Defender of Waco Killers Found Dead in Texas


PDA






2dogs
September 12, 2003, 07:55 AM
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/09/10/ap_dead_fed.htm

Defender of Waco Killers Found Dead in Texas

The Associated Press

SOUR LAKE, Texas (AP) - A former federal prosecutor who defended the U.S. government in a lawsuit filed by surviving Branch Davidians was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound, authorities said.
A police officer checking on an abandoned vehicle found the body of former U.S. Attorney J. Michael Bradford shortly before 7 p.m. Tuesday.

``He found a BMW, which was unusual, because it's a nice vehicle and it was parked out in the woods ... it had a briefcase in it, clothes and a sports jacket in it, so he started looking around,'' Hardin County Sheriff Ed Cain said.

He said the officer found the body and a shotgun about 75 feet from the car. Cain said it appears the gunshot wound to the head was self-inflicted.

``It's pretty clear as to what happened,'' he said. ``We have no indication of foul play.''

Bradford had been reported missing for about a day, investigators said.

Cain said Bradford had some business affairs and other things, including a note, left behind that indicated that he planned to kill himself. Cain did not know what was in the note.

Bradford represented the federal government in the 2000 trial of a $675 million wrongful death suit that surviving Branch Davidians and family members filed after the fiery end to the Branch Davidian standoff near Waco in 1993.

Bradford, who had been in private practice recently with a Beaumont law firm, was appointed U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Texas in 1994. He served until May 2001. Before his appointment to the district that stretches from far southeast Texas to the Dallas area, he was a state district judge and a federal magistrate.

He is survived by his wife, daughter and son.

If you enjoyed reading about "Defender of Waco Killers Found Dead in Texas" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Kharn
September 12, 2003, 08:03 AM
Is half the shotgun nickel and half blue (ala Vince Foster)? :scrutiny:

Kharn

Tamara
September 12, 2003, 09:15 AM
Having to stand in a courtroom and publically justify the burning to death of infants and their mothers to their next of kin would probably have the same effect on me. :scrutiny:

Joe Demko
September 12, 2003, 09:17 AM
Messy, no doubt.

Henry Bowman
September 12, 2003, 09:19 AM
Tamara, you have been in rare form lately! :neener:

El Tejon
September 12, 2003, 09:33 AM
Those that work for the Devil will be destroyed by him sooner or later.

Sodbuster
September 12, 2003, 09:36 AM
Don't worry. The government survives.

JohnBT
September 12, 2003, 09:46 AM
My condolences to his family.

John

P.S. - I hope nobody pulls a muscle jumping up and down celebrating this man's death.

ACP
September 12, 2003, 11:39 AM
Yeah, it's a shame what David Koresh did to his own people.

Carlos Cabeza
September 12, 2003, 11:48 AM
Post in poor taste, so deleted.

cordex
September 12, 2003, 12:23 PM
He who lives by the sword shall most assuredly die by the sword.
Good news for those who decide to live by the gun.
I hope nobody pulls a muscle jumping up and down celebrating this man's death.
I sure as hell won't. This guy didn't do any of the killing himself. He did as he was told and defended those that did some killing. May not make him my bestest friend, but it doesn't mean I'll rejoice at his death.
My condolences go out to his family. They didn't deserve this.
Yeah, it's a shame what David Koresh did to his own people.
Yep. Koresh was a nut who caused his followers some serious troubles.
But what really sickens me is that the BATFE and FBI thought it necessary to play soldier and assault the Davidian's church, school and homes with full ninja gear - thus leading directly to the deaths of more than 80 people (some of them federal agents). Over some alleged unpaid taxes.

Was it really worth it?

By the way, Tamara; on your recommendation, I read Cold Zero - a very good book. Thank you for suggesting it.

Quartus
September 12, 2003, 12:39 PM
It's sickening how many people whoh CALL themselves patriotic Americans will justify murder by Federal agents simply because the murder victims were weird.

NIGHTWATCH
September 12, 2003, 01:17 PM
Im with you Quartus. ;)

We get "Patriotic" when OUR particular freedom is under attack from those who think we are a little off, maybe even dangerous. Then turn ourselves against someone elses freedom or support the government in destroying someone elses freedom.

When are people going to get it? ALL freedom must be secure. :banghead:

Dannyboy
September 12, 2003, 01:54 PM
OK, let's see if I got this right. This guy was a baaaad man because he did his job as a US Attorney (defending the gov't., not the individuals) but Koresh was just "misunderstood?" Riiiight!

Comic relief, that's what I love about this place.

cordex
September 12, 2003, 02:20 PM
This guy was a baaaad man because he did his job as a US Attorney (defending the gov't., not the individuals) but Koresh was just "misunderstood?" Riiiight!
No, this guy was just a man who was forced to do something extremely distasteful. He was forced to say "Yeah, we were right in sending cattle-cars full of shock troops to collect a few hundred dollars in unpaid taxes." and ignore the fact that the operation lead to many unnecessary deaths. Perhaps this weighed on him and caused him to take his own life. Perhaps it had nothing to do with it. I don't know.

David Koresh was a pedophile (albeit one who got consent from the parents), a misguided preacher and a bad guitarist. He deserved psychological counseling, and serious jail time for abusing kids. He did not deserve to be the target of a military style assault which lead to his roasting. And his followers certainly didn't deserve what happened to them.

The BATF agents who stormed the church, school and homes of the Davidians like a bunch of wannabe Army Rangers and turned an alleged unpaid tax violation into a small war because they wanted to be able to show off video to the Budgetary Committee ... well ... those are the real scum.

seeker_two
September 12, 2003, 02:57 PM
Well said, cordex...:D

As for the recently deceased: I am sitting at home today without a job. Why? I decided that it was more important to stand up for my principals; oppose an administrative decision that brings a great deal of unnecesary risk to an incarcerated youth, his family, his community, and the facility I worked for; and was forced to resign as a result. While I wish I still had a job, I don't regret my position in the least...

...and I don't buy the "he was just following his orders" defense either. He had the same choice I did. He knew what he was doing & did it anyway. If that weighed too heavily on his conscious--it was his decision. If it didn't, it seems to have weighed on someone's ...:scrutiny:

At least I'm able to live with my decision without the need to swallow buckshot...:uhoh:

MicroBalrog
September 12, 2003, 02:59 PM
David Koresh was a pedophile,

and even that's highly dubious, and the child abuse investigation (happened before the... err, mass-suicide) stopped through complete lack of evidence.

Shooter 2.5
September 12, 2003, 03:15 PM
"Is half the shotgun nickel and half blue (ala Vince Foster)?"

Kharn


That's one of the BS stories put out by the tinfoil hat squad about the Foster case.

It's one thing to discuss the discrepencies about the case without trying for a list. The weird thing is if you go to one of the conspiracy websites, they even posted the interview where the Nickled pistol was discussed which ruined their "argument".

cordex
September 12, 2003, 03:22 PM
and even that's highly dubious
But even if it were demonstrably true, and there was video of him raping six year olds every day of his adult life, it still wouldn't excuse BATF agents running in and playing stormtrooper as that is a state matter, not a federal one. Much less the purview of a tax agency.

Ian Sean
September 12, 2003, 04:58 PM
and I don't buy the "he was just following his orders" defense either.

Seeker, thanks for posting it before I did. You said it a lot better too. Not only that though is they are supposed to know better and it is NOT a valid defense. The nazis were just following orders to. Nuremburg trumped that, and as far as I am concerned it applies here especially to those entrusted with powers of law enforcement.

gunsmith
September 12, 2003, 06:15 PM
What made you say that?
He was much,much better then pop star Madonna...:neener:

cordex
September 12, 2003, 06:25 PM
He was much,much better then pop star Madonna...
And I'm far less evil than Hitler. Doesn't make me a good guy. *grin*

His big dream was to be a rock star. When he failed that, he decided to be a messiah.
*shakes head*

WonderNine
September 12, 2003, 06:29 PM
I have as much sympathy for this guy as I have for David Koresh...

rock jock
September 12, 2003, 06:56 PM
This was about 1 mile from my house. It was a big shock to the community. My personal feelings were that he was a zealous prosecutor and good attorney but I was not a fan of his political leanings. He was, however, a decent fellow and a father to two young children.

Having to stand in a courtroom and publically justify the burning to death of infants and their mothers to their next of kin would probably have the same effect on me.
Myths, facts, what's the difference when you're trying to make a point, right?

cordex
September 12, 2003, 07:46 PM
Myths, facts, what's the difference when you're trying to make a point, right?
The BATF's raid lead directly to the deaths of over 80 people - including women and children.
This is fact.
Defending a raid that caused so much death and destruction - regardless of who actually lit the final fires - isn't easy. Even before the place started smoking, remember that a swarm of ATF tax collection agents charged the place like a bunch of first-graders trying to play Army man over a few hundred dollars in taxes. Regardless of the actions on either side that followed, could you defend that?

telewinz
September 12, 2003, 08:18 PM
1

standingbear
September 12, 2003, 08:31 PM
Seeker_Two....its better to stand up for your principles and values than follow someones blind ambition and second guess yourself for the rest of your life.

rock jock
September 12, 2003, 09:16 PM
regardless of who actually lit the final fires
That wasn't what Tamara and several others have stated. Let's be clear, the govt. is responsible for the standoff, David Koresh and his goons are responsible for the deaths of dozens of women and children.

If I throw a brick through my neighbor's window and in a rage he kills his family, am I then to be charged with murder in addition to damaging his property? Is your hatred of the govt. so profound or your defense of gunowners so absolute that you are willing to abandon all pretence of consistency and fairness in applying blame? Because that certainly seems to be the case here. And this certainly bears no resemblance to anything on the high road.

Tamara
September 13, 2003, 12:33 AM
Myths, facts, what's the difference when you're trying to make a point, right?

We've been over this ad nauseum in the last week or two.

Maybe you're one of the five people in the country who are unaware that the FBI fired pyrotechnic CS grenades into the compound (in which case you and telewinz could start a support group.) This has been documented. This is fact. This is not myth. The final assault on the Davidian compound was conducted with reckless disregard for the safety of the various innocents inside.

Should you wish to defend the "we had to burn the children to save them" policy of the feds, be my guest.

WonderNine
September 13, 2003, 12:55 AM
I have always been of the understanding that the FBI started the fire when they rammed the tank into the side of the compound. I remember watching this in 8th grade home-ec class, I think I know what I saw.

dustind
September 13, 2003, 02:39 AM
The gov killed those people, many where killed by the gas, then there was the bit about the missing front door and who fired first, and the helicopter's missing IR film showing people being gunned down after surrendering iirc. I could not live with myself having defended that. Although I do not blame someone for playing lawyer, everyone deserves council.

Ian Sean
September 13, 2003, 08:39 AM
How did the Feds obtain the use of National Guard helicopters? By going to then Gov. Ann Richards and saying Koresh had a meth lab in Mt. Carmel thats how. As far as I know no evidence of a meth lab was uncovered later.

I once took and oath to defend the Constitution, and I'll be damned if I blindly support those who so blatently pervert it.

Dannyboy
September 13, 2003, 10:26 AM
The nazis were just following orders to.
That's a bulls**t comparison and you know it.

As for the tear gas grenades and the fire, I still don't buy it. I've had enough experience with smoke/cs hand and 40mm grenades to know that they spark but that fire got too big way too fast for them to have been caused by those grenades unless every single grenade that went in caused a fire right where it landed which is highly unlikely. Of course, I know nobody here wants to hear this because everybody has all the facts and besides it's just so much easier to blame the big, bad boogeyman government.

AZLibertarian
September 13, 2003, 11:19 AM
Firstly, Tamara is right. We've been over and over this in another thread. The vast majority of us have "taken a side" on this, and I saw very little changing of minds in that other thread. That being said....

How did the Feds obtain the use of National Guard helicopters? By going to then Gov. Ann Richards and saying Koresh had a meth lab in Mt. Carmel thats how. As far as I know no evidence of a meth lab was uncovered later.

It's been quite some time since I read No More Wacos: What's Wrong with Federal Law Enforcement and How to Fix It by David B. Kopel and Paul H. Blackman, but I recommend it. I need to re-read it to pull some of these facts out of the back of my memory--where all the cobwebs are.

IIRC, there was a line of thought regarding of the use of those helicopters that is more sinister than you're suggesting. Again, my memory might not be correct, but apparantly the FBI put out a request to get a helicopter with IR capabilities. I think it was the Alabama National Guard who provided it. Legally, the Guard works for the Governor of each state. Again, IIRC, the request for the helicopter went from the Texas Guard commander to the Alabama Guard commander, bypassing their political superiors. While it's a stretch, one could make the case that Waco involved the use of the military by rouge commanders outside their chain of command.

Again, from this book, the issue of the independence of the post-incident arson investigation was highlighted. IIRC, the investigator "hired" to decide the claims that the Davidians set the fire/the FBI set the fire was an Arson Investigator of some note. However, he also was the husband of a BATF secretary in Houston. The claim was that the independence was not as clear as the reports might have suggested.

I'm gonna re-read this book, and I'll correct or expand on anything I'm fuzzy on.

mercedesrules
September 13, 2003, 04:00 PM
P.S. - I hope nobody pulls a muscle jumping up and down celebrating this man's death.
OUCH!

SkunkApe
September 13, 2003, 04:48 PM
The Posse Comitatus acts prevents the use of military forces against U.S. citizens, except for purposes of drug inderdiction.

Need National Gaurd tanks and helicopters? Need to get around that darned law? Easy - just claim they have a meth lab. No actual proof required. Don't worry, nobody will care.

Its for (burning) the children.

Ryder
September 13, 2003, 09:29 PM
It never ends....
Former U.S. Attorney J. Michael Bradford would argue otherwise.

Avoiding arguments with one's conscience is a very good thing. I can't see that it matters who you are, who tries to convince you otherwise, or how they attempt to do it.

goalie
September 13, 2003, 11:43 PM
David Koresh went running, alone and unarmed, often. Using massive force to apprehend a suspected criminal by raiding a "compound" where it was known the occupants were armed instead of just driving up as he went jogging and arressting him is germaine to the discussion. If I needlessly escalate a situation as a permit carrier the incident is not considered self-defense, even if I am attacked, because I was not an unwilling participant. The government was anything but an unwilling participant in the violence at Waco. It can be argued, convincingly IMO, that the BATF took great pains to ensure an "exciting" raid took place. I guess it's ok if the feds throw rocks at the hornet's nest, but try going out as a citizen and insulting some guy's wife in front of him in a very vulgar way, then try claiming self-defense if you have to use force to stop his "assault."

rock jock
September 13, 2003, 11:58 PM
Maybe you're one of the five people in the country who are unaware that the FBI fired pyrotechnic CS grenades into the compound (in which case you and telewinz could start a support group.) This has been documented. This is fact. This is not myth. The final assault on the Davidian compound was conducted with reckless disregard for the safety of the various innocents inside.
It doesn't matter if they fired cans of whipped cream into the compound, the forensic evidence and the videos clearly show that the Davidians started fires at various points during the final assault. They committed mass suicide (except for the children, who did not have a choice and were murdered by Koresh's thugs), but you can't seem to maintain an objective view on this - you want the government to have started the fire. It fits much more neatly into the conspiracy theories that put a few nut cases on the lucrative lecture circuit.

rock jock
September 14, 2003, 12:17 AM
I hate to interfere with someone's faith (really, this is the most appropriate term), but I feel compelled to introduce a few facts for those who still maintain an open mind.

From the Frontline episode Waco: The Inside Story:

Did the CS gas harm any of the people, especially the twenty-two children, inside the compound?

According to medical examiners who performed the autopsies, CS gas did not directly kill any of the more than 80 Branch Davidians, including 22 children, who died in the fire on April 19. Nor did anyone perish from inhalation of CS gas--or its byproduct from a fire, cyanide--the medical examiners told FRONTLINE. Other experts have told FRONTLINE that CS gas may have totally incapacitated the children and others so that when the fire occurred, it would have rendered them incapable of escape. It should be noted that Mount Carmel had not been gassed preceding the last hour of the fire. Experts also noted that CS gas only has a persistence factor of about ten minutes.

Who started the fire that erupted a little more than six hours after the FBI began inserting the tear gas on April 19?

Although several of the surviving Branch Davidians insist that they did not start the fire, a panel of arson investigators concluded that the Davidians were responsible for igniting it, simultaneously, in at least three different areas of the compound. Unless they were deliberatley set, the probability of the three fires starting almost simultaneously was highly unlikely, according to fire experts. Furthermore, the videotapes show the use of accelerants that strongly increased the spread of the fire. Although one Branch Davidian stated that a FBI tank had tipped over a lantern, videotapes show that the tank had struck the building a minute and a half before the fire began. Also some of the surviving Davidians' clothing showed evidence of lighter fluid and other accelerants. In addition, FBI listening devices seemed to establish that the Davidians were overheard making statements such as, "Spread the fuel," some six hours before the fires began. (Joint Hearing of the Crime Subcommittee July 1995.)

seeker_two
September 14, 2003, 12:39 AM
...Although one Branch Davidian stated that a FBI tank had tipped over a lantern, videotapes show that the tank had struck the building a minute and a half before the fire began. Also some of the surviving Davidians' clothing showed evidence of lighter fluid and other accelerants. In addition, FBI listening devices seemed to establish that the Davidians were overheard making statements such as, "Spread the fuel," some six hours before the fires began. (Joint Hearing of the Crime Subcommittee July 1995.)

So, if the FBI is to be believed, they knew hours before the raid that the compount has been spread with flammable fuel, contained lanterns & ammunition, and the leader was willing to kill himself & others if attacked.....


....AND THEY DECIDE TO ATTACK THE COMPOUND WITH PYROTECHNIC GAS GRENADES AND TANKS ANYWAY!!!! :banghead:

I don't think that the Feds intended to kill all those in the compound, but the Feds made so many :cuss: numbskull decisions in this case to warrant criminal negligence charges....


...but then again, the Feds are above all that, aren't they? :fire:

goalie
September 14, 2003, 01:24 AM
Even if you conceed the point that the fire was started by the Davidians, the feds still staged a military operation to arresst a man who went jogging alone and unarmed. They KNEW that the Davidians were a little off the wall (to put it mildly) and they escalated the situation. If I know a patient of mine is mentally ill, I sure as heck don't go out of my way to irritate or provoke him/her, and I use the minimum force necessary to ensure that patient's safety. That means that when I have a patient who has post-op dementia or has a history of mental illness I use a 1:1 sitter BEFORE I just slap on the 4-point leather restraints in the ICU. Why? Because tying down a patient often makes the situation much worse and results in my having to pharmacologically intervene, which results in a much longer ICU stay.

I ask again, what, pray tell, was so damn urgent that they had to attack the compound with a tank? What, pray tell, was the rational behind a paramilitary assault when a simple arresst would have been sufficient?

rock jock
September 14, 2003, 01:26 AM
willing to kill himself & others if attacked
I don't see that qualification anywhere. In fact, at that time, it would be perfectly reasonable to conclude based on this statement that the Davidians were planning to start the fires iiregardless of what the feds did or did not do. I have no idea if this statement had any effect on the FBI's plans to send the tanks in, but I do know that if they strongly suspected that the Davidians were about to commit mass suicide, they would be remiss in not trying to stop it.

C.R.Sam
September 14, 2003, 03:34 AM
Kill em.
that'll keep em from comitting suicide.

Sam

cordex
September 14, 2003, 04:02 AM
Hey rock jock ...
Why is it okay for you to use a Frontline episode to pat the feds on the back and "prove" that everything was the fault of those Waco Whackos ... but if anyone else presents third party, non-governmental, unsworn testimony you cry foul?
you can't seem to maintain an objective view on this - you want the government to have started the fire. It fits much more neatly into the conspiracy theories that put a few nut cases on the lucrative lecture circuit.
By the same token, while some may seem to blindly accept the word of every two-bit Alex Jones-ish theorist, others are just as willing to buy anything spoken by anyone who cashes government checks or wears a tin badge. Or, in some cases, an external media outlet ... as long as it fits your personal paradigm of the way you wanted things to have happened.

If it doesn't explicitly defend the actions of the Fed.gov, it must be nothing more than a silly conspiracy theory - to be dismissed out of hand, because the official reports said very clearly that no blame may be assigned to the government.

So rock jock ... how exactly do you defend the intial actions of the BATF in their original military-style assault on the Mount Carmel community over a few hundred dollars in uncollected taxes?

Dannyboy
September 14, 2003, 09:03 AM
It's ironic that somebody should bring up the book Cold Zero . I mean, it was written by a former FBI agent and we all know that they can't be believed or trusted. Especially if he was at the incident because then he has to be covering his butt. We all know that there is just no way that his account could be the least bit truthful, right?

cordex
September 14, 2003, 03:15 PM
It's ironic that somebody should bring up the book Cold Zero . I mean, it was written by a former FBI agent and we all know that they can't be believed or trusted. Especially if he was at the incident because then he has to be covering his butt. We all know that there is just no way that his account could be the least bit truthful, right?
What exactly are you talking about, Dannyboy?
I read Cold Zero. I liked it. It gave me another perspective on the issue.
Did I believe every single word in it? Not on your life. I took it with the proverbial grain of salt. From the same shaker I use when reading statements of surviving Branch Davidians, Randy Weaver and gov't hired investigators who all claim that their buddies were all innocent of any wrongdoing.

HRT was called in to both situations after Federal agents had been killed. Whitcomb entered both Ruby Ridge and Waco from a "those ******** are killing us and we should kill them back" soldier's point of view. Yet he was still able to recognize that there were mistakes made on both sides. He goes on to help the FBI change their tactics from always deploying ninja-clad troopers from black helicopters and settling any armed confrontation with overwhelming force, to scaling the response to fit the situation.
Reread chapter 24, "Back in the Saddle". This uber-FBI fellow is apalled by the heavyhanded response that the boys upstairs want to execute on some protesters, so he works to convince them to handle the situation like it should be handled - peacefully and in a mediagenic fashion. They calmly led them away in loose zip-ties rather than storming the beach like it was Normandy - as they were originally ordered to. The ones who wanted to fight being taken away, got to roll around on the beach unmolested until they got sunburned and hungry and decided to go peacefully. No one got shot. No kids got burned alive.
A much better way of dealing with the situation, methinks.

rock jock
September 14, 2003, 11:52 PM
So rock jock ... how exactly do you defend the intial actions of the BATF in their original military-style assault on the Mount Carmel community over a few hundred dollars in uncollected taxes?
I never did any such thing. I have always maintained the govt. was clearly wrong in their initial assault on the compound.

BTW, I am willing to look at other unbiased sources. In this case, I feel that Frontline was a pretty good source of information since they are definitely not govt. friendly.

Doctor Wu
September 15, 2003, 09:52 PM
A dead defense attorney, how sad. :rolleyes:

Quartus
September 16, 2003, 03:03 AM
Tell that to his wife and children, Wu.

Doctor Wu
September 16, 2003, 12:08 PM
Sorry Quartus,
I will try to be more caring in the future. :p


I am no more sorry that Koresh is dead by his own hand.
We are just better off as a whole, without some people, like clinton, gore, etc. :evil:

Gmac
September 16, 2003, 06:23 PM
Can you say "JBT" boys & girls?

If you enjoyed reading about "Defender of Waco Killers Found Dead in Texas" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!