uniforms came jumping out of the back, running toward the door
with guns pointed at the door. She testified she couldn’t see any writing or
badges on the uniforms until the agents left an hour or so later. Then she
noticed the “ATF” letters on the back of their coats. She heard gunshots as
the men ran at the door, but couldn’t determine the source. Five to ten
seconds later bullets started to penetrate her window and walls so she got
down and put her kids under the bed. At least “half a dozen” shots came into
her room but she didn’t return fire because she had no weapon at the time.

After the cease fire, Greg Summers and Brad Branch came to see if she was
all right and Kevin Whitecliff told her to go to the kitchen and get cokes
for the men. On the way she noticed a crate with “a handful of grenades” on
the serving counter.

The next day she went to the gun room to get a fully automatic AR-15. She
described how to distinguish an automatic AR-15 from a semi-automatic, and
said she began “straightening” the gun room which was in disarray. She also
began sorting ammunition and went to the old gun room to look for some .308
caliber ammo because no one could find any. There she noticed a “great big
round, jagged hole in the wall that had not been there before.” Schroeder
says Koresh, now injured, was in the hall laying down when Neil Veaga came in
and asked if he could “finish off” Perry Jones and told David that he
finished off Peter Hippsman as well.

Rita Riddle and Misty Ferguson’s cars had been moved to take children out the
evening before and her own four children left on March 1. Later, Neil Veaga
told her that David was making a tape, and that after it aired, they were all
going to come out and “draw fire” so they could be killed. Continuing under
direct examination, Schroeder testified she “made sure” Ruth Riddle had a gun
and 9mm magazine. Schroeder’s testimony continued into Thursday and under
cross examination the details of her plea bargain agreement and a movie
contract were revealed. She was given a choice of “possible lethal injection”
or, in exchange for testifying for the government, she could plead guilty to
a charge of “impeding an officer with a deadly weapon.” Judge Smith will
sentence her after the trial and, depending on her performance as a witness,
a recommendation from the prosecutors could reduce her sentence from the
mandatory ten years. While she was jailed, her attorney Scott Peterson,
negotiated a movie contract with Citadel’s Mark Sennett. In addition to an
advance of $12,000, she and her attorney will receive a royalty percentage.

Schroeder also confirmed that while incarcerated she spent time in the
Lexington, Kentucky facility for the criminally insane, but couldn’t remember
making a statement to a fellow inmate, Betty Jean Jordan, “I’m going to tell
them whatever they want to hear. I just want to be with my children, I’ve got
to get out of prison!” Schroeder now claims that everything she told the FBI
and the Rangers before the plea bargain was a lie. She was asked if she
ever “conspired” with anyone at Mt. Carmel to kill federal agents. The
objection to this question by the prosecution was overruled and she answered
that no such conspiring ever took place. She further testified that none of
the exterior walls had been fortified with hay or barricaded until well after
the initial ATF attack. And she said in addition to the named defendants, she
also observed Dave Thibodeau, Derek Lovelock, Oliver Gyarfas, Rita Riddle and
others carrying weapons in the days following the February attack. Saying
“everyone was scared to death,” Schroeder described bullet holes in the
walls and roof of the tower.

Attorney Mike DeGeurin concluded his cross examination of Mrs. Schroeder by
asking her to identify pictures displayed on the courtroom overhead projector
of sect members who allegedly died in the April 19 fire. Kathy smiled as she
recalled the names for the jury; “Doris Fagan, Yvette Fagan, Lisa Farris,
Diane Henry, Zilla Henry.” She paused as a photo of an attractive, light-
skinned Hispanic woman with long straight brown hair was displayed. “That’s
Teresa Noriega,” she said, “and she had a daughter, Natalie.” From photos,
Schroeder also identified Rosemary Morrison, Mellisa Morrison, and Juliette
Martinez who perished along with five children. She was asked if she would be
able to identify the voice of Wayne Martin.

The remainder of Thursday afternoon was devoted to the testimony of more gun
dealers. But the final witness called by the prosecution Thursday, Karen
Kilpatrick of Hewitt Handguns, proved lethal to the prosecution’s case. Ms.
Kilpatrick, the common-law wife of Hewitt Handgun owner Henry McMahon,
testified into Friday morning about the people she had come to know
personally at the Mt. Carmel center. She showed pictures as she fondly
recalled the 1969 vintage Camaro David Koresh and friends worked to restore
at the “shop” for her in 1992. She also gave heretofore unknown details of a
business venture that her husband and the Davidians had entered into that
allowed Koresh and defendant Paul Fatta use of the Hewitt Handguns’ Federal
Firearms License.

After several emotional objections from prosecutor Johnston, Kilpatrick was
finally allowed to graphically illustrate how ATF agent Davy Aguillera
frantically waved his arms and shook his head “no” during a compliance check
of their gun store records in August of 1992. As Aguillera, who is present in
all these proceedings slumped in his seat, Kilpatrick described the agent
entering their place of business posing as a trainee and wearing sloppy
tennis shoes, ragged jeans and a dirty T-shirt. When it became obvious to her
husband that Aguillera was only interested in the guns Koresh had bought, he
(McMahon) telephoned David, telling him that ATF was there and they were
questioning the number of guns he had bought. Koresh said to send them on out
to look for themselves. When McMahon tried to hand the phone to Aguillera he
waved his arms and shook his head as demonstrated by Ms. Kilpatrick on the
witness stand. Prosecutors appeared both annoyed and embarrassed as the
entire courtroom burst into laughter.

It was also during this testimony that the David Koresh Brand label of
clothing was introduced into evidence. The Davidians were sewing magazine
vests custom order for sportsmen, shooters, and lawmen, specializing in tall
and big-man sizes. For this they had filed the DBA “Mag Bag” at the County
Courthouse, and sold the vests in various colors at gun shows.

Another interesting witness called by Johnston was Kenneth Lands, an employee
of Radio Shack in Waco, who testified that on April 15, 1992, David Koresh
purchased, GASP and God forbid, 6 walkie-talkies. Also of note, was the
testimony Friday of a representative of Palladin Publications, a book and
video dealer from Boulder, Colorado, about 1992 purchases of clandestine
mail order books by Sect member Jeff Little. Wise to the game, DeGeurin asked
the representative if he knew or had ever talked to Jeff on the phone. The
response was no, the ATF only asked for the orders placed by Mr. Little. No
other Sect member’s name was inquired about. After this testimony it was
evident that someone in the ATF had used Jeff Little’s name and the Mag Bag
address to “mail order” the books.

As court recessed for the week, Judge Smith commented that 98 witnesses had
so far been called and it is expected the defense will begin presenting it’s
case sometime next week.

Chapter 6

Week Five

Agents’ Deaths Remain a Mystery
After 4 1/2 weeks of testimony, government witnesses have thus far failed to
produce any new revelations about how, when, why and where ATF agents died
in the botched Mt. Carmel raid. Most of the information to come out of the
proceedings so far has been an in-depth rehashing of the stories pandered to
the media during the morning FBI press briefings held in last year’s stand-
off. The only exception has been the testimony of ATF agents about the death
of Spcl. Agent Steven Willis. Courtroom testimony about the death of Agent
Willis has differed greatly from the events as described in public statements
by ATF Director Stephen Higgins and information officers Dan Conroy and Ed
(Dan) Hartnett before they were all fired or asked to retire last fall for
lying to the public and Congress.

This week prosecutors introduced more evidence of weapons purchases, calling
numerous gun dealers and UPS drivers to the witness stand. Testifying Monday
was 8-year UPS employee Debra Haney, who said that when she made deliveries
to Mt. Carmel she was afraid of the dogs, so she usually honked until a sect
member would come to the truck to receive the shipment. She identified Paul
Fatta as one of those who had met her in the church driveway. She had no
information as to what was in the packages however, and acknowledged that as
long as the parcel was paid for, anyone there could sign for it. Prosecutors
implied that there must have been illegal activity afoot because the Branch
Davidians, “always paid with cash.”

The next witness called was FBI hostage rescue team (HRT) agent Mike
Toulouse, a sniper assigned March 3 to the motorcycle garage at the rear of
the property. After laying in sandbag reinforcement, Toulouse said the FBI
could safely view any activity inside the compound. Toulouse said the Branch
Davidians almost immediately began cutting observation ports into the siding.
He identified holes in the north end of the building, as pictured in
government exhibit 2136, as holes that were made after Wed., March 3 by the
Branch Davidians so they could see and shoot out. The problem with this
testimony is that video footage exists of that end of the building taken on
Monday, March 1 with those same holes already visible. Toulouse testified
that FBI snipers manning the observation posts were armed with .308 Remington
sniper rifles, M-16 assault rifles, 9 mm pistols, .50 caliber sniper rifles,
an M60 machine gun, and a grenade launcher. They also had motion-sensor
lights, night-vision equipment and 24-hour coverage at the sniper positions.

Under cross-examination from Dan Cogdell, Toulouse said that FBI Agent
Dick Rogers made the decision to bring in the .50 caliber rifle, machine
gun, and grenade launchers to the site and that he was notified early in the
afternoon of Sunday, Feb. 28, that he was going to Waco. He said he wasn’t
told initially there were hostages inside, and their training was not
for these type situations.

He was also asked if “flash grenades” were used to keep people from coming
out of Mt. Carmel. His reply was “yes, many times, including Mar. 10 and
April 19.” He said they were not fired at Steve Schneider but at another
man. Toulouse also testified that he never saw any flags or banners hung
out of the building even though he was there throughout the 51-day siege.

The agent was also shown photographs from April 19 of the gymnasium at
the East side of the building. It was collapsed and fire and smoke were
visible there. The agent agreed that this was the first point of ignition,
contrary to Paul Gray’s alleged independent assessment.

Under cross-examination by Stanley Rentz, Toulouse said that he didn’t
hear any .50 caliber being fired on April 19 or at any time during the siege.

On Monday afternoon, Melvin Spitzenberger from the State Comptroller’s
office testified that Paul Fatta had received a tax permit under the name
of Seraph Guitars that reported $1.00 in sales in 1992.

The prosecution also called two more FBI HRT members, Thomas G. Rowan
and John W. Morrison.

They testified that “flashbangs” were used by the FBI at various times
to keep the residents of Mt. Carmel from coming out, and that on April 19
they could have shot and killed some of the sect members with their M-16s
but chose not to. They also agreed that if one of the 400, 40mm, Ferret CS
gas canisters fired into Mt. Carmel hit someone it could be lethal.

On Tuesday, attorney Mike DeGeurin asked Agent Morrison about tape
recordings of radio communication between agents. The defense, he said, had
been given these tapes by the government, but he didn’t remember hearing
Morrison on the tapes. Agent Morrison replied he didn’t know of any such
tapes. Morrison also claimed to have seen a man starting a fire inside Mt.
Carmel on April 19, near where the piano had been just inside the front
doors. On cross-examination by Dan Cogdell, the witness admitted that the
individual might have been putting a fire out that was started by one of the
tanks exiting the building. Morrison also admitted that his testimony about
when and where Mt. Carmel residents had exited the center during the fire was
in error. He now says he did not see anyone come out of the front.

FBI Agent Jim Atherton testified Tuesday under direct examination from Bill
Johnston that he was driving the Bradley APC with the diagonal red cross flag
on it. This was done for the benefit of those inside the center. So they
would know that the tank was not destroying their building, but was
“peacefully helping” them exit the building.

Under cross-examination Atherton admitted that the “red cross” was actually
a red “X” like on an Alabama state flag, and that there were no first-aid
provisions on hand. Further, if any Branch Davidians had tried to enter
the vehicle for help they would have been considered a threat and shot.
Atherton also recanted his taped statement in April to the Texas Rangers. In
that statement he had told Ranger Boyer that Davidian Clive Doyle had come
out of the compound, sat next to the concertina wire, and then was
handcuffed there. He had said that there were four Davidian prisoners already
sitting there and that the man who jumped off the roof came over and sat down
with them. A series of pictures of the man jumping off the roof (exhibits
317- 319) is shown and no other people are visible.

Later, FBI Agent Kenneth Vincent testified that the person agents kept
seeing they nicknamed “Elvis” was Ruth Riddle, and that he, unlike previous
government witnesses had seen a man throw a telephone out the front door on
April 19, and later saw a banner about the phone needing repair. When
Attorney Doug Tinker asked if the CS gas was liquid, he replied yes, it was
in “droplet form.”

FBI Agent James Magee, who was in Waco 50 days, testified that he rescued
sect member Ruth Riddle from the fire. He said he asked “Where are the
children?” as he dragged Ruth away from the building. He was not pressed by
the prosecution or the defense team for what Mrs. Riddle’s response to this
question was. He also said that though agents wore fire-proof, nomex suits
that day, there was no fire extinguishing equipment on board any of the
tanks.

Next up was FBI Agent David Johnson, who testified he was an ambulance
driver on the nineteenth. He said that as he left the scene with Renos
Avraam, he asked Renos where the children were. The reply was “probably
upstairs.” As to who started the fire, Renos replied “don’t know, the voice
came from downstairs.”

The last witness called by the government Tuesday was R.J. Craig, an FBI
agent who also worked at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, a similar stand-off that occurred
in August 1992. Craig’s testimony carried over into Wednesday morning. He is
in charge of the FBI armored vehicle team, and also served 8 years in the
Marine Corps. Craig testified that during the stand-off all the Davidian cars
were moved by the tanks, and that 2 in. of topsoil was removed during the
stand-off. Richard “Dick” Rodgers was Agent in Charge and Charles Pierce was
his immediate team leader. Craig says CO2 was used as the propellant for the
CS gas. He was not asked to name the dispersant or carrier. He says it was a
“jerry-rigged” system that took a week to assemble at Fort Hood and that it
“sprayed all the gas as a mist with one pull of a lever.” All gas from each
cylinder was used in seventeen seconds in a 45′ stream. He sprayed the buried
bus area first to prevent people from escaping there. They had radio problems
at about 10 a.m. Craig also said that he never heard anything broadcast over
the loudspeakers on April 19, and incredulously, no photos or videos were
taken from the tanks. The agent also said he didn’t know why people didn’t
come out, saying, “Any normal person would run from a tank.”

Defense attorney Dan Cogdell asked if he had seen prosecutor Bill Johnston
on the raid. The prosecution vehemently objected to that question, and Judge
Smith would not allow the agent to answer.

Craig testified he was first made aware of the plan to gas the center
on around March 24, and there were about 15 meetings where the gassing
plan was discussed, but no written notes were taken and no written plan was
ever issued.

Texas Rangers and others who assisted in the crime scene search and
arson investigation testified about the veracity of the findings of
“independent” arson investigator Paul Gray. Chemist Andrew Armstrong, from
Dallas, testified that he “makes a living” analyzing arson debris and
testifying in court on behalf of the ATF.

Testimony concluded with the showing of the FLIR (Forward Looking
Infrared) video tape. This footage, filmed from an aircraft during
the April 19 fire, was obtained using special infrared technology which
allows the camera to record sources of heat. The film was not shown in its
entirety and had obvious edit cuts. The FLIR video showed that the fire
in the chapel started one minute and twenty-four seconds before a second
fire began upstairs on the southwest end. Government witnesses could not
explain several suspicious flashes at the rear of the building, seconds
before the first fire breaks out.

Friday’s testimony, delayed until noon due to inclement weather, included
the Medical Examiner from Fort Worth, Dr. Nizaam Peerwani. Peerwani graduated
from Baylor University Medical school in 1976, and has been a Tarrant County
Medical Examiner for thirteen years. Dr. Peerwani began his testimony by
describing the fatal wounds of the four dead ATF agents. There were several
inconsistencies in his testimony. He concluded his testimony by identifying
sect members bodies on a chart. Several names and ages were in error, but on
Monday Dr. Peerwani was recalled to the witness stand and was allowed to
correct his mistakes. These are the names and locations of the bodies he
found in the fire-strewn rubble, along with his cause of death to each:

IN THE CHAPEL (THE SOUTH END OF THE COMPLEX)

MC doe #1 Raymond Freisen, 76, white male, Carbon monoxide poisoning (CO)
MC doe #2 Livingstone Malcolm, 26, Black male, CO poisoning

IN THE AUDITORIUM

MC doe #3 Floyd Houtman, 61, black male, burns
MC doe #4 Unidentified male, age unknown, burns
MC doe #6 Douglas Wayne Martin, 42, black male, burns

IN THE COMMUNICATIONS ROOM

MC doe #5 Mark Wendel, 37, white male, burns
MC doe #7 Steve Schneider, 48, white male, gunshot in the mouth
MC doe #8 David Koresh, 32, white male, gunshot to forehead

IN THE KITCHEN/ SERVING AREA AND HALLWAY

MC doe #9 Unidentified male, approx. 48, CO poisoning
MC doe #10 Sonia Murray, 31, black female, CO poisoning
MC doe #11 Unidentified female, approx. 25-35,CO poisoning
MC doe #12 Jennifer Andrade, 20, white female,CO poisoning
MC doe #13 Unidentified female, 30-50, spinal fracture
MC doe #14 Unidentified female, 30-39, burns
MC doe #15 Unidentified male, 35-50, burns
MC doe #16 Unidentified female, 22-28, CO poisoning
MC doe #17 Unidentified female, 22-40, CO poisoning
MC doe #18 Unidentified female, 17-35, CO poisoning
MC doe #19 Unidentified female, 30-50, CO poisoning
MC doe #20 James Riddle, 32, white male, gunshot in forehead, shrapnel ribs
MC doe #21 Phillip Henry, 26, black male, gunshot to chest
MC doe #22 Stephen Henry, 23, black male, gunshot to forehead
MC doe #23 Susan Benta, 31, black female, CO poisoning
MC doe #43 Lisa Farris, 24, white female, gunshot to head

IN THE HALLWAY NEAR “MEN’S QUARTERS”

MC doe #24 Unidentified female, 20-50, CO poisoning
MC doe #25 Yvette Fagan, 30, black female, CO poisoning
MC doe #26 Unidentified female, 15-19, burns
MC doe #27 Doris Fagan, 60, black female, CO poisoning
MC doe #28 Unidentified female, over 50, CO poisoning
MC doe #29 Unidentified female, 25-50, burns
ON TOP OF THE “BUNKER:” (ABOVE-GROUND, CONCRETE FOOD STORAGE ROOM)

MC doe #36 David Jones, 38, white male, burns
MC doe #37 Aldrick Bennett, 35, black male, CO poisoning
MC doe #38 Rebecca Saipai, 38, race unspecified, burns
MC doe #39 Novelette Hippsman, 36, black female, gunshot to chest
MC doe #40 Unidentified male, 27-40, burns
MC doe #41 Neil Vaega, 36, Hispanic male, gunshot to head
MC doe #42 Pablo Cohen, 32, white male, CO poisoning
MC doe #44 Unidentified male, 27-40, gunshot to left chest

IN THE “BUNKER:” (ABOVE-GROUND, CONCRETE FOOD STORAGE ROOM)

MC doe #30 Katherine Andrade, 30, white female, CO poisoning
MC doe #31A Unidentified 8 1/2 mo. female fetus, gunshot in L. chest
MC doe #31B Unidentified 8 1/2 mo. fetus, gunshot to chest
MC doe #31C Human leg
MC doe #31DE Parts of child’s skull, gunshot to head
MC doe #32 Unidentified male, 25-45, CO poisoning
MC doe #33 Unidentified toddler, 2 1/2-3 1/2, stab to ribs
MC doe #34 Floracita Sonobe, 35, white female, gunshot head
MC doe #35 Shari Doyle, 18, White female, gunshot to back of head
MC doe #47 is a group of commingled bodies and parts
MC doe #47A Unidentified female, age unspecified, gunshot to head
MC doe #47B Unidentified child, 3 1/2, sex and cause of death unspecified
MC doe #48 dog (animal)
MC doe #49 Wayne Martin, 20, black male, CO poisoning
MC doe #50 Right humerus (leg bone)
MC doe #51A Unidentified female, 2, CO poisoning
MC doe #51B Judy Schneider, 40, white female, buried alive (no CO or trauma)
MC doe #52 Joseph Martinez, 8, Hisp. male, CO poisoning
MC doe #53 Unidentified female, 5-6, gunshot L. chest
MC doe #54 Juliette Martinez, 30, hisp. female, CO poisoning
MC doe #55 Audrey Martinez, 13, hisp. female, buried alive
MC doe #56 Abigail Martinez, 11, hisp. female, gunshot to head
MC doe #57 Unidentified female, 6, suffocation
MC doe #58 3 bones from 8-9 month fetus
MC doe #59 Unidentified female, 14-19, blunt force trauma to head
MC doe #60 2 human mandibles (jaw bones) of 2-4 yr. child
MC doe #61 Rosemary Morrison, 29, white female, buried alive
MC doe #62 Unidentified sex unknown, 2, suffocation
MC doe #63 Unidentified female, 1-2, blunt force trauma to head
MC doe #64 Unidentified female, 1, CO poisoning
MC doe #65 Unidentified female, 2, CO poisoning
MC doe #66 Unidentified female, 30-50, gunshot L. back
MC doe #67-1 Unidentified female, 5-6, suffocation
MC doe #67-2 Unidentified male, 7-8, buried alive
MC doe #67-3 Rachel Koresh, 23, white female, buried alive
MC doe #67-4 Unidentified female, 2, CO poisoning
MC doe #67-5 Unidentified female, 1, CO poisoning
MC doe #67-6 Unidentified female, 14-18, buried alive
MC doe #67-7 Unidentified sex unknown, 2, cause of death unknown
MC doe #67-8 Unidentified sex unknown, 1, gunshot to head
MC doe #68 Not a body (undetermined or voided bag with contents)
MC doe #69 Unidentified sex unknown, 1-2, CO poisoning
MC doe #70 Unidentified female, 2-3, suffocation
MC doe #71 Michelle Jones, 18, white female, CO poisoning
MC doe #72 Unidentified female, 4-5, CO poisoning
MC doe #73 Unidentified female, 1-2, CO poisoning
MC doe #74 Unidentified female, 7-8, cause of death unknown
MC doe #75 Unidentified female, 25-35, CO poisoning

On Friday Dr. Peerwani continued his testimony about the recovery of sect
member’s bodies after the April 19 fire;

BODIES RECOVERED FROM SHALLOW GRAVES 5/4/93

Peter Gent, 24, white male, gunshot (9mm H.S.) to L. lower chest
Winston Blake, 28, white male, close range (10″) gunshot (.223) behind R. ear
Peter Hippsman, 28, white male, close range 9mm to L. arm and twice in back,
1 gunshot 4″ above R. ear

Jaydeen Wendell, 34, white female, 9mm H.S. (hydroshock) to chest
Perry Jones, 64, white male, single gunshot in mouth

Peerwani said that they “were very surprised these bodies were not that
decomposed. There was no significant difference in decomposition between Gent
and the other four.”

Peerwani also testified that an anthropologist from Washington, D.C. came
down to help recover the bodies. A total of 33-36 bodies were found stacked
inside the “bunker.” They were located along a wall at the rear of the
structure. The bodies on top were partially covered with debris. If he found
no evidence of soot or carbon deposit in the trachea, he ruled the death as
caused by burns or suffocation. In addition, most of these bodies had
shrapnel in them. He believes, based on the positioning, that they all died
very quickly.

No children were found anywhere else in the complex except the “bunker,” and
the bodies of Jeff Little, Scott Sonobe, or Greg Summers were not found.

Johnston then called UPS driver Robert Bell and introduced government
exhibits 2175-2186, computerized delivery records. As with Karen Kilpatrick,
Johnston “passed” this witness suspiciously abruptly after conferring and
whispering with Davy Aguilerra.

Defense attorney Jerry Morris cross-examined Mr. Bell who said, amidst
violent objections from Johnston, that many of the shipments he made had the
Mt. Carmel address, but also had a special note to leave the package at the
house across the street. (The BATF Undercover house)

Court was called into recess at 2:40 until Monday, February 14, 9:00 AM.


Chapter 7

Week Six

The Defense Rests
The prosecution continued to bring FBI personnel to the stand in this, the
sixth week of the Branch Davidian trial in San Antonio. Their testimony,
whether overly rehearsed or not, is so redundant that at times persons in the
gallery and even jurors appear inattentive. One elderly male juror has been
nodding off this week, and I myself was warned by a U.S. marshall to stay
awake. On Tuesday, February 15, the prosecution rested it’s case. Not a
moment to soon I might add.

On Wednesday, the defense called McLennan County Sheriff’s Deputy Lt. Larry
Lynch to the stand. Lynch testified about the “911″ emergency call he
received from Branch Davidian Wayne Martin on the morning of the ATF raid.
During his testimony, the first hour of 49 hours of “911″ tape was played for
the jury. Lynch testified under cross-examination by Bill Johnston that
Wayne Martin did refuse medical help, but it was several hours after the
initial ATF attack. It became clear that Wayne Martin erroneously believed
Lynch was in contact with the ATF attackers leading the Branch Davidians to
perceive three separate attacks by ATF on the first day. Because Lynch was
negotiating a cease-fire without consulting ATF, the Branch Davidians’ trust
in the negotiations suffered an indelible blow.

Lynch was asked if he recognized an ATF agent in a photo shown to the
court. According to courtroom observers it was a photo of Assistant
U.S. Attorney (AUSA) Bill Johnston in an ATF uniform. He said “No, I
don’t know him.”

Lynch also testified about disagreements between FBI negotiators, and
admitted that tactics such as publicly calling David Koresh a “liar
and a coward,” as well as loud music, bright lights and constant
harassment were counterproductive to the negotiations.

Later defense attorney Richard Ferguson called TV news reporter John
McLemore. For the first time since the trial began, I was not allowed into
the courtroom because of space constraints. However, Reporter Dick Reavis
later told me there was “plenty of room” in the “press seating” area of the
gallery. From my seat in the press room I was able to at least hear
McLemmore’s testimony. I was also able to observe McLemmore’s cameraman, Dan
Maloney, seated near the press room speaker, with an “open” microphone in his
lap during direct- and cross-examination of McLemmore, a violation of court
orders. As McLemmore spoke, Maloney mouthed his answers, as though he had
prior knowledge of what Mr. McLemmore was going to say.

Then, when the defense team passed the witness, Maloney said, “Go get
em’ Finizy.” To my surprise the seldom-used prosecution team member
John Finizy, began questioning McLemmore. Like his partner, McLemmore
said that the helicopters came in at least 10 minutes before the cattle
trailers and did circle the complex. Finizy put McLemmore in the position of
having to defend his testimony against the public statements in the form of
news reports he had made after the raid.

Attorney Jack Zimmermann was next up for the defense. A 29-year Marine Corps
veteran now serving as a military judge, he was one of two lawyers allowed to
enter Mt. Carmel during the siege. He was contacted by Sue Johnson, the
sister of Steve Schneider, on March 10, 1993 to represent Schneider, who
allegedly died in the fire. He spent about 16 hours in the center, with about
8 hours devoted to interviews of witnesses.

He described a tour through the center. He observed bullet holes,
made by gunfire from agents in the front yard, that passed through several
interior walls at very sharp angles. This is an indication that agents were
blindly firing into walls. Zimmermann testified that there was evidence of
helicopter gunfire coming in through the roof. He also observed several
blood spots, two of which he described as “massive,” and a badly-burned area
in the “old” arms room. He also observed a “spray pattern” of bullet holes
going into the right-hand front door (the part of the double-door now missing
from evidence) and didn’t notice any outgoing bullet holes in either door.
Zimmermann says that door is crucial because “it would show clearly who fired
first.” He also testified that the doors were made of steel, not aluminum,
and would not have melted in the fire.

He said Mt. Carmel inhabitants had stuffed paper and rags into the bullet
holes to prevent the cold and rain from getting in. He saw a large blood spot
in the upper bunk of the room the Santoyas were in. He was told it was from
Jaydeen Wendell. He said most of the bullet holes went into the second floor,
and he was shocked at the sheer volume of incoming bullet holes. After seeing
the evidence, he realized the ATF had committed crimes against the Davidians
so he asked the State of Texas to investigate the incident . He saw large
blood stains in the old gun room. Zimmermann testified that Coleman lanterns
were kept turned on even during the day because some interior rooms had no
windows. He observed 20-25 different people during his visits. They were
well- fed and he saw no evidence of dehydration. On April 4 he went back
inside Mt. Carmel and asked the Branch Davidians to take photos and
videotapes of all bullet holes and blood spots.

Zimmermann said he was told on April 14 by the FBI that the Branch
Davidians had all the time in the world, so he was shocked when he learned
of the tank assault on the nineteenth. He said all of the Branch Davidians he
met were pleasant, polite, articulate, good people. He was told that the
father of Judy’s baby was Steve, not David Koresh. He never saw anyone
carrying weapons. Never saw any .50 caliber weapons or hand grenades. He was
told that David would have invited the ATF in because they had nothing to
hide. He said he tried to stay away from the blood stains, and that he
was shown the entire complex, except for the walk-in cooler. He was told
by the Branch Davidians on April 14 that David would need about two more
weeks to complete his work on the seven seals.

On cross-examination Zimmermann told prosecutor Johnston that he didn’t
look for specific weapons because the ATF was still claiming the search
warrants were sealed, and he never got to see the warrants until after
the fire. Steve Schneider assured him there would be no suicide.

Defense attorneys next called Coryell County Sheriff Deputy Delbert King
to the stand. Officer King testified that previous prosecution witness
Bradley Rogan had only been incarcerated one day with defendant Renos Avraam.
This testimony damaged the credibility of a key prosecution witness and
Johnston appeared reluctant to cross-examine a uniformed Texas peace officer.

Tommy Spangler, a Waco wrecking-yard employee, and Mike Bernard, a
machinest in Axtell, Texas both affirmed that David Koresh had been in their
places of business as late as 4 days prior to the botched ATF raid.

As court resumed on Thursday, Feb. 17, the defense recalled Jack
Zimmermann to the stand to clarify that the mysterious missing front door was
made of steel, not aluminum, and therefore should have survived the fire. He
also shed some light on a statement reportedly made by Graeme Craddock to the
Grand Jury. He (Zimmerman) was told by Mr. Craddock on one of the visits
inside the complex, that Graeme lay on the floor throughout the shooting and
never fired a shot. Mr. Craddock told the Grand Jury that at one point he
thought he overheard a plan to “firebomb the Bradleys” as a last resort.

Defense attorney Mike DeGeurin then called Mrs. Sawyer, a woman whose arm
was blown off by a police “flash bang” grenade while she was sitting in her
living room. A picture of her badly disfigured right arm was admitted into
evidence. She has required six surgeries since the arm was reattached.
Degeurin also called Rob Milter, a Florida gun dealer who attested to seeing
Paul Fatta at a gun show the day of the raid.
Attorney John Carroll called Texas Ranger Johnny Waldrip to the stand,
who testified about finding a safe and a photo of a safe. This testimony was
somewhat cryptic. It has been reported by some of the Davidian survivors that
a safe containing $40,000 and other valuables came up missing from the scene.

Stanley Rentz then called Graeme Craddock’s Mother, June Craddock, to the
stand. She testified about Graeme’s involvement in the Seventh Day
Adventist Church.

At lunch that day I was stopped by Federal Marshals while walking across a
public parking lot with my friend Myrtle Riddle and her daughter Rita. The
officer, a Hispanic man about 35, pulled up beside us in his “marked” squad
car and asked me where I was going. Thinking the officer must be bored and
looking for company during the lunch break, I replied, “We’re going to lunch,
would you care to join us.” He said, “No. Sir, I’m sorry but I’ve been
instructed to “ID” you.” Somewhat taken aback by this I handed him my press
credentials and asked who had given such an instruction and for what purpose.
By this time a black U.S. Marshal had joined in and he requested to see my
trial notes. The Hispanic officer said that he could not tell me why I was
being detained, but that they had a ‘buzz’ in the “service” and the ‘buzz’
says that I needed to be identified. After checking my court issued “press
pass,” driver’s license, and Social Security card I was finally allowed to
proceed to lunch.

After the incident, Rita, who was quite perturbed by this annoyance, informed
me that I did not have to submit to such an interrogation, and that I should
have been less cooperative. She cited Articles one and four of the amendments
to the Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the United States. Though she was
correct, as usual, I am basically a pacifist and a “chicken” when it comes to
confrontations with men wearing loaded 9mm pistols. Besides, I doubt I was the
only journalist interrogated in this manner. I included the account of this
incident in this book because it illustrates how the press can be intimidated
without the government actually initiating a policy of oppression.

After lunch the defense attempted to call gun dealer Henry McMahon to the
stand but the judge would not allow this witness to testify. At 2 p.m. on
Thursday, Feb. 17, the defense rested its case. The jury was excused until
Tuesday of the following week to allow lawyers to debate the “jury charge.”

I spoke with McMahon and his attorney, Robert Montserrat of Dallas. They were
hesitant to discuss the case because of a pending lawsuit against the ATF.
McMahon believes the ATF harassed him and unlawfully put him out of business.
He also suffered medical disorders from the ATF’s continued pursuit of he and
companion Karen Kilpatrick related to the Branch Davidian case.

On Friday, without the presence of a jury, the lawyers argued about what they
would and would not like to see included in the “jury charge.” The entire
jury charge has been reprinted in the rear of this book.


Chapter 8

Week Seven

Final Arguments: Cogdell Steals Show

On Tuesday, February 22, lawyers for the prosecution began their final
arguments in this case. Because of the importance of this phase of the trial,
I have decided to simply reproduce, to the best of my ability, a verbatim
transcription of their statements to the jury.

Because of the number of lawyers involved, time limits have been imposed. Two
and a half hours for Bill Johnston to open for the State, 30 minutes each for
John Finizy and Ray Jahn who will close for the State. As in any case the
State is given the last word, but here they will argue first and last. Jeff
Kearney, Joe Turner, Stanley Rentz, John Carroll, Rocket Rosen, Doug Tinker,
Gerry Morris, Tim Evans, and Dan Cogdell will each be allotted 30 minutes for
defendant’s closing arguments.

Prosecutor Bill Johnston:

“Let’s talk about the charge of conspiracy. Let’s say you’ve got two guys
planning a bank robbery. One of ‘em is aggressive and mean. The other one is
timid and more of a follower. The timid one goes to a gun shop or a gun show
and buys a gun, then gives a gun to the aggressive one who then goes out and
robs the bank and kills the security guard. The timid one is also guilty of
murder- and it can’t be self defense.

Aiding and abetting is much the same. (Spins toward defendants, points at
Paul Fatta) Paul Fatta being conveniently miles away, while all his weapons of
war are being used to cripple and murder. They say (arm sweeps over defense
team) show us that person that shotgunned Agent Petrilli? (Pause for effect)
You’re lookin’ at ‘em!

They joined in a conspiracy every time. They joined in the malice. Let’s talk
about malice. Callous and wanton disregard for life. What kind of a person
does it take to shoot a man who’s carrying a medical bag. (Pause) You’re
lookin’ at ‘em!

The Court specifically states that you find them guilty! Who is it that
crippled Larry Shiver? Who is it that kept shooting at ‘im, kept shooting at
‘im? Who is it that shoots someone hiding behind a mud pile, who can’t even
shoot back? You know. That’s Livingston Fagan. What kind of a person does it
take for this? (Pause) That’s malice.

If just one of these agents was shot at while he was lying on the roof, that’
s malice. Wanton disregard for life! Who would shoot at Bill Buford after he
woulda’ gone inside that room? That’s malice. Who would shoot an unarmed man?
Fagan did. Fagan did. And that act is attributable to all his co-defendants.

When it comes to having your hip broken and laying there for two hours- Who
would make someone lay there in excruciating pain? That’s malice. Oh how
great that they allow a cease fire and take credit for it. How great. That’s
malice.

(Picks up photo of four slain agents) Oh, poor Steve Willis.

I’m gonna’ propose a theory! The evidence shows Brad Branch killed Steve
Willis. Because he was on the second floor shooting and yelled, “I got one!”
Brad Branch is cowardice. Why would he go to the second floor where all the
women and children were? That coward right there (points at Branch)- what a
coward! That coward, to hide behind women and children.

Another theory. Renos Avraam shot Rob Williams. Renos Avraam said something
about someone hiding behind a safe. There was a man behind a safe- Rob
Williams.

Castillo shot at the front door- Buford. Whitecliff shot the helicopter.
What kind of criminal does it take to shoot at a helicopter? What a coward he
is- Mr. Whitecliff. Each one aided and abetted the other. The fact that
Ruth Riddle was down at this end of the building, (points at model) meant
that someone else didn’t have to be down there. That alone- that alone is
aiding and abetting. Keeping the agent’s attention divided! The object of
the conspiracy was to divide the agents.

As human beings we make choices as to what to do next in our lives. Sometimes
we have a clear look. Each one of these defendants made a choice to join in
this crowd. In 1992 they made that choice. Talk of a war. But Allison and
Kendrick were not part of this situation. But words turn to action and they
had a choice.

And more guns were purchased, (holds up the .50 caliber Barrett) this thing
was purchased, (now struggling to rip off the plastic wrapping) and displayed
to the group. And firearms were purchased by Fatta, the blood merchant of the
group. An investment! What is the question of the value of firearms? It’s an
investment only by Mr. Fatta’s attorney! An investment! He says and Mr. gun
dealer he asks, “what happens to the investment when you convert the gun?”

So then, the purchasing of a firearm, the plan get’s more specific, and
becomes a war against the government of the United States. And a video tape is
played and machine guns are made. Yeah’ every church does that! It was not
illegal for those guns to be made. Does that make it right for Mr. Fatta? And
Machine guns are made. You have to get the machine tools and grind them down.
How do you suppose this “grinding factory” sound went over in the home? Oh
well, that’s just Vernon and Fatta makin’ a machine gun. We found in that
machine room, a box of Paul Fatta’s personal checks!

You need workers for an assembly line. And the conspiracy becomes like
cement. Remember Barbara Maxwell testified at first she just heard “shice-
shice” and then saw the ground popping up? Using a silencer is a good way to
start an ambush. The conspiracy does not apply if you find they ambushed the
agents. A good ambush is to make it look normal. An ambush is a surprise. If
they didn’t want to be part of the conspiracy it would be that they tried to
get out or refused to take a gun. Maybe like Mrs. Hollingsworth. Guns, ammo,
vests, and camouflage clothing were passed out.

Couple of weeks before the twenty-eighth Steve made a decision. For hours and
hours and days and days they listened to the talk of war and guns and ATF.
Why did each of them take and kill? There is no more calculated no more
selfish an act. They killed ‘em.

Questions were asked many times by these hyenas (pointing at Rocket Rosen and
Dan Cogdell), “agent did you think about the people inside?” Did those
inside think about those agents? That they had a wife and families? They had
a search warrant and part of the language says this, “…you are commanded to
search on or before February 28, 1993.” You don’t have a choice, and
that’s what they had a legal right to do, by golly.

You can’t die for God unless you can kill for God. So did those children die
and suffer because of them? (pointing at defendants) What kind of a person
does that to children? And agents moving in across the street, and a little
checking, pretty strange isn’t it? Credit card fraud and a news paper
article on the 27th. When talk came to action they had a choice to make. And
they didn’t withdraw from the conspiracy. The morning of the twenty-eighth
all the talk and all the plans. And Robert Rodriguez comes over and while
he’s still there Koresh is pulled out of the room, (pause) “they’re
coming…”

It is not often someone has 45 minutes to decide whether or not to be part of
a crime. And people make choices. Now conspiracy becomes murder. They had 45
minutes. How many of them ran out the back or called ‘911′ to tell them
not to come? None of them. Pete Gent and some other guy had time to get all
dressed up and take a position inside a tower, and Fagan drawn aside and
flanked the agents and laid in wait and when unsuspecting Eric Evers…

What did their (pointing at defense team) own witness John McLemore say?
Their own witness. He was ambushed in court by their lawyers. The firearm
possessed by Mr. Allison was Mr. Kendrick’s. “Dear sir, I have bought my wife
a Jennings J-22.” When those three decided to sneak in and join the
conspiracy they came upon the Highway patrolman. They did not seek the
officer’s help. They had to go and “reinforce the people in the compound
against the evil people.” The government. The box for the Berretta was at
the Mag Bag and he was at the trailer with plenty of ammo. Why so much ammo?
(99 rnds.)

What about the guilty, fleeing mind of Paul Fatta. During the 51 days, a
suicide pact (was formed) with Vernon Howell planning it. I submit to you
that a child could be alive today and say, “the smell of teargas, CS gas, is
the sweetest smell of my life, because it’s the smell that saved my life.”
But, those decisions were made for them. Even if they didn’t pick up a gun on
February 28, but if they were in there on the nineteenth (4-19-93) they are
guilty of part of the conspiracy because they fired on the tanks.

What kind of a person does it take to set fire to a building with people in
it- especially children? (pause) You’re lookin’ at ‘em. If there’s sadness
in this case it is by their hands. If there is sadness in this case it is on
their backs. What kind of people burn people and shoot others in the back as
they are trying to escape? Don’t let anybody lay a guilt trip on you about
your decision. Let the facts convict, let the facts convict. In terms of the
motive of the killing, I wanna play a tape… (plays section of ‘911′ call)
LYNCH: Wayne? Can I get you anything do you need anything for your people?
MARTIN: Here’s the deal Lynch. We don’t want any help from your country.
(tape ends, Johnston continues) You see what’s happening here? Can any
group… can a group arm themselves and secede from the Union?

Evidence shows that on the twenty-eighth the people inside killed more of
their own than the ATF did. Gent, Wendell, Hippsman and Blake were killed by
their own people. Where do we get agents to do the job they do? We are going
to show a tape that shows part of the ATF raid and part of the FBI conducting
tests on these weapons. (a video is shown of weapons being test-fired at
Quantico, Virginia. Then the segment of the raid footage where the dogs are
being shot.) And what a great credit they (pointing at defendants) let one
ambulance in to evacuate the field. (continues playing the video, voice in
background, “John, give me another battery. [diesel engine drones] Get my
battery John, get my battery behind the bus.”) Where do we go? Where do we
get agents to enforce our laws? It’s good they were there to try to enforce
our laws.”

An Aside:
During the lunch break, and before the defense had even begun it’s closing
arguments, I overheard Robert Woods of radio station KRLD 1080 AM speaking to
someone on his “press room” phone. He said in part, “I just hope they hurry
up and convict these bastards- I can’t see them taking more than a few
minutes to fry these sons-a-bitches.” So much for an unbiased “free press.”

Defense Attorney Jeff Kearney:

“I want to visit with you about what Mr. Johnston has said. I agree with him
on one thing, the only thing, I’m glad that you’re here. You are the most
powerful body sitting right here in the United States right now. The government
has a responsibility also. Accusations are made by men or parts of the
government. Their responsibility is to bring you evidence beyond a reasonable
doubt.

You are here to test whether the prosecution has met the obligation of proof
beyond a reasonable doubt. You are the only people between these people and
the government. He (Johnston) gave you theories, but that’s not fact. We
don’t convict on theories. You have to determine the facts.

They want to paint this with a broad brush and talk about what a group did
and not what an individual did or thought. They trained for 3 or 4 days. For
what? The biggest fiasco in law enforcement history, that’s what. Hurry up!
Hurry up, they know we’re coming! It’s showtime! It should have been called
off it was not. You know the supervisors that were in charge of this raid,
they went on TV and the nation and lied. And not one agent stood up to
correct them.

They gave statements to the Texas Rangers during a time when their
supervisors were lying. The government must rely on the agents testimony of
an agency that was under intense scrutiny at the time. When you decide this
case, ask yourself, “Does the government want a conviction to exonerate their
actions?” To validate their agent’s actions?

What did Robert Rodriguez tell you about the misrepresentation that was going
on at the time? He told you that he watched them tell a lie on TV, but he
didn’t do anything about it because he thought, “there must be a good reason
for that.”

He told you that on February 27th there were ATF snipers, video and still
cameras manned by skilled people at the undercover house. They had radio
contact with the trailers. Why don’t we have those tapes and photos of that
raid? Where are those tapes?

He used the term ambush. If this was an ambush, they would have put the women
and kids in a safe place and wouldn’t have called ‘911.’ The Texas rangers
didn’t give us an independent investigation. Paul Gray turns out to be a long
time ATF employee, and his wife is an ATF secretary.

If you follow the judge’s instructions, it’s going to be a very easy job to
follow. He talked about a conspiracy. They have to prove that, and they
haven’t done that. Because you live there, does not make that a conspiracy.

Consider Kathy Schroeder’s charge that Jaime Castillo tried but couldn’t
chamber a round. If you think he’s guilty of that then you must find him not
guilty. He did not try to chamber a round till a barrage of bullets came
through the door. They’ve got a duty to prove that he had some intent to do
those agents some harm. The agents testified that Castillo was clearly
visible. No headgear or goggles.

Victorine Hollingsworth and the others stayed there because God had told them
to wait. Kathy Schroeder said she was charged with the same thing these
others are charged with. She knew if she got convicted, she was looking at an
automatic life sentence. So, she made a deal.

There were two levels inside there. Inner circle, David Koresh and Steve
Schneider had their lawyers (DeGuerin & Zimmerman) inside there. Not Jaime
Castillo. Remember when Karen Kilpatrick said he only purchased one pistol?
He was there for part of the music. They were scared and protecting
themselves. Because he had Coleman Fuel on his shoes, they want you to
believe he set the fire. They were using gas lanterns, Coleman Fuel. He told
the Rangers that he came out because he couldn’t stand the smoke. He left
Scott Sonobe in the chapel, the inner circle. Don’t come up here with a
theory and expect a conviction!”

(Due to space constraints and the repetitive nature of closing arguments
inherent in a trial with multiple defendants, only highlights from the
statements of the remaining lawyers will be reported here.)

Joseph Turner

“What is Ruth Riddle doing in this courtroom? They don’t have a case against
Ruth Riddle. It’s true that they shared many common beliefs. It’s absurd to
think they were all alike. Just because you’re a Federal officer doesn’t give
you blanket authority to go in on a search warrant. Compare agents Barbara
Maxwell and Tim Gaborie. Maxwell never fired a shot. Gaborie fired 60 rounds
without looking. “Sight-shooting,” he called it! That’s silly! Insults your
intelligence! Ruth Riddle didn’t fire back. That shows her intent. She stood
guard because she was afraid. Vicky was hiding under her bed.

Move on to April 19. He (Johnston) thinks the evidence shows that David
Koresh and Pablo Cohen started the fire. Why didn’t they bring in the tape of
the bug from the 18th? Why was there a plane with a forward looking infra-
red up there on the morning of the nineteenth? Now they wanna’ blame Ruth for
what they helped Koresh do. None of her clothes came back with anything on
them.

McGee saved my client’s life. Thank you. She was afraid of them that’s why
she tried to run back in. Victorine Hollingsworth talked about how David
Koresh made them victims. Said she was very afraid on February 28. There
was no testimony about a conspiracy. Schroeder said she never fired, but
shots came in her room. She did give Ruth a weapon, but at that time, she was
entitled to self defense. All weapons were passed out after the shooting
stopped.

In Ranger Turner’s testimony, he interviewed Ruth, April 19, at Hillcrest
Hospital. If that were true she still had the right to defend herself. He
said in his report that Misty Ferguson had a weapon. No way she could have
seen the cattle trailers drive up from her room (illustrates with model). He
didn’t tape record it. He checked his notes and admitted he was wrong. He
offered no explanation for why he waited a month to make a written report.

It was because she was a victim, not a criminal. She’s not a criminal. She’s
a victim. Ruth Riddle needs your help now. You’re the only ones that can help
her.”

Stanley Rentz

“When you serve as a juror, you are performing you’re function as an American.
Thank you for serving on this long and complicated case. You’ve listened to
over 120 witnesses. Graeme and his family extend their grievances to the ATF
Agents and their families. You know that Graeme is from Australia. Deacon in
his church. He has his religious convictions. You the jury have an oath to
uphold. Religion is important in this case. We all respect the right to
believe as we choose. They have talked to you about Graeme, right or wrong he
has the right to practice his religion. Was there any evidence from any
neighbor? They had been there 30 years. They ran in with snipers and over 100
agents.

In 1959 they had preached lessons about prophesy of apocalypse in 1959. Of
course, that did not happen. Kathy Schroeder believed that the raid was part
of the prophecy. Graeme believed. Jesus loves me, yes I Know, because the
Bible tells me so. Johnston talked about the conspiracy he was supposed to
prove. Look at the definition of “reasonable doubt.” It is important. If the
doctor told you your child had some terrible disease, wouldn’t you get a
second opinion?

Conspiracy is a thought crime. You must have an agreement. When do you form
an agreement? If you go to Walmart, and you’re shopping, put something in
your cart, you haven’t reached an agreement till you check out. This man had
such a religious conviction he could never have agreed to a conspiracy to
murder with malice. Maybe David Koresh did, and maybe some of the inner circle
did, but he was supposed to wait for the word and he never got the word.

Johnston said that he would prove that David Koresh teached about death. But
you can’t teach about life without getting around to death sooner or later.
The man never handled a gun in his life. He was not preparing for battle. He
came because significant events were gonna’ happen. Not a mighty man,
whatever a mighty man was. No running water. No central air. Marjorie Thomas
testified she never saw him with a gun. Also his mother got a letter that he
was almost done, coming home. His window was not shot out! Take the picture
into the deliberations if you want to.

Ambush! Only ambush he’s seen is the ambush them supervisors tried to pull on
Robert Rodriguez. When someone messes up, someone has to pay. The government’
s saying the destruction was not to destroy the evidence. They’re trying to
make someone else pay for David Koresh’s crimes. He’s cooperated with the
Rangers right from the start.

Aiding and abetting. The court’s accused him of deliberately associating
himself. He never aided and abetted shooting at these agents. Graeme,
Marjorie Thomas said never saw him with a gun. Kathy Schroeder handled a gun.
Vicky Hollingsworth said David Koresh thought Graeme was weird.

You seen our government in action. Bringin’ in 50 ton tanks to open doors
with women and children in there. You don’t mow your lawn with those things.
They talk about him having a hand grenade. He didn’t know if it was a live
one or not. (An aside: If he had murderous intent he would have thrown the
grenade instead of handing it to the FBI)

I wanna’ thank ya’ll again for your service and your patience. I’m no Perry
Mason, and I can’t be like some of these other silver-tongue attorneys.”

John Carroll

“Thank you ladies and gentleman for your service. This case is about respect,
and what we can expect from our government. Respect. Is our government going
to view us as individuals, or are we going to get suspicion? They’re
suspicious. You people even have numbers as jurors. They expect trouble out
of us. They lost respect for their own agents and 120 people. Call press
conferences! Don’t give all the facts. Let’s whitewash. What’s the final
step? Right here, a conviction!

Listen to the evidence and the Judge’s instructions. When you look at
everything in this case, you’ll reach one verdict, acquittal for Renos
Avraam. Page 4 of the Court’s instruction says, “an indictment is not
evidence…” Indeed, defendants are presumed innocent. That’s where we
started, that hasn’t changed. The burden of proof. Your life savings. Would
you hesitate to act? Evidence. Direct or circumstantial. Look at the physical
evidence. Page 7, your role. You are the sole judges of the credibility of
witness’ charges. Page 17. Count One. Members of conspiracy of murder. Hold
them to it. People bought guns, but it wasn’t a conspiracy. If they don’t
have to prove something, look out! The mighty men! Marjorie Thomas said,
“The mighty men were all the men.” Page 26 defines conspiracy. The law comes
from the court, not the lawyers. They allege the conspiracy was to kill
agents. No, not from the witnesses. If there was a plan the plan was to be
translated.

Neal Vaega? Don’t know what’s going on with Neal Vaega or what’s in his head,
he’s dead. Page 31. This is like a flowchart. Have they first proved beyond a
reasonable doubt did a conspiracy exist? Was Renos a part of the conspiracy?
Did someone commit the offense of murder? Was that a reasonable consequence
of the conspiracy?

Self defense, page 48. If the defendant was not an aggressor and trying to
defend himself or another… Page 40, resisting arrest. No one called and
said, “Agents are coming with a search warrant.” Page 44, Voluntary
manslaughter. Killing without lawful justification. First thing that happened,
the raid. They felt that in the minds of the people, the people inside were
afraid. Ballesteros was shot in the thumb with a what? A shotgun. He said he
ran at the door with a shotgun pointed at David Koresh. Evers is lying.
Agents heard someone inside saying, “just leave us alone…” Indiscriminate
firing? Ask Kathryn Schroeder. Ask Marjorie Thomas. Self defense? They were
gonna go into the window regardless.” (DeGeurin yields time, 2 min.)

“Sector (I.), no pistols no magazines were found from where Renos jumped off
the roof. They lied about Bradley Rogan. A three time loser paroled the very
next day.”

Steve “Rocket” Rosen

“I have been entrusted with the future of two young men. Kevin Whitecliff and
Livingstone Fagan, would you please stand. They had a zeal to come closer to
their God. You have been entrusted to uphold our constitution. We always want
to say something good about America. This case has caused great conflict in
our country. I don’t want to put a guilt trip on you either. Johnston asked,
“what kind of person…” You look over here, watch their posture. Are these
people murderers? (Judge Smith cautions Rosen to remain at the lectern) It’s
not there. You’re probably sick and tired of hearing about a conspiracy.

Wherever you are Mr. Higgins, Chonacki, Sarabyn- a systematic plan to make a
spectacle of this country. Where are the video tapes, the testimony of
infiltrators, to show that these two individuals were part of a conspiracy.
Fagan’s mother and wife and two children, he’s thinking, “How can I save my
family from getting slaughtered?” Question. ATF, why didn’t you call and
find out who lived in that home?

I’m sick about the ATF fatalities. They died because their supervisors
said, “It’s showtime baby!” …why a dynamic entry? Why not a peaceful
entry? What was the emergency? Where were these guns running to? Why were
guns more important than human lives? Rodriguez did not observe one illegal
thing in that house. I wish we had that video tape from the undercover house.
If David Koresh didn’t walk out that door unarmed, you can be sure that
video would be right in your face now.

The clear full picture is these individuals lives were in danger. A long time
ago we had freedom in America. The result was the constitution. On February
28, 1993 our forefathers would have been sick. They chose a path of threat
and showmanship. Purposefully, suggestively, shocked our society. How
embarrassing to see an agency of the United States of America denigrate human
life. The greatest atrocity in America, since the slaughter of the American
Indians. Do we want the people of America to think it’s ok to try this kind
of assault without a peaceful try first?

You might say the parents could’ve sent ‘em (children) out. But can
you imagine turning your children over to people who run over their toys,
played loud noises, bright lights. Their last moments were spent under wet
blankets gasping. (the members of the media in the press room are laughing at
this point. A few, nearest the speaker system are trying to hear above the
insensitive chatter) Humiliated and lied about. Are there any winners here?
Yes Mr. Prosecutor, the ATF thought so- they raised their flag in victory!”

Douglas Tinker

“I feel inadequate after Mr. Carroll and Mr. Rosen. What evidence is there in
regard to Brad Branch? Brad did not arrive there until after January 1993. In
1991 he purchased one pistol and one rifle and was the signator on the lease
of the Mag Bag. What does that have to do with a conspiracy? Schroeder never
saw him (Branch) with a gun. Schroeder did not give times or dates when guns
were passed out or took up. You cannot convict on allegations.

The women and children were upstairs. Why did they (agents) fire up there?
Brad Branch, Schroeder said was wearing street clothes. This prosecutor
(points at Johnston) was there. Jahn was involved. Is that important? The
government didn’t put the ‘911′ tapes on, we did.

The government has the burden of proof. Wouldn’t you like to think they would
show all the evidence? They didn’t bring in Byron Sage. Remember Curtis? You
know they didn’t bring in an expert about the trajectory of those bullets
because they were “friendly fire.” It’s difficult to believe that a man
under fire would take the time to shoot dogs in a fence.

I sent all the ATF agents letters and invitations to call me or come talk to
me way last year. None- none of them would talk to me. What are they hiding?
Zimmerman said that any time you have a military exercise, you need a signal
for when to start firing. “Break and rake.” Thank God for video. See if you
see any firing at those officers. Do you believe that Constantino heard
automatic weapon fire before he went in the room?

Remember the fire. About the ATF man that saw a man start the fire behind the
piano? It was a lie. Does that scare you about the rest of this case?”

(At 5 p.m. on Tuesday Feb. 22, Judge Smith calls court into recess and
instructs the jury that henceforth they will be sequestered at a local hotel)

(Wednesday, Feb. 23, 1994, 9 a.m.)

Gerry Morris

“I haven’t said much throughout this trial. The government would lay the
blame of this tragedy at the feet of these 11 people, and in Kendrick’s case
he wasn’t even at Mt. Carmel. We have laws. Conspiracy is not like catching a
cold. Walk through Mt. Carmel Center and you’ve got it. Can’t get rid of it.
When the government put a chart on the board it was like one of those
aluminum siding salesmen.

ATF leaves in military formation from a barn. Maybe the agent’s story about a
man with a hood was a lie. 74 shots, plus three shotgun blasts at Mike
Schroeder. Woodrow Kendrick left because he didn’t want to die.

I’ve got a theory of my own. Who shot at Marjorie Thomas while she was
looking out that window at the helicopters. We don’t tolerate police abuse
in this country. There’s not gonna’ be any movie rights for Mr. Kendrick. All
he’s asking is for his God given rights, and all I’m asking is to be able to
drive him home.”

Tim Evans

“My client (Norman Allison) was one of the ones left to blame. We’re in an
atmosphere that started a year ago. Injustice occurs when good people allow
their judgment to be coerced. There is prejudice in this case… we don’t
even recognize. A few well meaning people, because of their convictions,
regardless of the ragged edges- a few people believe the end justifies the
means. It means they (ATF) will lie.

It is my privilege and honor to speak to you and represent Norman Allison. He
is here because one agent says he said the government was the “evil people.”
They want to make a big deal out of him giving the wrong name. Imagine you
are in a foreign country and that your friends believe the end of the world
is coming.”

Dan Cogdell

“I want to respond to being called a “hyena.” (looking eye to eye at
Johnston) An insult from you sir is the highest compliment I could have been
paid given the conduct of the government in this case. The whole world is
going to be looking to your verdict to see what law enforcement in this
country can get away with. After seeing the government’s arrogance,
misconduct- never in my life have I been more proud to do what I’m doing now.
B-A-T-F. Breaking the Law in the Name of the Law. It will mean that the next
time they raid a house with women and children they, will need to think. They
may argue that Jack Zimmerman was arrogant and unresponsive- he is a lot of
things but not stupid. This case is not about those four agents it’s about
their supervisors. The law does not begin and end in an ATF press conference.

Their first witness was captain David Byrnes. The same person that told you
that Jahn and Johnston were there on the day of decision, the day gas was
used. If he want’s to sit here with a straight face and say it doesn’t matter.

He discovered very early on that the ATF was lying to the world! Fitting,
that the video was of Constantino shooting Jordan.

We’re told that after the center burned to the ground, the ATF put up a flag.
What kind of people would stick a flag over 90 dead bodies- what kind of
people would suggest that CS gas, a gas we wouldn’t use on Sadaam Hussien,
was the sweetest smell of a child’s young life? You’re lookin at ‘em. (points
at chided prosecutors)

Great justice is like great art, you paint it with a fine brush. Not a broad
brush. The ATF and FBI lied and failed and so did the prosecution. The
government has reverted to catch phrases and demagoguery. When you have the
truth you don’t have to package it.

Why did 90 people lose their lives in the name of gun parts? They don’t have
the testosterone to put Aguillera on the stand. ATF said they went in to save
the children. And the IRS is here to save you money!

Why are they practicing with guns, blood type on their necks? Where were
these tents they were going to process the people with? Where is Aguillera,
Sarabyn, Chonacki? They lied cheated and stole in the name of the government.
There is no good reason to lie. Where is Byron Sage? Zimmerman saw Sage in
front of the courthouse the other day. The government owes you more. One
reason they didn’t call Sage, they skipped 51 days. (shows picture of Sage)
Here is the man they didn’t bring in.

What kind of a person stops for a trophy photo while 80 people are burning to
death? You’re lookin at ‘em. (again points to prosecutors) Where is Mr.
Doyle’s gun Mr. Jahn? Johnston would make the late senator (Joseph) McCarthy
proud. Schroeder said, “…killing the ATF was not something we ever talked
about.” Witness after witness lied in pretrial. All three government
witnesses said he (Doyle) did nothing more than be there. He’s so broke he
can’t pay attention!”

Mike DeGeurin

“This shouldn’t have happened. You all Know that. You shouldn’t have tried to
justify the prosecution of these people. (quotes from the Bill of Rights) We
must start from the beginning preventing the abuses of government.

(Reads 1st, 4th amendments) When you’re kicked by an ass consider the source.
This case is about government disrespect. Not criticizing Steve Willis. All
agents testified they didn’t know what others were doing. Possibly what they
meant when they said, ” you move to prepare yourself.”

Is the prosecution saying it’s the judge’s fault they had to go in on Feb.
28? Ballesteros was running to the door with a shotgun, 00′buck. We
practiced, never a peaceful entry. Grenades. Flash bangs. Koresh left all the
time. Marjorie Thomas said that if ATF had walked up and wanted to come in
they would have let them.”

John Finnizy

(Mr. Finnizy rehashed much of what his partner Johnston said earlier. Midway
through his statement, he took the time to attack Doug Tinker and at the same
time, interjected a clue about a key piece of pre-trial disinformation:)

“I think Tinker slept through the testimony. King was shot before they were
in the room. Remember the red Honda car? Why didn’t he find it before he came
into the courtroom? They had time to talk to the survivors. Just like their
own witness said, McLemmore.

Tinker also said that Zimmerman is reliable, but he didn’t see the .50
caliber. The defendants picked the name “Mag Bag.” Kendrick is paying that
credit card, he knows what is bought.

Actions speak louder than words. You run a search warrant because they had
guns and explosives. You wanna’ wait till they go out to Baylor and do
something? They (ATF) didn’t use enough force. If this had been a military
operation they would have come in for air-strikes, with tanks and artillery.
Only two people in that compound were killed by ATF. The rest by their own
people.”

Ray Jahn

“I rise to speak on behalf of the four dead agents who are the source of this
case, and on behalf of the government of the United States. You have been
encouraged by the defense to vote your conscience. If you want to complain
about the government your remedies are to complain to Janet Reno or your
Congressman. Those are the remedies of our foreign visitors. The defendants
are here because they wanted to destroy your country. That’s a declaration of
war. It was a war on the federal government.

You heard testimony about buying the “bear” (pick’s up .50 caliber Barrett).
Mr. Carroll complained about the lack of respect. I respect Avraam for
carrying this weapon from the back to the front, that takes a “mighty man.”
Kathy Schroeder said “man’s laws are not important.” You can use that same
logic to justify car bombings and attacks in the middle East.

You don’t have to consider self defense. Their perverted sense of paranoia.
Look at Ruth Riddle! Was she fearful, she heard shooting out her window? What
reasonable person lays awake at night worrying about ATF coming to get your
300 guns. Why didn’t they call ‘911′ 45 minutes before it happened. This is
the kind of people we’re looking at.

The issue of flashbangs, yes they can be dangerous, let’s try the government
on that. They used as many peaceful efforts as they could to get them to come
out peacefully. No we didn’t put Aguillera on the stand. David Koresh knew
the ATF was investigating. The real issue is the death of four agents. The
symbiotic relationship between David Koresh and his followers is like Hitler
to Mussolini. They followed a man called David Death.”

At this time the Judge excuses the six alternate jurors and says it’s unusual
that in a trial of this length, no one has fallen ill or needed to be
excused. He thanks them for their service. The Jury will now begin
deliberations.


Chapter 9

The Verdict, a Victory?

On Saturday February 26, 1994, two days short of one year after the day of
infamy, the ATF Mt. Carmel attack, and just 2 1/2 days into the
deliberations, the jury reached a verdict.

All eleven defendants were acquitted on the charges of murder and aiding and
abetting the murder of federal agents. These were the most serious of the
charges. Seven of the defendants were erroneously found guilty on count
number three, carrying a firearm during the commission of an offense against
the United States. Judge Walter Smith correctly reversed the jury’s verdict
on count three.

Paul Fatta, found guilty on charges of unlawful possession and manufacture of
machine guns, could be sentenced to up to 10 years. Jaime Castillo, Renos
Avraam, Kevin Whitecliff, Livingston Fagan, and Brad Branch were all found
guilty of voluntary manslaughter, which carries a maximum sentence of 10
years. Graeme Craddock was found guilty on one count of unlawful possession
of a hand grenade, which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. Ruth Riddle,
Clive Doyle, Woodrow Kendrick, and Norman Allison were cleared of all
charges. Mrs. Riddle was being detained in jail on possible illegal
immigration charges.

One week after the verdict the judge reversed his earlier ruling by
reinstating count three of the original indictment. This could add up to five
years to the sentences of 7 of the defendants still in jail awaiting
sentencing. It also means that Ruth Riddle is now facing sentencing for a
federal crime.

On the evening of the verdict there were victory parties held for the Defense
attorneys and freed Branch Davidians at the Fairmount Hotel and at San
Antonio attorney John Haring’s home in North San Antonio. Clive Doyle and
Woodrow Kendrick made brief appearances at each party. At the Fairmount there
was much celebration, with speeches, Cuban cigars and photos with mainstream
media reporters from CBS, CNN, and The Dallas Morning News. Atty. Dan Cogdell
said, “Look out, now we’re coming at ‘em for the civil trials.” I had the
ironic pleasure of Ms. Lee Hancock buying me a beer at the party. Ms.
Hancock, a reporter for the Dallas Morning News, had been especially acerbic
in her writing throughout the event and at times we had cross words with each
other over the phone.

I was with Davidian Rita Riddle at this party, but it was clear her mood was
anything but festive. When I asked Rita what was wrong, why wasn’t she
celebrating the reply was “What’s to celebrate? Nearly 100 of my friends are
dead. My daughter (Misty Ferguson) has to go through life with no fingers,
and twelve innocent people have spent a year in jail. Our cars, clothes, and
house were run over with tanks and burned. Now they’re not guilty of murder,
not guilty of conspiracy, but eight of them still might go to prison! Some
victory, I’d hate to see what you’d call a defeat.”

On April 17, 1994, some two months after the verdicts a “Day of
Information” was held at the Mt. Carmel ruins near Waco, Texas. I was a
featured speaker at this event. After my speech, I was delighted to meet
three of the jurors from the San Antonio trial who had traveled to Waco to
learn more about the tragedy. The three were all angry that Ruth Riddle was
still in jail, and they all agreed that the Davidians had suffered enough.
The only reason they returned the guilty verdicts they did was because they
felt obligated after the government had put on such an elaborate and
expensive case. If they had it to do over again, they all said they would
vote not guilty on all counts.

In retrospect, the government lost this case because they spent their time
and resources doing exactly what Judge Smith had told them they didn’t have
to do from the beginning. He had said in his opening instructions to the
jury that the government was not on trial. Yet, most of the testimony of the
federal agents was designed to counter critical observations that I and
others had made in relation to specific events that were videotaped on or
about February 28.

As an example, an entire line of questioning was devoted to showing that the
officer laying across the hood of the news truck was not one of the dead
agents. Supposedly, it was Bill Buford who testified in court that he had
lost consciousness due to bleeding. Why is the agent who is walking alongside
this casualty and apparently crying, identified in court as Chris Mayfield,
not administering first aid to Buford? And why would you place a man who is
unconscious and probably in shock, out on the hood exposed to the elements.
On earlier footage, two agents that are clearly dead were placed in the rear
of the vehicle. If the agent on the hood really were still alive, wouldn’t it
make more sense to leave the dead and evacuate the wounded as quickly as
possible. Also, there is not a single drop of blood visible on or around this
agent in any of the video segments or “still” news photos.

Much of the testimony of Agent Tim Gaborie was a futile attempt to explain
suspicious footage filmed nowhere near the crime scene, of an agent,
supposedly Gaborie, jumping into the back of a black pick-up truck as it
begins to move. There is a corpse in the truck lying on its back. One agent
says, “Let’s go! Let’s go!” Another answers, “Where? Where?” There is
little resemblance between the agent in the footage and the stockier Gaborie.
Further, Gaborie testified that he “jumped into the truck” to help two other
agents administer CPR to Conway LeBleu. According to the autopsy and
testimony of the coroner, Dr. Nizaam Peerwani, LeBleu was dead before he hit
the ground. The back side of his skull had been blown out by a gunshot that
also severed the spinal cord just below the medulla. Not even a fool, let
alone a trained medic such as Gaborie, would attempt CPR on a victim with
these wounds. Especially when there were allegedly so many severely injured
agents to attend to.

In another instance of testimony rigged to counter pre-trial criticism of the
raid, Agent Bernadette Griffin claimed to be administering aid to an agent at
the backside of a gray out-building. This testimony, like the examples given
above did nothing to establish the guilt of any of the accused, and could
only have been designed to explain the suspicious video footage of a black
female agent pretending to administer to a corpse.

On Thursday, June 16, 1994, I returned to San Antonio for the sentencing
phase of the trial. As court convened there were 6 probation officers sitting
in the now vacant jury box. About two dozen of the ATF agents from the
initial raid were seated in the front two courtroom gallery pews on the left.
Judge Smith opened by saying in an annoyed tone, “In the past few weeks my
office has been inundated with phone calls from all over the country. This is
obviously some concerted effort to express sympathy for the Defendants.”
Later, during the allocution statements of the Defendants, Judge Smith
described the people who had called and written his office as being so full
of hate for the U.S. government, that their opinions did not count.

He then proceeded to describe the rules that govern and restrict judges in
handing down sentences in federal court. He blamed these restrictions on the
public’s and Congress’ zeal to hand down tougher sentences on drug
traffickers.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Ray Jahn then proceeded to explain why the government
was requesting that the 5 year sentence in relation to Count number 3 be
changed to a thirty year sentence. There is a rule that if the weapon carried
is a machine gun the sentence can automatically be raised to thirty years.
Jahn said because you can hear automatic weapons fire on the video tape, this
is proof enough that the weapons possessed were fully automatic.

This was never established in court. In fact, a television crew from Oklahoma
has analyzed that segment of the video and determined that the sounds at that
juncture of the footage were dubbed in by someone tampering with or editing
the tape. Further, the jury has informed the Court that there was confusion
on Count 3, and the intention of the jury was for this to be a very minor
charge. During the allocution of Renos Avraam, Jurist Sarah Bain’s well
written letter to Judge Smith was handed to the judge. Smith denied ever
receiving it. (see Presiding Juror Sarah Bain’s letter in the Appendix)

After lawyers for both sides expressed their desires, the Defendants were
allowed their allocution statements. According to constitutional lawyer
Robert Fox of Dallas, allocution is the Defendant’s opportunity to state his
or her opinion regarding the validity of the findings in the case and to
challenge the jurisdiction of the judge or the court. Fox helped prepare
briefs that were filed on behalf of the Defendants to guarantee that these
allocution rights would not be waived. After Defendant Livingston Fagan’s
allocution many observers in the courtroom applauded. Smith screamed out in
anger that anyone else applauding in the court would be expelled. All of the
Defendants reasserted their innocence and said that they were not consulted
before their attorneys allowed Count number Two to be amended to include a
provision for “aiding and abetting manslaughter.”

On Friday, June 17, Judge Smith began reading a lengthy prepared statement in
which he compared the Defendants to Lebanese terrorists and the World Trade
Center bombers. Ignoring the jury’s findings, he linked the sentencing to the
conspiracy and murder charges which should not even have been mentioned. He
too alluded to the channel 10 video as the evidence that convinced him
automatic weapons were used. He mentioned, “evidence that I have seen that
was too gruesome to be given to the jury.” This evidence must have been shown
in closed chambers because it was never presented in court.

He then announced sentences as follows: Paul Fatta was sentenced to 15
years and a $5,000 fine. Ruth Riddle was sentenced to 5 years and $1,000 in
fines. Renos Avraam was sentenced to 40 years and $10,000 in fines. Graeme
Craddock was sentenced to 20 years and a $2000 fine. Brad Branch, Livingston
Fagan, Jaime Castillo and Kevin Whitecliffe were all sentenced to 40 years
plus fines up to $5,000. In addition, Smith leveled over a million dollars in
restitution against the defendants.

Jurist Sarah Bain and family members filed out of the courtroom in tears.
Davidian Myrtle Riddle aptly told CBS-TV that it, “was the death of the jury
system in the United States.”

One of the things I had said during my speech at the Waco “Day of
information,” was that when the jury returned its verdict of not guilty on
the murder charges it was a confirmation that yes our judicial system does
indeed still work and is still the best in the world. I said that the jury,
those twelve brave people, had drawn a line in the sand and said, “No Mr.
Government, not this time. We won’t stand for search warrants being served
with grenades and tanks.” Well, I still believe we have the best system in
the world, but it’s in jeopardy at this very moment. Unless we the people and
our elected officials take immediate action to rectify the anomalies in the
process that allow this kind tragedy to occur. I’m not talking about
allocating more funds to the Hostage Rescue Team or to study cults, that’s
the last thing we need.

Only a specially appointed prosecutorial team, whose independence and
veracity can be publicly verified, will be able to properly pursue the
obvious unlawful, unethical and immoral acts of callousness and deceit
perpetrated by the ATF agents and their supervisors related to this
disgraceful event. Until such prosecution commences, the very foundation of
our law enforcement and judicial systems, as well as the moral fiber of our
great Nation, remains shaky and flawed.

As of this writing, the eight Defendants,Paul Fatta, Jaime Castillo, Ruth
Riddle, Renos Avraam, Kevin Whitecliff, Livingstone Fagan, and Brad Branch,
are awaiting processing and appeals. Write to them. Like Mr. Zimmerman said
they are all friendly, articulate, good people. I’ve never met finer people
in my life.


Appendix A: Indictment:
CRIMINAL NO. W-93-CR-046

S U P E R S E D I N G
I N D I C T M E N T

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, * @18 U.S.C. 1117–Conspiracy
* to Murder Federal Officers;
Plaintiff, * 18 U.S.C. 1114 and 1111–
* Murder of Federal Offi-
V. * cers; 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(I)–
* Possession of a,Firearm
KATHERYN SCHROEDER, * During the Commission of
BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, * a Crime of Violence; 26
KEVIN A. WHITECLIFF, * U.S.C. 5861(d)–Possession
CLIVE J. DOYLE, * of an Unregistered Destruc-
NORMAN WASHINGTON ALLISON, * tive Device; 18 U.S.C.
also known as DELROY NASH,* 371–conspiracy to Possess
JAIME CASTILLO, * an Unregistered Destructive
LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, * Device; 18 U.S.C. 371–
PAUL GORDON FATTA, * Conspiracy to Unlawfully
WOODROW KENDRICK, * Manufacture and Possess
also known as BOB KENDRICK,* Machineguns; 18 U.S.C.
GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK, * 922(o) Unlawful Possession
RENOS AVRAAM, * of Machine Guns; 18 U.S.C.
and RUTH 0TTMAN RIDDLE * 2–Aiding and abetting]

COUNT ONE
1. From on or before February, 1992, and continuing thereafter up to and
including April 19, 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Defendants,

KATHERYN SCHROEDER, BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, KEVIN A. WHITECLIFF,
CLIVE J. DOYLE, JAIME CASTILLO, LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, PAUL GORDON
FATTA, WOODROW KENDRICK, also known as BOB KENDRICK, NORMAN
WASHINGTON ALLISON, also known as DELROY NASH, GRAEME LEONARD
CRADDOCK, RENOS AVRAAM, and RUTH 0TTMAN RIDDLE,

did knowingly, willfully and unlawfully combine, conspire,
confederate, and agree together and with each other, and with persons
known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to kill, ‘with malice aforethought
during the performance and on account of the performance of their
duties, officers and employees of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
(hereinafter “ATF”), United States Department of the Treasury, including
but not limited to, ATF Special Agents Steven D. Willis, Robert
Williams, Conway C. LeBleu, and Todd W. McKeehan, and Agents of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter “FBI”), United States Department of
Justice, all agencies of the United States as specified in Title 18, United
States Code, Section 1114, all in violation of Title 18,United states Code,
Section 1117.

MEMBERS OF THE CONSPIRACY
2. At all times pertinent to this indictment, Vernon K.
Howell, also known as David Koresh, was a member of and the self- proclaimed
prophet for a group of individuals who lived at a location known
as the Mt. Carmel Compound, located near Waco, Texas.

3. At all times pertinent to this indictment, Steven Emil Schneider
and Douglas Wayne Martin were followers of and advisors to Vernon Howell,
also known as David Koresh.

4. At all times pertinent to this indictment defendants KATHERYN
SCHROEDER, BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, KEVIN A. WHITECLIFF, CLIVE J. DOYLE, JAIME
CASTILLO, LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, PAUL GORDON FATTA, WOODROW KENDRICK, also
known as BOB KENDRICK, NORMAN WASHINGTON ALLISON, also known as DELROY
NASH, GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK, RENOS AVRAAM, and RUTH 0TTMAN RIDDLE, and
others were followers of Vernon K. Howell, also known as David Koresh.

SCOPE NATURE OF CONSPIRACY
5. It was a part of the conspiracy that Vernon K. Howell, also known
as David Koresh, would and did advocate and encourage an armed
confrontation, ‘which he described as a “war,” between his followers
and representatives of the United States government. Vernon K. Howell,
also known as David Koresh, originally predicted that this “war” would
occur in the Nation of Israel and later changed the location to Mt.
Carmel Compound, near Waco, Texas.

6. It was a part of the conspiracy that in order to prepare for the ”
war” with the United States, Vernon K. Howell, also known as David Koresh,
would and did establish a unit among his followers which he called the ”
Mighty Men”. Defendants, BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, KEVIN A. WHITECLIFF, CLIVE J.
DOYLE, JAIME CASTILLO, LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, PAUL GORDON FATTA, WOODROW
KENDRICK, also known as BOB KENDRICK, NORMAN WASHINGTON ALLISON, also
known as DELROY NASH, GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK, RENOS AVRAAM,and other
followers were members of the “Mighty Men” ‘

7. It was a part of the conspiracy that in order to arm his followers
for “war” with the United States, Vernon K. Howell, also known as
David Koresh, would and did direct that a business location called “The Mag
Bag” be established near the Mt. Carmel Compound for the purpose, among
others, of receiving shipments of paramilitary supplies. The supplies
purchased and received at The Mag Bag included: firearms parts (including
parts for fully automatic AK-47 and M-16 rifles); thirty (30) round
magazines and one hundred (100) round magazines for M-16 and AK-47
rifles; pouches to carry large ammunition magazines; substantial quantities
of ammunition of various sizes (including .50 caliber armor piercing
ammunition); grenade launcher parts, flare launchers, K-bar fighting
knives, night vision equipment, hand grenade hulls, kevlar helmets, bullet
proof vests and other similar equipment.

8. It was a part of the conspiracy that Defendants BRAD EUGENE BRANCH
and PAUL GORDON FATTA would and did make the necessary arrangements
to obtain The Mag Bag location, which had a mailing address of Route 7, Box
555, Waco, Texas. It was Further a part of the conspiracy that Defendant
PAUL GORDON FATTA would and did acquire a Texas Sales and Use Tax Permit in
the name of “The Mag Bag.” It was a part of the conspiracy that Defendants
WOODROW KENDRICK, also known as BOB KENDRICK, and NORMAN ALLISON,
also known as DELROY NASH, would and did occupy the premises for the
purpose (among others) of receiving paramilitary supplies.

9. It was a part of the conspiracy that Defendants BRAD
EUGENE BRANCH, JAIME CASTILLO, PAUL GORDON FATTA, and WOODROW KENDRICK,
also known as BOB KENDRICK, and others would and did acquire and assist in
the acquisition of weapons to be used in the “war” with the United States,
including .50 caliber semi-automatic rifles.

10. It was a part of the conspiracy that Defendant PAUL GORDON
FATTA and others, would and did assist in converting legally purchased semi-
automatic rifles to fully automatic rifles. It was a part of the conspiracy
that inert hand grenade shells would be converted to live hand grenades for
the purpose of waging “war” against the United 5tates government.

11. It was a part of the conspiracy that on February 28, 1993, after
becoming aware of a planned search of the premises of the Mt. Carmel
Compound, by agents of the ATF, Vernon K. Howell, also known as David Koresh,
would and did instruct his followers to prepare for the arrival of the
federal agents. It was a part of the conspiracy that KATHRYN SCHROEDER,
BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, KEVIN A. WHITECLIFF, CLIVE J. DOYLE, JAIME CASTILLO,
LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK, RENOS AVRAAM, RUTH 0TTMAN
RIDDLE, and others would and did change into camouflage/combat
clothing and equipment, gather their pistols and rifles, load
magazines, distribute hand grenades, assume ambush positions and engage in
other conduct designed to kill and attempt to kill and aid and abet the
killing of Agents of the ATF upon their arrival at the Mt. Carmel
Compound.

12. It was a part of the conspiracy that on February 28, 1993,
after the ambush of ATF agents at the Mt. Carmel Compound by their
conspirator, Defendants NORMAN ALLISON, also known as DELROY NASH, and
WOODROW KENDRICK, also known as BOB KENDRICK, and another person would arm
themselves at The Mag Bag and endeavor to forcibly enter the Mt. Carmel
Compound to assist their coconspirators.

13. It was a part of the conspiracy that after the initial ambush of
the ATF, Defendants KATHRYN SCHROEDER, BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, KEVIN A.
WHITECLIFF, CLIVE J. DOYLE, JAIME CASTILLO, LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, GRAEME
LEONARD CRADDOCK, RENOS AVRAAM, RUTH 0TTMAN RIDDLE, and others would and did
forcibly resist and oppose agents of the FBI who were authorized to execute
search warrants under the authority of the United States from February 28,
1993, until each of them emerged from the Mt. Carmel Compound.

14. It was a part of the conspiracy that on April 19, 1993 Vernon K.
Howell, also known as David Koresh, and Steven Schneider would and did
finalize a plan to burn the Mt. Carmel Compound in the event an effort was
made to finally end the siege by the FBI. This plan was communicated to other
residents of the compound.

15. It was part of the conspiracy that on Apr:1 19, 1993, some of the
conspirators would and did fire upon tanks and other vehicles manned by FBI
agents in an attempt to drive them back from the Mt. Carmel Compound.

16. It was a part of the conspiracy that on April 19, 1993 Vernon K.
Howell, also known as David Koresh, would give instructions to
spread flammable fuel within the Mt. Carmel Compound upon learning that
the FBI was to introduce tear gas into the Compound to end the siege. It was
part of the conspiracy that an unidentified coconspirator would and did give
instructions at about noon on April 19, 1993, to start the fires within Mt.
Carmel.

OVERT ACTS
In furtherance of such agreement and conspiracy and to effect the
objects thereof, the Defendants and their conspirators, known and unknown,
committed the following overt acts, among others:

1. On August 4, 1992, in the Western District of Texas, Vernon
K. Howell, also known as David Koresh, executed documentation
covering the purchase of 88 lower receivers for the AR-15 rifle, 16 handguns,
and 10 rifles from Hewitt Handguns.

2. On February 28, 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Special
Agent Steven D. Willis of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms was
shot and killed by conspirators while he was attempting to execute
search and arrest warrants.

3. On February 28, 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Special
Agent Robert Williams of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms was
shot and killed by conspirators while he was attempting to execute
search and arrest warrants.

4. On February 28, 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Special
Agent Conway C. LeBleu of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and firearms was
shot and killed by conspirators while he was attempting to execute
search and arrest warrants.

5. On February 28, 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Special
Agent Todd W. McKeehan of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms was
shot and killed by conspirators while he was attempting to execute search and
arrest warrants.

6. On April 19, 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Agents
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation were fired upon by conspirators as
they endeavored to serve arrest and search warrants. All in violation
of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1117.
COUNT TWO
[18 U.S.C. $$ 1114
1111(a), and 2]

On or about February 28, 1993, in the Western District of Texas,
Defendants,

KATHERYN SCHROEDER, BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, KEVIN A. WHITECLIFF, CLIVE J. DOYLE,
JAIME CASTILLO, LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, PAUL GORDON FATTA, WOODROW KENDRICK,
also known as BOB KENDRICK, NORMAN WASHINGTON ALLISON, also known as
DELROY NASH, GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK, RENOS AVRAAM, and RUTH 0TTMAN
RIDDLE
by aiding and abetting unknown principals and each other did
knowingly, willfully, and unlawfully kill, with malice
aforethought, ATF Special Agents Steven D. Willis, Robert Williams, Conway
C. LeBleu, and Todd W. McKeehan, Special Agents of the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, while said agents were engaged in the
performance of their official duties, by shooting the said Agents with a
firearm, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1114, 1111(
a), and title 18, United States Code, Section 2.

COUNT THREE
[18 u.s.c. $ 924(c) (1)]

On or about February 28, 1993, in the Western District ofTexas,
Defendants,

KATHERYN SCHROEDER, BRAD EUGENE BRANCH, KEVIN A. WHITECLIFF, CLIVE J. DOYLE,
JAIME CASTILLO, LIVINGSTONE FAGAN, GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK, RENOS AVRAAM,
and RUTH 0TTMAN RIDDLE did knowingly use and carry a firearm during and
in relation to commission of a crime of violence which may be
prosecuted in a court of the United States, to-wit: Conspiracy to Murder
Officers and Employees of the United States, in violation of Title
18, United States Code, Sections 1117 and 1114, all in violation of Title
18, United States Code, Section 924(c) (1).
COUNT FOUR
[ 18 U. S. C. $$ 1114
1111 (a) and 2 ]

On or about February 28, 1993, in the Western District of Texas,
Defendants,

NORMAN WASHINGTON ALLISON, aka
DELROY NASH,
and
WOODROW KENDRICK, aka
BOB KENDRICK, ‘
by aiding and abetting Michael Schroeder, deceased, named as a
principal, but not as a defendant herein, did knowingly, willfully, and
unlawfully attempt to kill, with malice aforethought, Charles Meyer, a
Special Agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, while
said agent was engaged in the performance of his official duties, by shooting
at Special Agent Charles Meyer with a firearm, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Sections 1114, Illl(a), and Title 18, United States
Code, Section 2.

COUNT FIVE
[18 U.S.C. $ 924(c)(I)]

On or about February 28, 1993, in the Western District of Texas,
Defendant,
WOODROW KENDRICK, aka
BOB KENDRICK,

did knowingly, willfully and unlawfully use and carry one or more of the
following firearms, to-wit:

(1) an RG revolver, model RG 31, .32 caliber,
bearing serial number 0194405;

(2) a Beretta pistol, model 92FS 9 mm, bearing
serial number BER116248Z,

during and in relation to the commission of a violent crime which may be
prosecuted in a court of the United States, namely, attempting to
kill a Federal officer, contrary to Title 18, United States Code, Section
1114 and Section 2, and all in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 924(c)(I).

COUNT SIX
[18 U.S.C. $ 924(c)(I)]

On or about February 28, 1993, in ,the Western District of Texas,
Defendant,
NORMAN WASHINGTON ALLISON, aka
DELROY NASH

did knowingly, Willfully and unlawfully use and carry the following firearm,
to-wit: a Jennings .22 caliber pistol, bearing serial number 628835,
during and in relation to the commission of a violent crime which
may be prosecuted in a court of the United States, namely, attempting to
kill a Federal officer, contrary to Title 18, United States Code, Section
1114 and Section 2, and all in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Section 924(c)(I).

COUNT SEVEN
[26 U.S.C. $ 5861(d)]

On or about April 19, 1993, in the Western District of Texas,
Defendant,

GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK

did knowingly and unlawfully possess a firearm, as defined by Section
5845(a), Title 26, United States Code, namely an explosive grenade, being a
firearm defined as a destructive device, which firearm was not registered
to him in the National Firearm Registration and Transfer Record, in
violation of Title 26, United States Code, Sections 5861(d) and 5871.

COUNT EIGHT
[26 U.S.C. $ 5861(d)
and 18 U.S.C. $ 371]

From on or about February 28, 1993, and continuing thereafter until on
or about April 19, 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Defendant, GRAEME
LEONARD CRADDOCK did knowingly and willfully, combine, conspire, confederate
and agree with other persons both known and unknown to the Grand Jury,
to commit an offense against: The United States, namely, to
unlawfully possess a firearm as defined by Section 5845(a), Title 26, United
States Code, to-wit: a grenade, without having the said firearm registered
to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. In
furtherance of the said conspiracy and to effect the objects thereof, the
following overt acts were committed by the Defendant in the Western District
of Texas:

1. On April 19, 1993, co-conspirator Vernon Howell,
also known as David Koresh, gave GRAEME LEONARD
CRADDOCK a grenade;

contrary to Title 26, United States Code, Section 5861(d) and in
violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.
COUNT NINE
[18 U.S.C. $ 371
(18 U.S.C. $ 922(o)]

On or about February 1992, and continuing thereafter until on
or about February 1993, in the Western District of Texas, defendant,

PAUL GORDON FATTA

did intentionally, knowingly and willfully combine, conspire,
confederate and agree with other persons to the Grand Jury both known and
unknown to commit an offense against the United States, namely, to unlawfully
manufacture and possess machineguns, without having the said firearms
registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer
Record. In furtherance of the said conspiracy and to the effect the
objects thereof, the following overt acts were committed by the defendants in
the Western District of Texas:

1. On March 21, 19 9 2, PAUL GORDON FATTA
purchased a FoG, Model SA85M rifle, 7.62
caliber, Serial No. SL02791;

2. On January 16, 1993, PAUL GORDON FATTA
purchased an H&K, SP89, pistol, 9 mm, Serial
NO. 2122147;

contrary to Title 18, United States Code, Section 92 2( o ), and in
violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. ‘

COUNT TEN
[18 U.S.C. $$ 2 and 922(o)]

Beginning about February 1992 and continuing thereafter until about
February 1993, in the Western District of Texas, Defendant,

PAUL GORDON FATTA

intentionally and knowingly did aid and abet Vernon Howell, also known as
David Koresh, in the unlawful possession of machineguns, contrary to Title
18, United States Code, Section 922(o), and in violation of Title 18, United
States Code, Section 2.

A TRUE BILL:

(signature unreadable)

FOREPERSON

Signed;
JAMES H. DeATLEY
ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By: Signed;
W. Ray Jahn
Assistant U. S. Attorney


Appendix B: Jury Charge

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
WACO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA $
$
v. $ Criminal No. W-93-CR-046
$
BRAD EUGENE BRANCH (2), $
KEVIN WHITECLIFF (3), $
CLIVE DOYLE (4), $
JAIME CASTILLO (5), $
LIVINGSTONE FAGAN (6), $
PAUL GORDON FATTA (7), $
WOODROW KENDRICK, also known $
as BOB KENDRICK (8), $
NORMAN WASHINGTON ALLISON, also $
known as DELROY NASH (9), $
GRAEME LEONARD CRADDOCK (10), $
RENOS AVRAAM (11), $
RUTH OTTMAN RIDDLE (12), $

COURT’S INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY

Members of the Jury:
In any jury trial there are, in effect, two judges. I am one of the judges;
the other is the jury. It is my duty to preside over the trial and to decide
what evidence is proper for your consideration. It is also my duty at the end
of the trial to explain to you the rules of law that you must follow and
apply in arriving at your verdict.

First, I will give you some general instructions which apply in every case,
for example, instructions about burden of proof and how to judge the
believability of witnesses. Then I will give you some specific rules of law
about this particular case, and finally, I will explain to you the procedures
you should following your deliberations.

The indictment or formal charge against the Defendants is not evidence of
guilt. Indeed, the Defendants are presumed by the law to be innocent. The law
does not require a defendant to prove his or her innocence or produce any
evidence at all and no inference whatsoever may be drawn from the election of
a defendant not to testify. The government has the burden of proving each
Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and if it fails to do so, you
must acquit him or her.

Thus, while the government’s burden of proof is a strict or heavy burden, it
is not necessary that the Defendants’ guilt be proved beyond all possible
doubt. It is only required that the government’s proof exclude any ”
reasonable doubt” concerning the Defendants’ guilt.

A “reasonable doubt” is a doubt based upon reason and common sense after
careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence in the case. Proof
beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, is proof of such a convincing character
that you would be willing to rely and act upon it without hesitation in the
most important of your own affairs. If you are convinced that one or more of
the accused be proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, say so. If you are
not convinced say so.

While you should considerñ only the evidence, you are permitted to draw
such reasonable inferences from the testimony and exhibits as you feel are
justified in the light of common experience. In other words, you may make
deductions and ñeach conclusions that reason and common sense lead, you to
draw from the facts which have been established by the evidence.

You should not be concerned about whether the evidence is direct or
circumstantial. Direct evidence” is the testimony of one who asserts actual
knowledge of a fact such as an eye witness. Circumstantial evidence” is
proof of a chain of facts and circumstances indicating that a defendant
is either guilty oñ not guilty. The law makes no distinction between the
weight you may give to either direct of circumstantial evidence.
I remind you that It is your job to decide whether the
government has proved the guilt of each Defendant beyond a reasonable
doubt. In doing so, you must consider all of the evidence. This does not
mean, however, that you must accept all of the evidence as true or
accurate.

You are the sole judges of the credibility or “believability” of each
witness and the weight to be given the witness’ testimony. An important part
of your job will be making judgments about the testimony of the witnesses who
testified in this case. You should decide whether you believe what each
person had to say, and how important that testimony was. In making that
decision I suggest that you ask yourself a few questions: Did the person
impress you as honest? Did the witness have any particular reason not to
tell the truth? Did the witness have a personal interest in the outcome of
the case? Did the witness have any relationship with either the government
or the defense? Did the witness seem to have a good memory? Did the
witness seem to have the opportunity and ability to understand the questions
clearly and answer them directly? Did the witness testimony differ
from, the testimony of other witnesses? These are a few of the
considerations that will help you determine the accuracy of what each witness
said.

In making up your mind and reaching a verdict, do not make any
decisions simply because there were more witnesses on one side than on the
other. Do not reach a conclusion on a particular point just because there
were more witnesses testifying for one side on that point. Your job is to
think about the testimony of each witness you have heard and decide how much
you believe of what each witness had to say.

The testimony of a witness may be discredited by showing that the
witness testified falsely concerning a material matter, or by evidence that
at some other time the witness said or did something, or failed to say or do
something which is inconsistent with the testimony the witness gave at this
trial.

If you believe that a witness has been discredited In this manner, it
is your exclusive right to give the testimony of that witness whatever weight
you think it deserves.

You will always bear in mind, however, that the law never imposes
upon a defendant in a criminal case the burden or duty of calling any
witnesses or producing any evidence, and no inference whatsoever may be drawn
from the election of any defendant not to testify.

You have heard that some of the witnesses who testified were convicted of
felony offenses in the past. Convictions are factors you may consider in
deciding whether to believe a witness, but they do not necessarily destroy a
witness’ credibility. They have been brought to your attention only because
you may wish to consider them when you decide whether you believe the
witness’ testimony.

The testimony of an alleged accomplice, and the testimony of one who
provides evidence as on informer for pay or for immunity from punishment, hop
of leniency or for other personal advantage or vindication, must always be
examined and weighed by the jury with greater care and caution than the
testimony of ordinary witnesses. You, the jury, must decide whether
such witness’ testimony has been affected by any of those circumstances, or
by his or her interest in the outcome of the case, or by prejudice against
the Defendant, or by the benefits that he or she has received either
financially, or as a result of being immunized from prosecution or hope of
leniency.

You should never convict a Defendant upon the unsupported
testimony of such a witness unless you believe that testimony beyond
a reasonable doubt.

In this case the government called Kathryn Schroeder, who is an alleged
co-conspirator. The government has entered into a plea agreement with her,
providing for her agreement to cooperate with and testify truthfully if
called as a witness by the government in exchange for the promise of
more lenient treatment than she otherwise would have received. Such
plea bargaining, as it is called, has been approved as lawful and is
expressly provided for in the rules of this court.

An alleged co-conspirator, including one who has entered into a plea
agreement with the government, is not prohibited from testifying. On
the contrary, the testimony of such a witness may alone be of sufficient
weight to sustain a verdict of guilty. However, you should keep in mind
that such testimony is always to be received with caution and weighed with
great care. You should never convict a Defendant upon the unsupported
testimony of an alleged co-conspirator unless you believe that testimony
beyond a reasonable doubt; and the fact that such witness has entered a plea
of guilty to the offense charged is not evidence, in and of itself of the
guilt of any other person.

If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge might assist the
jury in understanding the evidence or in determining a fact in issue, a
witness qualified an an expert by knowledge, skill, experience,
training,,or education, may testify and state an opinion concerning such
matters.

Merely because on expert witness has expressed an opinion does not mean,
however, that you must accept the opinion. The same as with any other
witness, it is up to you to decide whether you believe this testimony
and choose to rely upon it. Part of that decision will depend on your
judgment about whether the witness’ background or training and experience is
sufficient for the witness to give the expert opinion that you heard. You
must also decide whether the witness’ opinions were based on sound reason,
judgment, and information.

In determining whether any statement, claimed to have been made by a
Defendant outside of court and after an alleged crime has been committed,
was knowingly and voluntarily made, you should consider the evidence
concerning such a statement with caution and great care, and should give such
weight to the statement as you feel it deserves under the circumstances.

You may consider in that regard such factors as the age, sex, training,
education, occupation, and physical and mental condition of the Defendant,
his or her treatment while under interrogation, and all the other
circumstances in evidence surrounding the making of the statement. Of course,
any such statement should not be considered in any way whatsoever as evidence
with respect to any other Defendant on trial.

In any criminal case the government must prove not only the essential
elements of the offense or offenses charged, as hereafter defined, but must
also prove, of course, the identity of each Defendant as a perpetrator
of the alleged offenses. In evaluating the identification testimony of a
witness you should consider all of the factors already mentioned concerning
your assessment of the credibility of any witness in general, and should also
consider, in particular, whether the witness had an adequate opportunity
to observe the person In question, the prevailing conditions at that
time in terms of visibility or distance and the like, and whether
the witness had known or observed the person at earlier times.

You may also consider the circumstances surrounding the
identification itself including, for example, the manner in which the
Defendant was presented to the witness for identification, and the length of
time that elapsed between the incident in question and the next opportunity
the witness had to observe the Defendant. If, after examining all the
testimony and evidence in the case, you have a reasonable doubt as to the
identity of a Defendant as the perpetrator of an offense charged, you
must find that Defendant not guilty.

Any notes that you have taken during this trial are only aids to your
memory. If your memory differs from your notes, you should rely on your
memory and not on the notes. The notes are not evidence. If you
have not taken notes, you should rely on your independent recollection of the
evidence and should not be unduly influenced by the notes of other jurors.
Notes are not entitled to any greater weight than the recollection or
impression of each juror concerning the testimony.

Government’s Exhibit 2217 has been identified as a typewritten transcript
of the oral conversations which can be heard on the tape recording received
in evidence as Government’s Exhibit 2216. The transcript also purports, in
some cases, to identify the speakers engaged in such conversation. I have
admitted the transcript for the limited and secondary purpose of aiding you
in following the content of the conversation as you listen to the tape
recording, and also to aid you in identifying the speakers.

However, you are specifically instructed that whether the
transcript correctly or incorrectly reflects the content of the conversation
or the identity of the speakers is entirely for you to determine based upon
your own evaluation of the testimony you have heard concerning the
preparation of the transcript, and from your own examination of the
transcript in relation to your hearing of the tape recording itself as the
primary evidence of its contents; and, if you should determine that the
transcript is in any respect incorrect or unreliable, you should disregard it
to that extent.

COUNT ONE
(Here Judge Smith redefines count one. For the scope of this text refer to
the reprinting of “The Indictment” found here in the appendix)

ELEMENTS COUNT ONE
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1117 makes it a crime two or
more persons to conspire to murder federal officers. For you to find any
Defendant guilty of this crime, you must convinced that the government has
proved each of the following and a reasonable doubt as to that Defendant:

First: That two or more persons made an agreement to commit the
crime of murder of federal agents as charged In the Count Two of the /
indictment;

Second: That the Defendant under consideration knew the unlawful
purpose of the agreement and joined it willfully, that Is, with the
intent to further the unlawful purpose;

Third: That at least one of the conspirators during the existence of the
conspiracy knowingly committed at least one of the overt acts described
on pages of these instructions, in order to accomplish some
object or purpose of the conspiracy; and

Fourth: That the Defendant under consideration conspired to kill federal
agents with the requisite intent of malice aforethought, as defined on
page of these instructions.
CONSPIRACY
A “conspiracy” is an agreement between two or more persons to Join
together to accomplish some unlawful purpose. It is a kind of partnership In
crime” In which every member becomes the agent of every other member.

One may become a member of a conspiracy without knowing all of the
details of the unlawful scheme or the Identities of all the , other alleged
conspirators. If a defendant understands the unlawful nature of a plan
or scheme and knowingly and intentionally Joins in that plan or scheme on one
occasion, that is sufficient to convict him or her for conspiracy even though
that defendant had not participated before and even though the defendant
played only a minor part.

The government need not prove that the alleged conspirators entered into
any formal agreement, or that they directly stated between themselves all the
details of the scheme. Similarly, the government need not prove that all of
the details of the scheme alleged in the indictment were actually agreed upon
or carried out. Nor must it prove that all of the persons alleged to have
been members of the conspiracy were such, or that the alleged
conspirators actually succeeded In accomplishing their unlawful
objectives.

Mere presence at the scene of an event, even with knowledge that a crime
is being committed, or the mere fact that certain persons may have associated
with each other, and may have assembled together and discussed common aims
and Interests, does not necessarily establish proof of the existence
of a conspiracy. Also, a person who haY r.o knowledge of a
conspiracy, but who happens to act In a way which advances some
purpose of a conspiracy, does not thereby become a conspirator.

You must determine whether the conspiracy charged in the
Indictment existed, and, if It did, whether the Defendant under consideration
was a m r of It. If you find that the conspiracy charged did not exist,
then you must return a not guilty verdict to that count of the Indictment,
even though you find that some other conspiracy existed. If you find that
the Defendant under consideration was not a member of the conspiracy charged
in the Indictment, then you must find that Defendant not guilty even
though that Defendant may have been a member of some other
conspiracy.

In your consideration of the conspiracy offense as alleged in the
indictment you should first determine,,from all of the testimony and
evidence in the case, whether or not the conspiracy existed as charged.
If you conclude that a conspiracy did exist as alleged, you should next
determine whether or not each Defendant willfully became a member of such
conspiracy.

In determining whether a defendant was a member of an alleged
conspiracy, however, the jury should consider only that evidence, if any,.
pertaining to his or her own acts and statements. He or she is not
responsible for the acts or declarations of other alleged participants
until it is established beyond a reasonable doubt, first that a conspiracy
existed; and second, from evidence of his or her own acts and statements,
that the defendant was one of its members.

On the other hand, If and when It does appear beyond a
reasonable doubt from the evidence In the case that a conspiracy did exist as
charged, and that the defendant under consideration was one of Its members,
then the statements and acts knowingly made and done during such conspiracy
and In furtherance of its objects, by any other pñoven member of the
conspiracy, may be considered by the Jury as evidence against that defendant
even though he or she was not present to hear the statements made or see the
acts done.

This is true because, as stated earlier, a conspiracy is a kind of ”
partnership” so that under the law each member is an agent or partner of
every other member, and each member is bound by or responsible for the acts
and statements of every other member made in pursuance of their scheme.

An “overt act” is any act knowingly committed by one of the
conspirators, in an effort to effect or accomplish some object or purpose of
the conspiracy. The overt act need not be criminal in nature, if considered
separately and apart from the conspiracy. It must, however, be an act which
follows and tends toward accomplishment of the plan or scheme, and must be
knowingly done in furtherance of some object or purpose of the conspiracy
charged in the indictment. you must be unanimous in your decision of which
overt acts, if any, were committed. In other words, It would not be a
unanimous verdict if some of you believed one overt act was committed while
others of you believed a different overt act had been committed additional-
l.y<, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that at least one
of these alleged overt acts was committed in order to accomplish some
object or purpose of the conspiracy by at least one member of conspiracy.

A conspirator Is responsible for offenses committed by other
conspirators If the conspirator was a member of the conspiracy when the
offense was committed and If the offense was committed in
furtherance of, or as a foreseeable consequence of, the conspiracy.

Therefore, if you have first found a Defendant guilty of the conspiracy
charged in Count One, and If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that
during the time the Defendant was a m r of that conspiracy, other
conspirators committed the offenses in Counts Two, Three, and/or
Found in furtherance of or as a foreseeable consequence of that
conspiracy, then you may find the Defendant guilty of Counts Two, Three,
and/or Four, even though the Defendant may not have participated in any
of the acts which constitute the offenses descried in Counts Two, Three,
and Four. The reason for this is that a conspirator committing a substantive
offense pursuant to a conspiracy is held to be the agent of the other
conspirators.

COUNT TWO
(Here, Judge Smith reiterates Count Two of the Indictment)

MALICE AFORETHOUGHT

“To kill with malice aforethought” (or “attempt to kill with malice
aforethought” also applicable in Count Four) means either to kill (or
attempt to kill under Count Four) another person deliberately and
intentionally, or to act with callous and wanton disregard for human life.
To find malice aforethought, you need not be convinced that the Defendant
under consideration hated the “persons killed (or attempted to be killed
under Count Four), or felt ill will toward the victim at the time.

In determining whether the killing (or attempted killing under Count
Four was with malice aforethought, you may consider the use of a weapon or
instrument and the manner in which death was caused or attempted under Count
Four).

You should consider all the facts and circumstances preceding,
surrounding, and following the killing (or attempted killing under Count
Four) which tend to shed light upon the condition of mind of each Defendant,
before and at the time of the killing (or attempted killing under Count
Four). No fact, no matter how small, no circumstance, no matter how
trivial, which bears upon the questions of malice aforethought should escape
your careful consideration.
SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT

You are instructed that an Agent of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms is one of the federal officers referred to in this law, and that:
it is part of the official duty of such an officer to execute search and
arrest warrants issued by a Judge or Magistrate Judge of this Court. To find
a Defendant guilty of this offense, you must determine that time government
has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that ATF Special Agents Steven D.
Willie, Robert William6, Conway C. LeBleu and Todd W. McKeehan (or Special
Agent Charles Meyer under Count Four) were acting within the scope of their
official duties as agents of the ATF. You are further instructed
that as a matter of law the ATF agents were not acting within the scope of
their official duties if they were engaged in a personal frolic or acting
merely as a private citizen. If you determine that the government has
failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that ATF Special Agents Steven
D. Willis, Robert Willis, Conway C. LeBleu and Todd W. McKeehan (or Special
Agent Charles Meyer under Count Four) were acting within the scope of their
official duties as agents of the ATF, you must find the Defendants not
guilty.
AIDING AND ABETTING

Count Two alleges that each named Defendant aided and abetted the other
Defendants as well as other unknown persons in the commission of this
offense. You are instructed as follows with regard to what “aiding and
abetting” means

Title 18, United States Code, Section 2, provides that the guilt of a
defendant in a criminal case may be established without proof that the
defendant personally did every act constituting the offense alleged. The law
recognizes that, ordinarily, anything a per6on can do toñ himself may also be
accomplished by that person through direction of another person as his or
her agent, or by acting in concert with, or under the direction of, another
person or persons in a joint effort or enterprise. So, if another person
is acting under the direction of a defendant or if the defendant joins
another person and performs acts with the intent to commit a crime, then the
law holds that defendant responsible for the acts and conduct of such
other persons just as though the defendant had committed the acts or engaged
in such conduct. Notice, however, that before any defendant may be held
criminally responsible for the acts of others it Is necessary that the accused
deliberately associate himself in some way with the crime and participate in
it with the intent to bring about the crime. Of course, mere presence at the
scene of a crime and knowledge that a crime is being committed are not
sufficient to establish that a defendant either directed or aided and abetted
the crime unless you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant under
consideration was a participant and not merely a knowing spectator.

In other words, you may not find the Defendant guilty unless you find
beyond a reasonable doubt that every element of the offense as
defined in these instructions was committed by some person or persons and
that the Defendant voluntarily participated in its commission with the intent
to violate the law.
SELF-DEFENSE

In this self-defense instruction, the “male gender” pronouns will
include Defendant Ruth Riddle.

If a Defendant was not an aggressor, and had reasonable grounds to
believe and actually did believe that he was Imminent danger of death or
serious bodily harm from which he could save himself only by using deadly
force against his assailants, he had the right to employ deadly force In
order to defend himself. By “deadly force” is meant force which is likely to
cause death or serious bodily harm.

In order for a Defendant to have been justified in the use of deadly
force in self-defense, he must not have provoked the assault on him or have
been the aggressor. Mere words without more, do not constitute provocation
or aggression.

The circumstances under which a Defendant acted must have been such as
to produce in the mind of a reasonably prudent person, similarly situated,
the reasonable belief that the other persons were then about to kill him or
to do him serious bodily harm. In addition, a Defendant must have actually
believed that he was In imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm and
that deadly force must be used to repel it.

If evidence of self-defense is present, the government must prove beyond
a reasonable doubt that a Defendant did not act in self-defense. If you find
that the government has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a
Defendant did not act in self-defense, you must find that Defendant not
guilty. In other words, if you have a reasonable doubt whether or not a
Defendant acted In self-defense, your verdict must be not guilty as to that
Defendant.

If a Defendant had reasonable grounds to believe and actually did
believe that he was In imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm and
that deadly force was necessary to repel such danger, he would be
justified In using deadly force in self- defense, even though it may
afterwards have turned out that the appearances were false. If these
requirements are met, he could use deadly force even though there was In fact
neither purpose on the part of the other persons to kill him or do him
serious bodily harm, nor imminent danger that it would be done, nor
actual necessity that deadly force be used in self-defense.

If a Defendant had reasonable grounds to believe and actually did
believe that he was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm and
that deadly force was necessary to repel such danger, he was not
required to retreat or to consider whether he could safely retreat. He was
entitled to stand his ground and use such force as was reasonably necessary
under the circumstances to save his life or protect himself from serious
bodily harm.

However, if a Defendant could have safely retreated but did not do so,
his failure to retreat is a circumstance which you may consider, together
with all other circumstances, in determining whether he went farther in
repelling the danger, real or apparent, then he was justified in doing under
the circumstances.

Even if the other persons were the aggressors and a Defendant was
justified in using force in self-defense, he would not be entitled to
use any greater force than he had reasonable grounds to believe and
actually did believe to be necessary under the circumstances to save
his life or avert serious bodily harm.

In determining whether o Defendant used excessive force in defending
himself, you may consider all the circumstances under which he acted.
The claim of self-defense is not necessarily defeated if greater
force than would have seemed necessary in careful reflection was used by
a Defendant in the heat of passion generated by an assault upon him.
A belief which may be unreasonable in careful reflection may be actually
and reasonably entertained in the heat of passion.

You must distinguish resisting arrest from self-defense. If you find
that the government has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that a Defendant
knew before he acted that the ATF agents were law- enforcement officers who
intended to search Mount Carmel or to arrest one or more of its
occupants, and that the Defendant under consideration acted to avoid arrest
or to prevent the search of Mount Carmel, you may not acquit that Defendant
by reason of self- defense. Additionally, if you are convinced beyond a
reasonable doubt that a Defendant prepared to ambush the ATF agents upon
their arrival at Mount Carmel by changing into combat clothing, gathering
pistols or rifles, loading magazines, or distributing hand grenades,
you may not acquit that Defendant by reason of self defense.

Generally, the law forbids forcible resistance to law enforcement
officers executing search and arrest warrants. Therefore, the general
rule is that knowledge of an officer’s status in law enforcement would
automatically negate any claim of self-defense. However, under the Fourth
Amendment, an individual has the right to be free from the use of excessive
force by a law enforcement officer even when that officer is making a
lawful search or arrest. It has, always been a policy of the law
to protect the physical integrity of every person from unauthorized violence.
This right arises from the Constitutions guarantee to be free from unlawful
attack upon one’s person. Therefore, if a federal officer uses excessive
force, that is, force that is not reasonable under all the circumstances
from the officer’s viewpoint, a citizen has the right to defend himself
from such force. However, the citizen may only use so much force as is
necessary to stop the officer’s use of excessive force. A citizen may only
use deadly force under the circumstances I have already explained to you.

Therefore, if you determine that the ATF agents caused the Defendant
under consideration to reasonably and honestly believe that he was about to
be killed or receive serious bodily harm due to the agents’ use of excessive
or unreasonable force, then self- defense would be appropriate if all of the
above elements are met. On the other hand, if you find that the ATF agents’
conduct caused the Defendant under consideration to believe that he or
someone similarly situated was about to be arrested or that mount Carmel was
about to be searched, and he acted to resist arrest, then self- defense would
not be appropriate.

You are instructed that federal agents are not automatically entitled to
use deadly Force to make an arrest or to conduct a search. If a suspect
threatens an officer with a weapon or if there is Probable cause to believe
that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or
threatened infliction of serious bodily harm, deadly force may be used to
apprehend that suspect. An officer cannot, however, seize an unarmed,
non- dangerous suspect by shooting him dead.

You are instructed that Federal law provides that upon the request of a
federal law enforcement officer or on attorney for the government, based upon
en affidavit containing probable cause, a search warrant may be issued by a
federal magistrate for a search of property or for a person within the
Federal district. Moreover, if it appears from a complaint, a written
statement of the facts constituting an offense charged, or from an affidavit
or affidavits that an offense has been committed and that the named Defendant
has committed it, a warrant for the arrest of the named Defendant shall issue
to any officer authorized to execute it. The search and arrest
warrants entered into evidence in this case are, as such, lawful process.

VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER

I have explained what the government has to prove for you to convict a
Defendant of aiding and abetting the murder of a federal agent. Your first
task is to decide whether the government has proved, beyond a reasonable
doubt, that the Defendant under consideration committed that crime. If
your verdict on that is guilty as to a particular Defendant, you are finished
with regard to that Defendant. But if your verdict is not guilty as to a
particular Defendant, or if you are unable to reach a verdict as to a
particular Defendant, you should then consider whether that Defendant
is guilty of voluntary manslaughter.

Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice.
Voluntary manslaughter is committed when a human being is killed unlawfully
in the sudden heat of passion caused by adequate provocation.

In order for a particular Defendant to be guilty of voluntary
manslaughter, you must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the
government has proved the following elements:
First: that the Defendant under consideration aided and
abetted the killing of ATF Special Agents Steven D.
Willis, Robert Williams, Conway C. LeBleu and Todd
W. McKeehan without lawful justification;

Second: That the persons killed were federal officers as
described above, who were then engaged in the
performance of their official duty, as charged;

Third: That the Defendant under consideration acted in the
heat of passion; and

Fourth: That the heat of passion was caused by an adequate
provocation.

For a determination of whether the person killed was a federal officer
who was engaged in the performance of his official duty, refer to the
explanation on page of these Instructions.

For a full explanation of “aiding and abetting,’ refer to pace of these
Instructions.

Heat of passion” is such a passion or emotion as naturally would be
aroused in the mind of an ordinary reasonable person of average disposition
in the same or similar circumstances as confronted the Defendant
under consideration at the time the killing occurred. It is such a
state of passion, or hot blood, or rage, anger, resentment, terror or fear as
to indicate the absence of deliberate design to kill or as to cause one to
act on impulse without reflection.

Thus, the law does not consider the peculiarities of a
particular Defendant’s nature or temperament or condition. It will occur to
you that the underlying reason for this rule is the same as that which was
the basis of the “reasonable man” rule in the law of self-defense. The
passion which was aroused from the facts and circumstances that confronted
the Defendant under consideration. must be such as also would have
aroused the passion of an ordinarily reasonable person likewise situated.

The basic inquiry is whether or not at the time of the
killing, the reason and judgment of the Defendant under
consideration was obscured or disturbed by passion–or dethroned, to use
another expression–to such an extent as would cause an ordinarily
reasonable person of average disposition to act rashly and without
deliberation and from passion rather than judgment.

Before you may find that the Defendant under consideration acted in
the heat of passion, you must also find that there was adequate provocation.”
Provocation, in order to be adequate to reduce the offense from murder to
voluntary manslaughter, must be such as might naturally induce a reasonable
man in the passion of the moment to lose self-control and to act on Impulse
and without reflection.

A blow or other personal violence may constitute adequate
provocation. But a trivial or slight provocation, entirely
disproportionate to the violence of the retaliation, is not adequate
provocation to reduce the offense from murder to voluntary manslaughter.
Mere words standing alone, however, no matter how insulting, no matter how
offensive, no matter how abusive, are not adequate to reduce the offense.

You should ask yourself whether the ordinarily reasonable man, placed
in the same situation in which the Defendant under consideration
found himself or herself, and knowing what the Defendant under
consideration then knew or believed he or she knew, have been thrown into
such heat of passion?

COUNT THREE

(Here Judge Smith enumerates Count Three of the Indictment. See Appendix)

ELEMENTS OF COUNT THREE
Title 18, United States Code, Section 924(c)(1), makes it a crime for
anyone to use or carry a firearm during and in relation to the commission of
a crime of violence which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States.
For you to find a Defendant guilty of this crime, you must be convinced that
the government has proved each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:
First: That the Defendant under consideration committed the crime
alleged in Count One of the indictment. I instruct you that Conspiracy to
Murder Officers and Employees of the United States is a crime of violence;
and Second: That the Defendant under consideration knowingly used or
carried a firearm during and in relation to the Defendant’s commission of the
crime alleged in Count One of the Indictment.

The government is not required to prove that the Defendant under
consideration actually fired the weapon or brandished it at someone in
order to prove “use” as that term is used in this instruction.
However, you must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the firearm
played a role in or facilitated the commission of the crime of
violence. In other words, you must find that the firearm was an integral
part of the offense charged.

The term “firearm” means any weapon which will or is designed to or may
readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive. The
term “firearm” also includes the frame or receiver of any such weapon, or
any firearm muffler or firearm silencer, or destructive device.

COUNT FOUR
(for this text see “COUNT FOUR” in the indictment)

ELEMENTS OF COUNT FOUR

Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1111 and 1114, make it a crime to
kill or attempt to kill a federal official, including an Agent of the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, in the performance of his
official duties.

For you to find any Defendant guilty of this offense, you must be
convinced that the government has proved each of the following elements
beyond a reasonable doubt as to that Defendant:

First: That the Defendant under consideration aided and
abetted the attempted killing of ATF Special Agent
Charles Meyer without lawful justification;

Second: That ATF Special Agent Charles Meyer was a federal
officer as described above, who was then engaged in
the performance of his official duty, as charged;
and

Third: That the Defendant under consideration aided and
abetted the attempted killing of ATF Special Agent
Charles Meyer with malice aforethought.
“To attempt to kill with malice aforethought” is defined on pages of
these Instructions.”

For a determination of whether the person killed was a federal officer
who was engaged in the performance of his official duty, refer to the
explanation on page , of these instructions.

For a full explanation of “aiding and abetting” refer to page of these
Instructions.

COUNT SIX
(See “the Indictment” for this text)

ELEMENTS OF COUNT SIX

Title 18 United States Code, Section 924(c)(1), makes it a crime for
anyone to use or carry a firearm during and in relation to the commission of
a crime of violence which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States.

For you to find Norman Allison guilty of this crime, you must be
convinced that the government has proved each of the following beyond a
reasonable doubt:

First: That the Defendant committed the crime alleged in
Count Four of the indictment. I instruct you that
Attempting to kill a federal officer is a crime of
violence.

Second: That the Defendant knowingly used or carried a
firearm during and in relation to the Defendant’s
commission of the crime alleged in Count Four of
the indictment.

The term “use” and “firearm” are defined on page , of these Instructions,
and you should refer to those definitions again.

ELEMENTS OF COUNT SEVEN

Title 26, United States Code, Section 5861(d), makes it a crime for
anyone to possess certain kinds of unregistered firearms.

For you to find Graeme Craddock guilty of this crime, you must be
convinced that the government has proved each of the following beyond a
reasonable doubt:

First: That the Defendant knew he had a firearm in his
possession.

Second: That this firearm was a destructive device, namely
an explosive grenade.

Third: That the Defendant knew of the characteristics of
the firearm, namely that it was an explosive
grenade.

Fourth: That this firearm was in operating condition; and

Fifth: That this firearm was not registered to the
Defendant in the National Firearms Registration and
Transfer Record. It does not matter whether the
Defendant knew that the firearm had to be
registered.

ELEMENTS OF COUNT EIGHT

Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, makes It a crime for anyone
to conspire with someone else to commit an offense against the laws
of the United States. In this count of the Indictment, Defendant
Craddock is charged with conspiring to unlawfully possess a firearm
without having the firearm registered to him in the National Firearms
Registration and Transfer Record.

For you to find the Defendant guilty of this crime, you must be
convinced that the government has proved each of the following beyond a
reasonable doubt:

First: That two or more persons made an agreement to
commit the crime of unlawful possession of a
firearm as defined by Section 5845(a), Title 26,
United States Code, to wit: a grenade, without
having the said firearm registered to him in the
National Firearms Registration and Transfer
Records, as charged in Count Seven of the
Indictment;

Second: That the Defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the
agreement and joined it willfully, that is, with
the intent to further the unlawful purpose; and

Third: That one of the conspirators during the existence
of the conspiracy knowingly committed the overt act
listed above in order to accomplish some object or
purpose of the conspiracy.

For a full explanation of the law of conspiracy, refer to pages, of these
instructions.

ELEMENTS OF COUNT NINE

Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, makes it a crime for anyone
to conspire with someone else to commit an offense against the laws
of the United States. In this count of the indictment, Defendant
Fatta is charged with conspiring to unlawfully possess machineguns in
violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922 ( o ).

For you to find the Defendant guilty of this crime, you must be
convinced that the government has proved each of the following beyond a
reasonable doubt:

First: That two or more persons made an agreement to
commit the crime of unlawful possession of
machineguns;

Second: That the Defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the
agreement and joined it willfully, that is, with
the intent to further the unlawful purpose; and

Third: That one of the conspirators during the existence
of the conspiracy knowingly committed one or more
of the two overt acts listed above in order to
accomplish some object or purpose of the
conspiracy.

For a full explanation of the law of conspiracy, refer to pages of
these instructions.

ELEMENTS OF COUNT TEN

Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(o), makes it a crime to
unlawfully possess a machinegun Title 18, United States Code, Section 2,
makes it a crime to aid and abet another person in that offense For you
to find the Defendant guilty of aiding and abetting In this crime, you
must be convinced that the government has proved beyond a reasonable doubt
the following:

First: That Vernon Howell, also known as David Koresh,
knowingly transferred or possessed a machinegun
without lawful authority or after May 19, 1986;
Second: That Vernon Howell, also known as David Koresh,
knew of the characteristics of the machinegun as
defined above; and
Third: That this machinegun was in operating condition or
could readily be converted or assembled into
operating condition

For further explanation of this offense, including pertinent definitions
and the lawful justification for possessing a machinegun, refer to
pages of these Instructions.

For you to find the Defendant guilty of aiding and abetting in this
crime, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2, you must
further be convinced that the government has proved beyond a reasonable
doubt that the Defendant aided and abetted Vernon Howell in this
offense as defined on pages of these Instructions.

The word “knowingly,” as that term is used in these instructions, means
that the act was done voluntarily and intentionally,not because of mistake or
accident.

The word “willfully,” as that term has been used from time to time in
these instructions, means that the act was committed voluntarily and
purposely, with the specific intent to do something the law forbids; that is
to say, with bad purpose either to disobey or disregard the law. To possess”
or “possession,” as has been used from time to time in these instructions,
may be of two kinds: actual possession and constructive possession. A person
who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing, at a given time, is
then in actual possession of it. A person who, although not in actual
possession, knowingly has both the power and the intention, at a given time,
to exercise dominion or control over a thing, either directly or
through another person or persons, is then in constructive possession
of it. Possession may be sole or joint. If one person alone has actual or
constructive possession of a thing, possession is sole. If two or more share
actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is joint. You may
find that the element of possession, as that term is used in these
instructions, is present if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant had actual or constructive Possession, either alone or jointly with
others.

You are further instructed that the Constitution of the United States
guarantees freedom of religion. A Defendant’s religious beliefs, thoughts,
and manner of worship alone cannot be held against a Defendant. On
the other hand, a Defendant’s religious beliefs, thoughts, and manner
of worship alone are not justification for an overt criminal act.

You will note that the indictment charges that the offenses were
committed on or before or on or about specified dates. The government does
not have to prove that the crimes were committed on the exact dates, so long
as the government proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendants
committed the crimes on dates reasonably near the dates stated in the
indictment. You are here to decide whether the government has proved
beyond a reasonable doubt that each Defendant is guilty of the crimes
charged. No Defendant is on trial for any act, conduct, or offense not
alleged in the indictment against that particular Defendant. Neither
are you concerned with the guilt of any other person or persons not on trial
as a Defendant in this case. If any of the Defendants are found guilty, it
will be my duty to decide what the punishment will be. You should not be
concerned with punishment in any way. It should not enter your consideration
or discussion. A separate crime is charged against one or more of the
Defendants in each count of the indictment. Each count, and the evidence
pertaining to it, should be considered separately. Also, the case of each
Defendant should be considered separately and individually. The fact
that you may find one or more of the accused guilty or not guilty of
any of the crimes charged should not control your verdict as to any other
crime or any other defendant. You must give separate consideration to the
evidence as to each defendant.
To reach a verdict, all of you must agree. Your verdict must be
unanimous. Your deliberations will be secret. You will never have to
explain your verdict to anyone.

It is your duty to consult with one another and to deliberate in an
effort to reach agreement If you can do so. Each of you must decide the
case for yourself, but only after an impartial consideration of the
evidence, with your fellow jurors. During your deliberations, do not
hesitate to reexamine your own opinions and change your mind If convinced
that you were wrong> But do not give up your honest beliefs as to the weight
or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinion of your fellow
jurors, or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.

Remember at all times, you are judges — judges of the facts. Your sole
interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case, to decide
whether the government has proved the Defendants guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt.

Upon retiring to the jury room, the first thing that you should
do is select one of your number as your presiding juror, who will help to
guide your deliberations and will speak for you here in the courtroom.

A form of verdict has been prepared for your convenience. The presiding
juror will write the unanimous answers of the jury In the spaces provided,
either guilty or not guilty. At the conclusion of your deliberations, the
presiding juror should date and sign the verdict. If you need to communicate
with me during your deliberations, the presiding juror should write the
message and give it to the marshal. I will either reply in writing or bring
you back into the court to answer your message.

Bear in mind that you are never to reveal to any person,not even to the
Court, how the jury stands, numerically or otherwise, until after you have
reached a unanimous verdict.

To reach a verdict, all of you must agree. Your verdict must be
unanimous. Your deliberations will r secret. You wall never have to explain
your verdict to anyone.

It is your duty to consult with one another and to deliberate in an
effort to reach agreement If you can do so. Each of you must decide the
case for yourself, but only after an impartial consideration of the
evidence, with your fellow jurors. During your deliberations, do not
hesitate to re-examine your own opinions and change your mind if convinced
that you were wrong. But do not give up your honest beliefs as to the weight
or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinion of your fellow
jurors, or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.

Remember at all times, you are judges - judges of the facts. Your sole
interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case, to decide
whether the government has proved the Defendants guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt.

Upon retiring to the jury room, the first thing that you should
do is select one of your number as your presiding juror, who will help to
guide your deliberations and will speak for you here in the courtroom.

A form of verdict has been prepared for your convenience. The presiding
juror will write the unanimous answers of the jury In the spaces provided,
either guilty or not guilty. At the conclusion of your deliberations, the
presiding juror should date and sign the verdict. If you need to communicate
with me during your deliberations,

As I told you earlier, It is your duty to determine the facts.
Specifically, you must determine whether the government has proven the
allegations of the indictment beyond a reasonable doubt. In doing so, you
must consider only the evidence presented during the trial, including the
sworn testimony of the witnesses and the exhibits. Remember that any
statements, objections, or arguments made by the lawyers are not evidence.
The function of the lawyers is to point out those things that are most
significant or most helpful to their side of the case, and in so doing to
call your attention to certain facts or Inferences that might
otherwise escape your notice. In the final analysis, however, it is your own
recollection and interpretation of the evidence that controls. What
the lawyers say is not binding upon you.

Also, do not assume from anything I may have done or said during the
trial that I have any opinion concerning any of the issues in this case.
Except for the instructions to you on the law, you should disregard anything
I may have said during the trial in arriving at your own findings as to the
facts.

It is the duty of the Court to admonish an attorney who, out of zeal
for his cause, does something which I feel is not in keeping, with
the rules of evidence or procedure. You are to draw absolutely no inference
against the side to whom an admonition of the court may have been addressed
during the trial of this case.

You, as jurors, are the judges cf the facts, But in determining what
actually happened–that is, in reaching your decision as to the facts–it is
your sworn duty to follow all of the rules of law as I explain them to you.

You have no right to disregard or give special attention to any one
instruction, or to question the wisdom or correctness of any rule I may state
to you. You must not substitute or follow your own notion or opinion as to
what the law is or ought to be. It is your duty to apply the law as I explain
it to you, regardless of the consequences.

This Court recognizes that each of you is a reasonable person, capable
of making appropriate decisions based simply on your collective common
sense and experiences. However, our society is, and must be, ruled by law
and not by men. Thus it would violate the very linch-pin of our judicial
system if you were to render a decision not based on the law as I am now
explaining it.

It is also your duty to base your verdict solely upon the evidence,
Without prejudice or sympathy. That was the promise you made and the oath
you took before being accepted by the parties as jurors, and they have the
right to expect nothing less.



Appendix C: Warrant
TEXT OF SEARCH WARRANT W-93-15M 2-25-93 FROM WACO, TEXAS:

Affiant alleges the following grounds for search and seizure:
I, Davy Aguilera, being duly sworn, depose and state that:

I am a Special Agent with the US Treasury Department, BATF, Austin, Texas,
and I have been so employed for approximately 5 years. This affidavit is
based on my own investigation as well as information furnished to me by other
law enforcement officers and concerned citizens.

*NEXT TWO PARAGRAPHS LIST THE AGENT’S QUALIFICATIONS*

On June 4, 1992, I met with Lt. Gene Barber, McClennan County Sheriff’s
Department, Waco, Texas, who has received extensive training in explosives
classification, identification and the rendering safe of explosive devices
and has been recognized in Federal Court as an expert witness in this field.
Lt. Barber stated that he had received information in May 1992, from an
employee of United Parcel Service, Waco, Texas, that from April through June
of 1992, several deliveries had been made to a place known as the “Mag-Bag”,
Route 7, Box 555-B, Waco, Texas, 76705, located on Farm Road number 2491, in
the names of Mike Schroeder and David Koresh, which the UPS employee believed
to be firearms components and explosives. Through my investigation, I know
that the place known as the “Mag-Bag” is a small tract of land located at the
above address which has two metal buildings located on it. The name “Mag-
Bag” comes from the shipping label which is accompanied many items shipped
to the above address. I and other agents have personally observed vehicles
consistently over the past six months at the “mag-Bag” location which are
registered to Vernon Wayne Howell, aka: David Koresh. Lt. Barber further
stated that the UPS employee, Larry Gilbreath, became suspicious and
concerned about the deliveries, most of which were shipped COD because of
their frequency and because of the method used by the recipient to receive
the shipments and to pay for them.

Lt. Barber explained that David Koresh was an alias name used by Vernon Wayne
Howell who operated a religious cult commune near Waco, Texas, at a place
commonly known as the Mount Carmel Center, which is one of the premises to be
searched and more specifically described above. I have learned from my
investigation, particularly from my discussions with former cult members that
Vernon Howell adopted the name David Koresh more than a year ago. The
name “David Koresh” was chosen by Howell because Howell believed that the
name helped designate him as the messiah or the anointed one of God. Lt.
Barber further related that he was told by Gilbreath that he had been making
deliveries to the Mag-Bag” and the Mt. Carmel Center on Double EE Ranch Road,
Waco, Texas, for several years, but he had never been suspicious of any of
the deliveries until 1992. Gilbreath became concerned because he made
several COD deliveries addressed to the “Mag-Bag”, but when he would stop at
that location he was instructed to wait while a telephone call was made to
the Mt. Carmel Center by the person at the “Mag-Bag”, usually Woodrow
Kendrick or Mike Schroeder, notifying the person who answered the phone at
the Mt. Carmel Center that UPS was coming there with a COD delivery, after
which Gilbreath would be instructed to drive to the Mt. Carmel Center to
deliver the package and collect for it. That on those occasions when he was
at the Mt. Carmel Center to deliver and collect for the COD packages he saw
several manned observation posts, and believed that the observers were armed.

Lt. Barber stated that he was told by Larry Gilbreath (UPS) that in May of
1992 two cases of inert hand grenades and a quantity of black gunpowder were
delivered by him to the “Mag-Bag.” The source of these shipments was unknown
to Gilbreath.

On June 9, 1992, I was contacted by Lt. Barber who told me that he had
learned from Larry Gilbreath that in June of 1992, the UPS delivered 90
pounds of powdered aluminum metal and 30 to 40 cardboard tubes, 24 inches in
length and 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 inches in diameter, which were shipped from the Fox
Fire Company, Pocatello, Idaho, to “Mag-Bag.” From another shipper whose
identity is unknown, to parcels containing a total of 60 M-16/AR-15
ammunition magazines were delivered by UPS to the mag-Bag” on June 8, 1992.
I know based upon my training and experience that an AR-15 is a semi-
automatic rifle practically identical to the M-16 rifle carried by United
States Armed Forces. The AR-15 rifle fires 223 caliber ammunition and, just
like the M-16, can carry magazines of ammunition ranging from 30 to 60 rounds
of ammunition. I have been involved in many cases where defendants,
following a relatively simple process, convert AR-15 semi-automatic rifles to
fully automatic rifles of the nature of the M-16. This conversion process
can often be accomplished by an individual purchasing certain parts which
will quickly transform the rifle to fire fully automatic. Often times
templates, milling machines, lathes and instruction guides are utilized by
the converter.

*THE NEXT FIVE PARAGRAPHS DESCRIBE THE HISTORY OF THE COMMUNE AND THE DISPUTE
BETWEEN KORESH AND THE COMMUNE’S ORIGINAL FOUNDER WHICH RESULTED IN A GUN
BATTLE. KORESH AND OTHERS WERE ACQUITTED ON ALL CHARGES*

Lt. Barber furnished me with recently taken aerial photographs of the Mt.
Carmel Center which had been taken by Captain Dan Weyenberg of the McClennan
County Sheriff’s Department, Waco, Texas. Among the things noted in the
photographs was a buried bus near the main structure and an observation
tower, approximately three or four stories tall with windows on all four
sides enabling a view from the structure of 360 degrees.

I was also advised by Lt. Barber that Robert Cervenka, a known long time
McClennan County citizen, who lives near the Mt. Carmel Center compound, had,
on several occasions, from January through February of 1992, heard machine
gun fire coming from the compound property. Mr. Cervenka offered law
enforcement authorities his residence to be used as a surveillance post.

On July 21, 1992, I met with Robert L. Cervenka, Route 7, Box 103, Riesel,
Texas. Mr. Cervenka farms the property surrounding the east side of the Mt.
Carmel property. Mr. Cervenka stated that he has farmed that area since
1948. From about January and February of 1992 he has heard machine gun fire
on the Vernon Howell property during the night hours. He is familiar with and
knows the sound of machine gun fire because he did a tour overseas with the
US Army. He believes that some of the gunfire he heard was being done
with .50 caliber machine guns and possibly M-16 machine guns.

On November 13, 1992, I spoke with Lt. Gene Barber who told me that Mr.
Cervenka, whose ranch is adjacent to the Mt. Carmel property, had reported
hearing bursts of gunfire from the Mt. Carmel compound on November 8, 1992,
at approximately 2:45 p.m.

On June 8, 1992, based on information gained from Gilbreath by Lt. Barber, I
interviewed Dave Haupert, Olympic Arms Inc., Olympia Washington, a company
which had shipped several parcels to David Koresh at the “Mag-Bag”, Route 7,
Box 555-B, Waco, Texas. Mr. Haupert told me that the records of Olympic Arms
Inc., indicated that approximately forty-five AR-15/M-16 rifle upper receiver
units, with barrels of various calibers, had been shipped from March through
April of 1992 to the Mag-Bag corporation for a total cost of $11,107.31, cash
on delivery.

On January 13, 1993, I interviewed Larry Gilbreath in Waco, Texas, and
confirmed the information which had previously been related to me by Lt.
Barber. Mr. Gilbreath told me that although he had been making deliveries at
the “Mag-Bag” and the Mt. Carmel Center for quite some time, his suspicion
about the packages being delivered to those places was never aroused until
about February 1992. At that time the invoices accompanying a number of
packages reflected that they contained firearm parts and accessories as well
as various chemicals. He stated that in May 1992, a package which was
addressed to the “Mag-Bag” accidentally broke open while it was being loaded
on his delivery truck. He saw that it contained three other boxes, the
contents of which were “pineapple” type hand grenades which he believed to be
inert. He stated that there were about 50 of the grenades and that he later
delivered them to the Mt. Carmel Center. The Mt. Carmel Center is that tract
of land depicted in the photograph labeled “attachment B” with the main
residential structure being depicted in “attachment C.”

Mr. Gilbreath stated that these suspicious packages were usually addressed to
the “Mag-Bag” or to David Koresh. When he would stop to deliver them to the
“Mag-Bag” he was met most of the time by Woodrow Kendrick and on other
occasions by Steve Schneider. They would have him wait while they telephoned
the Mt. Carmel Center to tell them that UPS was coming with a COD package.
He would be instructed to take the package(s) to the Mt. Carmel Center. Upon
arriving at the Mt. Carmel Center he was usually met by Perry Jones or on
occasion by Steve Schneider who would pay the COD charges in cash and would
accept delivery of the shipments.

On this same date, June 8, 1992, I interviewed Glen Deruiter, manager, Sarco
Inc., Stirling, New Jersey, and learned from him that in May of 1992 their
company shipped one M-16 parts set kit with a sling and magazine to the ”
Mag-Bag” in the name of David Koresh. The total value of these items was $
284.95.

Also on June 8, 1992, I interviewed Cynthia Aleo, Owner/manager Nesard Gun
Parts Co., Barrington, Illinois, and learned from her that in May of 1992 her
company shipped to the “Mag-Bag” 2 M-16 machine gun CAR kits and 2 M-16
machine gun EZ kits. These kits contain all the parts of an M-16 machine gun
except for the lower receiver unit which is the firearm” by lawful
definition. Ms. Aleo stated that the total amount of sales to the “Mag-Bag”
was $1227.00. Within the past month I have spoken with Curtis Bartlett,
firearms technician with BATF and have learned that Nesard Co. has been under
investigation in the past by BATF for engaging in a scheme to supply parts
which would enable individuals to construct illegal weapons from various
component parts.

*THE NEXT THREE PARAGRAPHS DESCRIBE THE AGENT’S RECORD SEARCH TO DETERMINE IF
ANY OF THE PRINCIPALS OF THE COMMUNE ARE REGISTERED AS MACHINE GUN OWNERS OR
FIREARMS MANUFACTURERS. HE DESCRIBES THE RESULT AS NEGATIVE*

On June 23, 1992, I spoke with ATF compliance inspector Robert Souza,
Seattle, Washington, who inquired about the “Mag-Bag” corporation, Route 7,
Box 555, Waco, Texas. He had received some invoices reflecting a large
quantity of upper receivers and AR-15 parts being shipped to Mag-Bag”, Waco,
Texas, from Olympic Arms Inc., 624 Old Pacific Highway, SE, Olympia,
Washington. Inspector Souza faxed me copies of invoices reflecting purchases
of twenty AR-15 upper receiver units with barrels by the “Mag-Bag” on March
26 and 30, 1992. These items are in addition to the items referred to above.

As a result of my investigation of shipments to Howell/Koresh and Mike
Schroeder at the “Mag-Bag” Corporation, Waco, Texas, through UPS and the
inspection of the firearms records of Henry McMahon, dba Hewitt Handguns,
Hewitt, Texas, I have learned that they acquired during 1992 the following
firearms and related explosive paraphernalia:

104 AR-15/M-16 upper receiver groups with barrels 8,100 rounds of 9MM and .
223 caliber ammunition for AR-15/M-16 20 100 round capacity drum magazines
for AK-47 rifles 260 M-16/AR-15 magazines 30 M-14 magazines 2 M-16 EZ kits 2
M-16 CAR kits 1 M-76 grenade launcher (not a typo, this is what it says) 200
M-31 practice rifle grenades 4 M-16 parts set kits “A” 2 flare launchers 2
cases (approximately 50) inert practice hand grenades 40-50 pounds of black
gunpowder 30 pounds of potassium nitrate 5 pounds of magnesium metal powder 1
pound of igniter cord (a Class C explosive) 91 AR-15 lower receiver units 26
various calibers and brands of handguns and long guns 90 pounds of aluminum
metal powder 30-40 cardboard tubes

The amount of expenditure for the above listed firearm paraphernalia,
excluding the 91 AR-15 lower receiver units and the 26 complete firearms, was
in excess of $44,300.00.

From my investigation I have learned that a number of shipments to the
“Mag-Bag” have been from vendors with questionable trade practices. One
is presently under investigation by the ATF for violations of the
National Firearms Act which prohibits unlawful possession of machine
guns, silencers, destructive devices, and machine gun conversion kits.

Because of the sensitivity of this investigation these vendors have not
been contacted by me for copies of invoices indicating the exact items
shipped to the “Mag-Bag.”

On November 13, 1992, I interviewed Lt. Coy Jones, McClennan County
Sheriff’s Department, Waco, Texas, and learned from him that he had
spoken with an employee of UPS, Waco, Texas, who wished to remain
anonymous. This person told Jones that Marshal Keith Butler, a relative
of the person who wishes to remain anonymous, is a machinist by trade
and is associated with Vernon Howell.

The records of the Texas Department of Public Safety reflect that Butler
has been arrested on 7 occasions since 1984 for unlawful possession of
drugs. Two of the arrests resulted in convictions for possession of a
controlled substance. Butler’s latest arrest and conviction was in
January 1992. Butler received a sentence of three years in the Texas
Department of Corrections. In April 1992 Butler was paroled to
McClennan County, Texas.

On November 13, 1992, I interviewed Terry Fuller, a deputy sheriff for
the McClennan County Sheriff’s Department, Waco, Texas, and learned from
him that on November 6, 1992, at approximately 1:25 pm while on route
patrol in the area of the Mt. Carmel Center, the property controlled by
Vernon Howell, he heard a loud explosion in the area of the north part
of the Mt. Carmel property. As he drove toward the area where he
thought the explosion had occurred, he observed a large cloud of grey
smoke dissipating from ground level on the north end of the Mt. Carmel
property.

On December 7, 1992, I spoke with Special Agent Carlos Torres, BATF,
Houston, Texas, who had been assisting me in a portion of this
investigation. He related to me the results of his interview on
December 4, 1992, with Joyce Sparks, Texas Department of Human Services,
Waco, Texas. Special Agent Torres told me that Ms. Sparks received a
complaint from outside the State of Texas that David Koresh was
operating a commune-type compound and that he was sexually abusing young
girls. Ms. Sparks stated that on February 27, 1992, she, along with two
other employees of the Texas Dept. of Human Services, and two McClennan
County Sheriff’s deputies responded to the complaint. They went to the
Mt. Carmel Center compound, located east of Waco in McClennan County.
When they arrived at the compound they were met by a lady who identified
herself as Rachel Koresh, the wife of David Koresh.

Mrs. Koresh was reluctant to talk with Ms. Sparks because David Koresh
was not there. She had strict orders from him not to talk with anyone
unless he was present. Ms. Sparks finally was able to convince Mrs.
Koresh to allow her to talk with some of the children who were present.
She talked to a young boy about 7 or 8 years old. The child said that
he could not wait to grow up and be a man. When Ms. Sparks asked him
why he was in such a hurry to grow up he replied that when he grew up he
would get a “long gun” just like all the other men there. When Ms.
Sparks pursued the subject the boy told her that all the adults had guns
and that they were always practicing with them.

Ms. Sparks also told Special Agent Torres that she was escorted through
part of the building where she noted a lot of construction being
performed. She also said that she could not determine how many people
were in the group but estimated about 60-70 people there including men,
women and children. She stated that she saw about 15-20 adult males
there.

Ms. Sparks also said that on April 6, 1992, she visited the compound again.
On this occasion she talked with David Koresh. She asked Koresh about
the firearms which she had been told by the small child. Koresh
admitted that there were a few firearms there, but said that most of the
adults did not know of them, and there were too few to be of any
significance. Ms. Sparks said that when she pressed Koresh about the
firearms and their location at the compound, he offered to show her
around. He requested that she wait about 30 minutes until he could get
the other residents out of the building so they would not see where he
had the firearms stored. After a period of time, Ms. Sparks was
escorted through part of the building by Koresh. She noted that there
was more construction activity and that the inside of the structure
looked quite different from her previous visit. Each time Ms. Sparks
asked Koresh about the location of the firearms, he would tell her that
they were in a safe place where the children could not get to them. He
would then change the subject.

Ms. Sparks said that she noticed a trap door in the floor at one end of
the building. When she inquired about it, Koresh allowed her to look
into the trap door. She could see a ladder leading down into a buried
school bus from which all the seats had been removed. At one end of the
bus she could see a very large refrigerator with numerous bullet holes.
She also saw three long guns lying on the floor of the bus, however, she
did not know the make or caliber of them. She stated that there was no
electricity in the bus. Everything she saw was with the aid of a pen
light. When questioned by Ms. Sparks, Koresh said that the bus was
where he practiced his target shooting in order not to disturb his
neighbors.

Ms. Sparks felt the entire walk through the compound was staged for her
by Koresh. When she asked to speak with some of the children and other
residents, Koresh refused, stating they were not available. She said
that during her conversation with Koresh, he told her that he was the
“Messenger” from God, that the world was coming to an end, and that when
he “reveals” himself the riots in Los Angeles would pale in comparison
to what was going to happen in Waco, Texas. Koresh stated that it would
be a “military type operation” and that all the “non-believers” would
have to suffer.

On December 11, 1992, I interviewed Robyn Bunds in LaVerne, California.
Robyn Bunds is a former member and resident of Vernon Howell’s commune
in Waco, Texas. She told me that in 1988 at the age of 19, she gave
birth to a son who was fathered by Vernon Howell. Her departure from
the commune in 1990 was a result of Howell becoming progressively more
violent and abusive.

While she was there she and other residents were subjected to watching
extremely violent movies of the Viet Nam war which Howell would refer to
as training films. Howell forced members to stand guard of the commune
24 hours a day with loaded weapons. Howell always was in possession of
firearms and kept one under his bed while sleeping. Robyn stated that
her present residence in California belonged to her parents. For a
period of several years, Howell had exclusive control of the residence
and used it for other members of his cult when they were in California.
It was later relinquished by Howell to Robyn’s mother. In June 1992,
while she was cleaning one of the bedrooms of the residence, she found a
plastic bag containing gun parts. She showed them to her brother, David
Bunds, who has some knowledge of firearms. He told her it was a machine
gun conversion kit. She stored the gun parts in her garage because she
felt certain that Howell would send some of his followers to pick them
up. Subsequent to her discovery of the conversion kit, Paul Fatta,
Jimmy Riddle, and Neal Vaega, all members of Howell’s cult, and
residents of the commune in Waco, came from Waco, Texas, to California,
and picked up the conversion kit.

On December 12, 1992, I interviewed Jeannine Bunds, the mother of Robyn
and David Bunds. She told me that she was a former member of Howell’s
group in Waco, Texas, having left there in September, 1991. She is a
registered nurse and was working in that capacity at the Good Samaritan
Hospital, Los Angeles, California. While at Howell’s commune in Waco,
she participated in live fire shooting exercises conducted by Howell.
She saw several long guns there, some of which she described as AK-47
rifles. Mrs. Bunds described the weapon to me and was able to identify
an AK-47 from among a number of photographs of firearms shown to her by
me. I believe that she is well able to identify an AK-47. In July of
1991 she saw Howell shooting a machine gun on the back portion of the
commune property. She knew it was a machine gun because it functioned
with a very rapid fire and would tear up the ground when Howell shot it.
Mrs. Bunds also told me that Howell had fathered at least fifteen
children from various women and young girls at the compound. Some of
the girls who had babies fathered by Howell were as young as 12 years
old. She had personally delivered 7 of these children.

According to Ms. Bunds, Howell annuls all marriages of couples who join
his cult. He then has exclusive sexual access to the women. He also,
according to Mrs. Bunds, has regular sexual relations with young girls
there. The girls ages are from 11 years old to adulthood.

On January 6, 1993, I interviewed Jeannine Bunds again, in Los Angeles,
California. I showed her several photographs of firearms and explosive
devices. She identified an AR-15 rifle, and a pineapple type hand
grenade as being items which she had seen at the Mt. Carmel Center while
she was there. She stated that she saw several of the AR-15 rifles and
at least one of the hand grenades.

On January 7, 1993, I interviewed Deborah Sue Bunds in Los Angeles,
California. She was the wife of David Bunds, and she had been a member
of the “Branch Davidians” since birth. She stated she first met Vernon
Wayne Howell in July, 1980. When Howell assumed leadership of the
“Branch” in Waco, Texas, in 1987, he began to change the context of
their doctrine. While she was at the Mt. Carmel compound in Waco,
Texas, she was assigned under Howell’s direction to guard duty with a
loaded weapon. About February, 1989, she observed Howell shooting a
machine gun behind the main structure of the compound. She is sure the
firearm was a machine gun because of the rapid rate of fire and the rate
of fire was much different from that which was usually conducted during
practice exercises on the compound. After describing the firing of this
weapon to me, I believe that Ms. Bunds was describing the firing of an
automatic weapon.

Mrs. Deborah Bunds also told me that during an evening meal a short time
after having seen Howell shoot the machine gun, she overheard Howell and
his closest associates discussing machine guns. Howell was very excited
about having a machine gun. He voiced a desire to acquire additional
machine guns specifically AK-47 type macine guns.

During this investigation I made inquiries of a number of law
enforcement data bases for information about those commune residents who
I have been able to identify. Through TECS I learned that some 40
foreign nationals from Jamaica, United Kingdom, Israel, Australia, and
New Zealand have entered the United States at various times in the past
and have used the address of the Mt. Carmel Center, Waco, Texas, as
their point of contact while here. According to INS records, most of
these foreign nationals have overstayed their entry permits or visas and
are therefore illegally in the United States. I know that it is a
violation of Title 18, U.S.C. Section 922, for an illegal alien to
receive a firearm.

On January 1 and January 3, 1993, Mrs. Poia Vaega, of Mangere, Auckland,
New Zealand, was interviewed telephonically by Resident Agent in Charge
Bill Buford, BATF, Little Rock Arkansas, who also is assisting me in
this investigation. The results of Special Agent Buford’s interview on
January 1, 1993, was reduced to writing and furnished to me. Special
Agent Buford’s interview on January 3, 1993, was tape recorded with the
permission of Poia Vaega and has since been transcribed and typewritten.
Both the tape recording and the transcription was furnished to me by
Special Agent Buford. Both interviews with Poia Vaega revealed a false
imprisonment for a term of three and a half months which began in June
of 1991 and physical and sexual abuse of one of Mrs. Vaega’s sisters,
Doreen Saipaia. This was while she was a member of the Branch Davidian
at the Mt. Carmel Center, Waco, Texas. The physical and sexual abuse
was done by Vernon Wayne Howell and Stanley Sylvia, a close follower of
Howell, on several occasions.

It was learned From Mrs. Vaega that she and her husband Leslie were also
members of Howell’s group in Waco for a short period of time in March,
1990. Upon their arrival at Mt. Carmel Center, she and her husband were
separated and not allowed to sleep together or have any sexual contact.

According to Mrs. Vaega, all the girls and women at the compound were
exclusively reserved for Howell. She stated that Howell would preach
his philosophy, which did not always coincide with the bible, for hours
at a time. She and her husband left the compound after ten days because
her husband did not agree with Howell’s doctrine but that her two
sisters stayed behind.

Mrs. Vaega also related that she was present at one of the study periods
held by Howell when Howell passed his personal AK-47 machine gun around
for the group to handle and look over.

On January 6, 1993, I received the results of an examination conducted
by Jerry A. Taylor, explosives enforcement officer, BATF, Walnut Creek,
California, in response to a request from me to render an opinion on
device design, construction, functioning, effects and classification of
explosives materials which have been accumulated by Howell and his
followers. Mr. Taylor has received extensive training in explosives
classification, identification and rendering safe of explosive devices
and has been recognized on numerous occasions as an expert witness in
Federal Court. Mr. Taylor stated that the chemicals Potassium Nitrate,
Aluminum and Magnesium, when mixed in the proper proportions do
constitute an explosive as defined by federal law. He further stated
that igniter cord is an explosive. Also Mr. Taylor stated that the
inert practice rifle grenades and hand grenades would, if modified as
weapons, with the parts available to Howell, become explosive devices as
defined by federal law. Finally, he stated that black powder is
routinely used as the main charge when manufacturing improvised
explosive weapons, such as grenades and pipe bombs. I know that Title
26, U.S.C. Section 5845, makes it unlawful for a person to possess any
combination of parts designed or intended for use in converting any
device into a destructive device. The definition of “firearm” includes
any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in
converting any device into a destructive device, such as a grenade, and
from which a destructive device may be readily assembled. See United
States vs Price, 877 F.2d 334 (5th Cir. 1989). So long as an individual
possesses all the component parts item constitutes a destructive device,
even though it is not assembled, so long as it can be readily assembled.
United States vs Russell, 468 F.SUPP. 322 (D.C. Tex. 1979).

On January 8, 1993, I interviewed Marc Breault in Los Angeles,
California. He is an American citizen who lives in Australia with his
wife Elizabeth. He was once a member of the Branch Davidian in Waco,
Texas. He lived at the Mt. Carmel Center from early 1988 until
September 1989. While there he participated in physical training and
firearms shooting exercises conducted by Howell. He stood guard armed
with a loaded weapon. Guard duty was maintained 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week. Those who stood guard duty were instructed by Howell to “shoot
to kill” anyone who attempted to come through the entrance gate of the
Mt. Carmel property. On one occasion, Howell told him that he wanted to
obtain and/or manufacture machine guns, grenades and explosive devices.
Howell stated he thought that the gun control laws were ludicrous
because an individual could easily acquire a firearm and the necessary
parts to convert it to a machine gun, but if a person had the gun and
the parts together they would be in violation of the law. On another
occasion Howell told him that he was interested in acquiring the
“Anarchist’s Cookbook” which I know is a publication outlining
clandestine operations to include instructions and formulas for
manufacturing improvised explosive devices.

On January 12, 1993, I spoke with Special Agent Earl Dunagan, BATF,
Austin, Texas, who is assisting me in this investigation. He related
the results of his inquiry to the ATF firearms technology branch,
Washington, DC, for an opinion concerning the firearms parts which have
been accumulated by Howell and his group. Special Agent Dunagan stated
that he had spoken with Curtis Bartlett, firearms enforcement officer,
Washington, DC, and was told by Officer Bartlett that the firearms parts
which Howell has received and the method by which he has received them
is consistent with activities in other ATF investigations in various
parts of the US which have resulted in the discovery and seizure of
machine guns. Mr. Bartlett stated that the firearms parts received by
Howell could be used to assemble both semi-automatic firearms and
machine guns. He has examined many firearms which had been assembled as
machine guns which include these type parts.

Mr. Bartlett also told Special Agent Dunagan that one of the vendors of
supplies to Howell has been the subject of several ATF investigations in
the past. ATF executed a search warrant at this company and had seized
a number of illegal machine guns and silencers.

Special Agent Dunagan told me that on January 12, 1993, he spoke to
Special Agent Mark Mutz, ATF, Washington, DC, who was the case agent on
the above ongoing investigation dealing with the illicit supplier who
has provided gun parts to Howell. Special Agent Mutz stated that during
the execution of the federal search warrant at the company’s office in
South Carolina he saw large quantities of M-16 machine gun and AK-47
machine gun parts. The company maintained their inventory of these
parts as “replacement parts” so they fell easily within a loophole in
the federal law which prohibited ATF from seizing the parts. Special
Agent Mutz stated that the company had all the necessary parts to
convert AR-15 rifles and semi-automatic AK-47 rifles into machine guns
if their customers had the upper and lower receivers for those firearms.
Based on my investigation as stated above in the description of gun
parts shipped to Howell I know that Howell possesses the upper and lower
receivers for the firearms which he apparently trying to convert to
fully automatic.

Mr. Bartlett told me that another one of the vendors of supplies to
Howell, Nesard Gun Parts Co., 27 West 990 Industrial Road, Barrington,
Illinois, has also been the subject of an ATF investigation. Officer of
that company, Gerald Grayson, Cynthia Aleo, and Anthony Aleo all plead
guilty to ATF charges. The Nesard Company which owned Sendra
Corporation was shipping AR-15 receivers through the Sendra Corporation,
along with part kits from the Nesard Company. When these parts are
assembled it resulted in the manufacture of a short barreled rifle.
Even though the above subjects are convicted felons they continue to
conduct business because the Nesard Gun Parts Co. distributes gun parts
and not firearms.

On January 25, 1993, I interviewed David Block in Los Angeles,
California. He stated that he was a member of Howell’s cult at the Mt.
Carmel Center, Waco, Texas, from March 1992 until June 13, 1992. During
the time he was there he attended two gun shows with Vernon Howell, Mike
Schroeder, Paul Fatta, and Henry McMahon, who is a federally licensed
firearms dealer. The gun shows were in Houston and San Antonio, Texas.

While at the Mt. Carmel Center, he saw a metal lathe and a metal milling
machine which were normally operated by Donald Bunds and Jeff Little.
Donald Bunds, a mechanical engineer, has the capability to fabricate
firearm parts according to Block. On one occasion, at the Mt. Carmel
Center, he observed Bunds designing what Bunds described as a “grease
gun/sten gun” on an Auto Cad computer located at the residence building
at the compound. The computer has the capability of displaying a three
dimensional rendering of objects on a computer monitor screen. The
object appeared to be a cylindrical tube with a slot cut into the side
of it for a bolt cocking lever. Bunds told him that Howell wanted Bunds
to design a “grease gun” which they could manufacture. Mr. Block told
me that on another occasion at the Mt. Carmel Center, he saw Donald
Bunds designing a template which Bunds explained was to fit around the
“grease gun” tubes indicating where the bolt lever slots were to be
milled out. This was another step in manufacturing “grease guns” which
had been requested by Howell. I know that a “grease gun” is a machine
gun following after the design of a WWII era military weapon.

During his time at the Mt. Carmel Center, Mr. Block was present on
several occasions when Howell would ask if anyone had any knowledge
about making hand grenades or converting semi-automatic rifles to
machine guns. At one point he also heard discussion about a shipment of
inert hand grenades and Howell’s intent to reactivate them. Mr. Block
stated that he observed at the compound published magazines such as “The
Shotgun News” and other related clandestine magazines. He heard
extensive talk of the existence of the “Anarchist’s Cookbook.”

Mr. Block told me that he observed a .50 caliber rifle mounted on a
bipod along with .50 caliber ammunition. However, what Mr. Block
described to ATF agents was a British Boys .52 caliber anti-tank rifle
(a destructive device.) Mr. Block further stated that he also heard
talk of the existence of two additional .50 caliber rifles on the
compound. There was also extensive talk about converting the .50
caliber rifles and other rifles to machine guns.

Mr. Block also told me that he met James Paul Jones from Redding,
Claifornia, who was visiting the Mt. Carmel Center in April or May of
1992. According to Howell, Jones was a firearms and explosives expert.

On February 22, 1993, ATF Special Agent Robert Rodriguez told me that on
February 21, 1993, while acting in an undercover capacity, he was
contacted by David Koresh and was invited to the Mt. Carmel compound.
Special Agent Rodriguez accepted the invitation and met with David
Koresh inside the compound. Vernon Howell, aka David Koresh, played
music on a guitar for 30 minutes and then began to read the bible to
Special Agent Rodriguez. During this session, Special Agent Rodriguez
was asked numerous questions about his life. After answering all the
questions, Special Agent Rodriguez was asked to attend a two week bible
session with David Koresh. This was for Special Agent Rodriguez to
learn the seven seals and become a member of the group. Special Agent
Rodriguez was told that by becoming a member he (Rodriguez) was going to
be watched and disliked. David Koresh stated that Special Agent
Rodriguez would be disliked because the government did not consider the
group religious, and that he (Korseh) did not pay taxes, or local taxes
because he felt he did not have to. David Koresh told Special Agent
Rodriguez that he believed in the right to bear arms but that the US
government was going to take away that right. David Koresh asked
Special Agent Rodriguez if he knew that if he (Rodriguez) purchased a
drop-in sear for an AR-15 rifle it would not be illegal. But if he had
an AR-15 rifle with the sear that it would be against the law. David
Koresh stated that the sear could be purchased legally. David Koresh
stated that the bible gave him the right to bear arms. David Koresh
then advised Special Agent Rodriguez that he had something he wanted
Special Agent Rodriguez to see. At that point he showed Special Agent
Rodriguez a video tape on ATF which was made by the Gun Owner’s
Association (GOA). This film portrayed ATF as an agency who violated
the rights of gun owners by threats and lies.

I believe that Vernon Howell, aka David Koresh and/or his followers who
reside at the compound known locally as the Mt. Carmel Center are
unlawfully manufacturing and possessing machine guns and explosive
devices.

It has been my experience over the five years that I have been a special
agent for BATF and that of other special agents of the BATF, some of
whom have the experience of twenty years or more, who have assisted in
this investigation, that it is a common practice for persons engaged in
the unlawful manufacture and possession of machine guns and explosive
devices to employ surreptitious methods and means to acquire the
products necessary to produce such items, and the production, use, and
storage of those items are usually in a protected or secret environment.
It is also my experience that persons who acquire firearms, firearms
parts, and explosive materials maintain records of receipt and ownership
of such items and instruction manuals or other documents explaining the
methods of construction of such unlawful weaponry.

Davy Aguilera, Special Agent
Bureau of ATF

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 25th day of February 1993
Dennis G. Green
United States Magistrate Judge
Western District of Texas - Waco

Appendix D: Letter of Jury Foreperson Sarah Bain to Smith

Sarah L. Bain, Presiding Juror
6007 Lonesome Pine
San Antonio, Tx 78247
May 11, 1994
The Honorable Walter S. Smith, Jr.
United States District Court
P.O. Box 1908
Waco, TX 76703
Dear Judge Smith:

Following the “erroneous” action on Count Three by the jury in the trial
of the eleven Branch Davidians, it is with some chagrin that I ask the Court
to consider some of our discussions as the Court determines the sentencing
for the defendants involved in Count Three and also Count Two.

Generally, I feel it is necessary to address the jury’s considerations
in bringing guilty verdicts; and specifically, I feel it is necessary to
address our deliberations on the involvement of certain defendants.

The jury asked the Court for a clarification of what seemed to be a
discrepancy in the use of “and” and “or” in Charge Three as it pertained
to “using and carrying” versus “using or carrying firearms . . .”. The Court
advised that the Government would have proven its case if it proved beyond a
reasonable doubt that a defendant had “used or carried a firearm . . .”.
With those instructions, we found seven of the nine defendants guilty.

At the time, the jury questioned among ourselves how sentencing could be
carried out fairly since there surely must be a more serious penalty for ”
using” as opposed to “carrying” a firearm, and since we were not charged to
identify which defendants, if any, should be found guilty of actually “using”
the firearms. To each other, we voiced our desire that perhaps the simple
act of “carrying” a firearm might serve to diminish the penalty associated
with “using” a firearm.

I now understand that the “sentencing guidelines” stipulate a penalty of
from five to thirty years in prison. I am incredulous!
Since the “crime” during which the “carrying/ using” took place was that
of aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter and not conspiracy to murder or
aiding and abetting murder (all defendants were found not guilty of those
charges), there surely must be a different set of sentencing guidelines that
can be followed. After we had delivered our verdict to the Court and prior
to its being presented to the public, we jurors discussed what most of us
felt was the probability that with the consideration of time already served
by the defendants, none would be facing severe penalties. Even five years is
too severe a penalty for what we believed to be a minor charge. All of us
agreed that Kathryn Schroeder probably would be serving a lesser charge if
she had remained a part of this case!

Specifically, I am most concerned with the sentences that are facing two
defendants on Count Three and five defendants on Count Two (part two).

Regarding Count Three and the charges faced by Ruth Ottman Riddle and
Graem Leonard Craddock: Graem Craddock was found guilty of Count Three for
only one reason: for Count Seven, it had been proven beyond a reasonable
doubt that he had been in possession of a hand grenade. But further in Count
Eight, it was not proven that he was guilty of a conspiracy to possess such a
device. However, since “carrying a firearm . . .” created a guilty verdict
in Count Three, we felt we had no choice but to find him guilty in Count
Three. We even discussed whether or not this was not a type of double
jeopardy– not of being tried twice for the same crime but being punished
twice for the same crime: possession of a hand grenade. Again, we felt we
had no choice.

In the case of Ruth Ottman Riddle, we debated whether carrying” was to
be taken literally, as “moving around transporting a firearm”; or whether it
was to be taken figuratively, as “being, even briefly, in possession of a
firearm”. We were in agreement that Ruth Riddle had, upon request, retrieved
a “long gun” (rifle? shotgun?) from under her bed and had passed it
downstairs. It is unfathomable that for this act she is facing even five
years, much less thirty years, in prison. Are there no other sentencing
guidelines that can be brought to bear? If we had interpreted “carrying”
literally, she would be totally free since there was no proof beyond
reasonable doubt that she even walked to the window of her room while in
possession of a firearm!

For at least these two individuals, I beg the Courts utmost leniency.

Further, on Count Two (part two): the five individuals found guilty,
Brad Eugene Branch, Kevin A. Whitecliff, Jaime castillo, Livingston Fagan,
and Renos Avraam, were not found guilty of voluntary manslaughter but of
aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter. I implore the Court,to recognize
that the jury never believed these individuals themselves committed the crime
of voluntary manslaughter. Further, we did believe, and the charge to the
jury gave credence to the belief that aiding and abetting was “a lesser
charge”.

For these five individuals, I beg the Courts utmost leniency.
Finally, regarding what was deemed an error on the part of the jury:
finding certain defendants guilty on count Three after having found all
defendants not guilty of Count One: In our defense I submit that we
determined that certain defendants did “use and (?) carry a firearm during
and in relation to the commission of a crime of violence which may be
prosecuted in a court of the United States”. We further interpreted the
following portion of that statement, “to wit: conspiracy to murder federal
agents”, to mean “for example, conspiracy to murder federal agents”–with
“conspiracy to murder” being but one example of a crime that could be
prosecuted in a federal court. The jury had found certain defendants guilty
of aiding and abetting voluntary manslaughter. To us, that was also a crime
that could be tried in federal court. On that basis, we began our
deliberations on Count Three. We certainly had no knowledge that the penalty
for a guilty verdict would be tied to a conspiracy charge as alleged in Count
One!

On a more personal note: I cannot explain the honor and responsibility
I felt when I was chosen to serve on this jury. It was the most intense
forty-eight days (my “thoughts” did not take a break on weekends and
holidays!) of my life. If justice is served in the end, I and my fellow
jurors did our duty. It is now in the Court’s hands to assure that our
intentions are not belied.

Sincerely,
Sarah L. Bain
Juror #16, Foreman
Branch Davidian Trial