The Ruby Ridge Incident - Essay Example

The Government Overstepped its Boundaries at Ruby Ridge Introduction: A Federal force that consisted of U.S. Marshals, F.B.I and B.A.T.F agents conducted an assault on the home of Randy and Vicki Weaver in Idaho on August 21, 1992. This assault led to the death of Sammy, the fourteen-year old son of the Weavers, Vicki Weaver herself, and a U.S. Marshal. This incident led to the charge of excessive use of force by the federal governmental agencies against the citizens of the United States of America. Background: The incident began when U.S. Marshals on the basis of an arrest warrant issued against Randy Weaver for a firearms offense began surveillance of the Weaver home at Ruby Ridge. The Weaver housedog started barking at the unknown persons sneaking around the house, and to silence it the U.S. Marshals shot and killed the dog. Sammy and a family friend Harris, who happened to be at the home opened fire on the unknown prowlers, and a U.S Marshall was killed. In the retaliatory firing by the U.S. Marshals Sammy was killed. The Weavers along with Harris retreated into their cabin, while the U.S. Marshals withdrew and called for assistance. The assistance arrived in the form of F.B.I. and B.A.T.F. agents, who promptly surrounded the house leading to an eleven-day standoff between Federal agents and the Weaver family. During this period Vicki Weaver was killed, and Randy injured through firing by the F.B.I. snipers, when they presented themselves at a windows. At the end of the eleven days the standoff came to an end Randy gave himself up and was arrested. Randy Weaver and Harris were tried on charges for conspiracy to commit murder, but were found not guilty by a jury of all serious charges against them. (1) Overstepping of Boundaries by the Government: The basis of the incident was an arrest warrant for a firearm offense. Though there are claims that the firearm offense was a result of a Federal initiative against Randy Weaver, it has not been substantiated. Yet, there are indications that the warrant for arrest was a result of improper communication to Randy Weaver by the Federal authorities, and the warrant issued despite full knowledge of the improper communication that was made. Randy Weaver had been arrested earlier for the firearm offence, and was on bail pending trial. On January 22, 1991 Randy Weaver received summons to appear in court on March 20, 1991, but the actual hearing was scheduled for February 20, 1991. The mistake was later claimed to be a typographical error. When Randy failed to appear, the U.S. Attorney Ron Howen requested Judge Harold Ryan to declare Randy as a federal fugitive. Judge Ryan agreed with him, and issued the necessary orders despite the fact that both of them had just been informed of the error in intimation sent to Randy. The information of the arrest warrant when received by Randy only confirmed his misgivings that the government agencies were out to get him for his refusal to become an informer on illegal sale of guns. He and his family decided to stick it out in their mountain home. A typographic error was to become, through the harsh and deliberate action of a U.S. Attorney and a Judge responsible for the death of two civilians and a U.S. Marshal! (2) The errors on the part of the governmental agencies do not end there. The striking overstepping of boundaries was to come in the action taking to arrest Randy from his mountain home. This was in the use of deadly force in the incident at Ruby Ridge. Standard policy allows the use of deadly force only when an agent or another agent is found to be in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. If these standard procedures were followed Vicki Weaver need not have lost her life. The FBI Hostage Rescue Team commander decided to change the standard policy as he felt that the situation justified it. He recommended four changes including one that read, “If any adult male is observed with a weapon prior to the announcement, deadly force can and should be employed, if the shot can be taken without endangering any children”. The F.B.I headquarters refused to sanction the changes for want of a negotiation plan in it. The Assistant Director of the Criminal Division of F.B.I. falsely confirmed sanction of the amendments to the field team. As a result, the F.B.I. use of deadly force came without warning and lead to the death of Vicki. Vicki was shot with an infant in her arms, and this was even inn violence of the amended rules that the use of deadly force was to be employed “without endangering children”. So the use of deadly force at Ruby Ridge was against standard policy on the use of deadly force, and even violated the amended policy on the use of deadly force that had not received sanction from the F.B.I. Headquarters. (2). Cover-ups are attempted when governmental agencies overstep their limits. This was witnessed in the case of Ruby Ridge incident. A report critical of the F.B.I. role in the Ruby Ridge incident was generated within the F.B.I, but was destroyed by the then head of the Violent Crimes section Michael Kahoe. Confirmation of complicity comes from his being sentenced to eighteen months in prison in October 1997. (3). Confirmation of the overstepping of limits by the federal agencies at Ruby Ridge comes from the investigation conducted by the Justice Department task force established by Attorney General Janet Reno to go into the Ruby Ridge incident, which submitted its report in 1994. The task force report was highly critical of the conduct of the F.B.I. at Ruby Ridge. It found that there were serious contraventions of the terms of the Rules of Engagement in force at Ruby Ridge. The task force also found that it was these contraventions that created an atmosphere for the use of deadly force that lead to the unintentional death of Vicki. The task force found that the shot that was fired by the F.B.I. sniper that killed Vicki did not meet the standard of “objective reasonableness”, as laid down by the Constitution in the use of deadly force. Another finding was that review conducted by the F.B.I. on the shooting was not sufficiently thorough that led to incorrect conclusions. There were also several shortcomings in command and control of the F.B.I at Ruby Ridge. (4). The task force concluded that the F.B.I Hostage and Rescue Team had demonstrated overreaction to the any perceived threat of violence, and had brought into force a shoot-on-sight policy that were in violation of the guidelines laid down by the bureau, and the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America that places restriction on the use of firepower by the police. This report caused the F.B.I to take disciplinary action against twelve employees of the F.B.I. (5). Conclusion: The government had overstepped its boundaries at Ruby Ridge and this is confirmed by the findings and the conclusions of the Justice Department task force, which investigated the Ruby Ridge incident. The task force confirmed violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, and norms laid down by the Constitution on the use of deadly force by a police force. Works Cited 1. Lynch, Timothy. “Remember Ruby Ridge”. national review ONLINE. 2002. 21 July 2006. . 2. Lohr, David. “Government Gone Wrong”. CRIME LIBRARY. 21 July 2006. . 3. “National News Briefs; Ex-F.B.I. Man Sentenced In Ruby Ridge Case”. The New York Times. 11 October 1997: A8. 4. “Executive Summary”. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPORT ON INTERNAL REVIEW REGARDING THE RUBY RIDGE HOSTAGE SITUATION AND SHOOTINGS BY LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL. LEXIS COUNCIL CONNECT. 21 July 2006. 5. “DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REPORT REGARDING INTERNAL INVESTIGATION OF SHOOTINGS AT RUBY RIDGE, IDAHO DURING ARREST OF RANDY WEAVER”. LEXIS COUNCIL CONNECT. 21 July 2006. . Read More