As I am sure many are well aware, my best friend, Robert "Woody" Woodward was brutally shot and killed 2 1/2 years ago in the All-Souls Unitarian church in Brattleboro by law "enforcement" officers Terrance Parker & Marshall Holbrook. Unfortunately, his parents' wrongful death lawsuit has just been dismissed by the judge in this civil matter, J. Garvan Murtha.
This decision seems to me to be part of an overall pattern of abrogation of basic human rights right to life and liberty under the current national government; but more specifically, it completely runs counter to the facts in this case. I call particular attention to the following points:
There were eighteen unbiased eyewitness, 17 of whom are 100 percent clear that Woody threatened NO One other than himself, and NEVER made any forward motion toward law enforcement officials. He was "armed" - but he pointed the knife ONLY at himself
Most of these witnesses, contrary to what the judge apparently suggests, had very clear views on what was occurring. They were NOT "unable to see" what was going on, as the judge apparently suggests. I should know - under the VT-FIA, I requested and received copies of all of the relevant testimony. The judge's decision is completely contrary to the FACTS in this case, as found in the witness testimony.
The Judge also - and perhaps more egregiously - seems to be ignoring the blatant disregard for Woody's life by the officers who denied him necessary and readily available medical care as he bled uncontrollably for at least ten minutes. That sort of callous disregard for a person's life cannot be justified under any circumstances. What about THIS violation of a basic HUMAN right??
The judge further seems to assert that state officials have authority to eliminate whoever they want based on the pretext that "they were doing governmental work, and are therefore entitled to governmental immunity."
Does this mean that law enforcement officers, if it is somehow at a later date deemed "reasonable" for them to have somehow "felt" "threatened" can kill anyone - in any situation - and it will be subsequently sanctioned???
And will the perpetrators then be granted something called "qualified immunity???
This is more appropriately called KILLING with IMPUNITY!!! And the judicial system has now given this its seal of approval? This does not seem like something that should be occurring in the United States of America, does it?
I, and I hope - ANYONE who values the worth and dignity of the individual and the basic civil liberties and right enshrined in our Constitution - will reject this decision as thoroughly unfounded in any principle of justice, fact or common human decency.
It is abhorrent and UNjust in the most profound sense of the term. Today, one more nail has been pounded into the coffin of whatever was left of "civil rights" in this country. We should all shed a tear. I know I have shed quite a few.
Stephen Monroe "Zak" Tomczak