Ever since the conviction of Leonard Peltier of first degree murder, there have been numerous arguments over the idea of a pardon. Some believe that political factors may have influenced the way in which the case was prosecuted. Others believe he is completely guilty and the punishment is proportionate. On April 18, 1977, Leonard Peltier was convicted of two counts of first degree murder of FBI Special Agents Jack R. Coler and Ronald A. Williams. Peltier was sentenced to serve two consecutive life terms in prison. It has been 40 years since the murder Agents Coler and Williams. There is a substantial amount of evidence that indicates that Leonard Peltier is guilty of these murders, and therefore, should remain in prison unpardoned of his offense.
…show more content…
His supporters commonly connect his conviction to abuse suffered by Native Americans. Peltier was fairly tried and fairly convicted. This conclusion has been met by every federal judge who's reviewed the case. The evidence against Peltier has been repeatedly confirmed which disproves these accounts. Mr. Peltier's version of the events of that day have changed many times over the years. He first blamed the killings on someone he knew, but after went back on his word. He later claimed in an interview that the agents were killed in "self-defense." Another thing his supporters use as an argument is that Peltier is now old, in poor health, suffering from diabetes, and is rarely visited by his loved ones. This argument should be completely disregarded as it does not change what Peltier had done. His inconvenience in prison should not in any way justify his …show more content…
Peltier took part in seizing the lives of two innocent FBI agents following protocol. There is a substantial amount of evidence that indicates that Leonard Peltier is guilty of these murders, and therefore, should remain in prison unpardoned for this horrendous crime. The arguments made by his supporters should all be disregarded as they are inadequate reasons for a pardon. The release of a evidently guilty murderer would also be an unjust decision. Agents Coler and Williams will never get the privilege of going home. Why should
His supporters commonly connect his conviction to abuse suffered by Native Americans. Peltier was fairly tried and fairly convicted. This conclusion has been met by every federal judge who's reviewed the case. The evidence against Peltier has been repeatedly confirmed which disproves these accounts. Mr. Peltier's version of the events of that day have changed many times over the years. He first blamed the killings on someone he knew, but after went back on his word. He later claimed in an interview that the agents were killed in "self-defense." Another thing his supporters use as an argument is that Peltier is now old, in poor health, suffering from diabetes, and is rarely visited by his loved ones. This argument should be completely disregarded as it does not change what Peltier had done. His inconvenience in prison should not in any way justify his …show more content…
Peltier took part in seizing the lives of two innocent FBI agents following protocol. There is a substantial amount of evidence that indicates that Leonard Peltier is guilty of these murders, and therefore, should remain in prison unpardoned for this horrendous crime. The arguments made by his supporters should all be disregarded as they are inadequate reasons for a pardon. The release of a evidently guilty murderer would also be an unjust decision. Agents Coler and Williams will never get the privilege of going home. Why should