US vs LEONARD PELTIER TRIAL TRANSCRIPT EXCERPTS Case Number CR77-3003

CROSS EXAMINATION NORMAN BROWN

CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. TAIKEFF
 Q  Mr. Hultman referred to you by your first name. Do you want me to call you Mr. Brown or Norman?
 A  Don't matter.
 Q  All right. Defendant's Exhibit 93 in evidence is a photograph of a red white vehicle, and I think you looked at it before, land I think you said that you thought that vehicle at one time or another was in the vicinity of the so-called junked cars; is that right?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Do you know whether that vehicle was ever operated, or was it possible to operate that vehicle?
 A  I don't know.
 Q  I show you what has previously been marked Defendant's Exhibit 94 for identification. It is not in evidence. Can you tell us if you know of your own knowledge the relationship between what's in that photograph and what is in Defendant's Exhibit 93 in evidence?
 A  What?
 Q  Do you know what this is in this picture No. 94?
 A  It's this one (indicating).
 Q  When you say "this one" you pointed to No. 93?
 A  Yeah. Looks like it, yeah.
 Q  All right. 94 is the back end of 93?
 A  Yeah.
{1560}
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Offer it in evidence, Your Honor.
 MR. HULTMAN:  If counsel so indicates it is, I no objection.
 THE COURT:  94 is received.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Now, in October of 1975 you were interviewed by the FBI, in fact the date I believe was October 10 1975 at approximately 12:00 noon; is that correct?
 A  (No response).
 Q  October 10, 1975?
 A  12:00 noon?
 Q  12:00 in the afternoon.
 A  No.
 Q  No. In Arizona?
 A  It was -- what time did you say there?
 Q  I said I believe it was on October 10th at approximately five minutes after 12:0..
 A  No.
 Q  Do you recall whether you were interviewed --
 A  It was in the evening I got interviewed that first time.
 Q  In other words could it have been around midnight, five minutes after midnight?
 A  Yeah. I think so.
 Q  All right.
 A  I know the time.
 Q  And were there four law enforcement officers present?
{1561}
 A  (No response.)
 Q  If you're not sure, tell us how many you remember.
 A  I remember three.
 *Q  Were there three FBI agents?
 A  Yeah. There was three.
 Q  Three FBI agents?
 A  I think there was five of them. But one kept moving in and out, bringing coffee. I don't know if there was another one.
 Q  Was there someone from the BIA?
 A  Yeah.
 What's his name?
 Q  First name Frank?
 A  Frank Adake.
 Q  All right.
 A  No. That's -- he wasn't there that time. I think you got different one there.
 Q  Well, did you sign a statement that night?
 A  Yeah. Signed a statement.
 Q  And do you recall whether Frank Adake witnessed the statement?
 A  You mean that first time they came?
 Q  Well, I'm talking about October 10, '75. I wouldn't know whether that was the first time or the second time or the third time.
{1562}
 Well, let's skip past that particular name. Do you remember the names of the agents who were there?
 A  The first time was a Victor Harvey, J. Gary Adams. I don't remember the other one.
 Q  Was there ever a time when you were interviewed by an agent named James Doyle?
 A  Yes.
 Q  And did you sign a statement on that occasion?
 A  Yeah, I think so.
 Q  And was Gary Adams there that time with Doyle?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And was there another agent by the name of Michael Ness or Ress from Albuquerque?
 A  What time are you talking about?
 Q  I believe October 10th. I'm not trying to pin you down to the date.
 A  No. I know I'd remember if I knew what time, because it was twice.
 Q  I see.
 A  I might --
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Let me have this marked so I can show it to you.
 (Mr. Taikeff had exhibit marked.)
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) I'm placing before you this folder which contains, what has now been marked Defendant's Exhibit 110 for {1563} identification. Do you recognize that sheet?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And do you recognize that the following sheets are handwritten statement?
 A  Handwritten?
 Q  Yes. Written by someone's hand. It's not typewritten?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Did you ever see that handwritten statement before?
 A  What?
 Q  Before I just showed it to you, did you ever see that statement?
 A  Yeah. Yeah, I saw it.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, may I have a moment to confer with Mr. Hultman?
 THE COURT:  Very well.
 (Whereupon, Mr. Taikeff conferred with Mr. Hultman.)
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, with Mr. Hultman's consent and subject to Your Honor's ruling, I'm going to give to the witness a duplicate of what has been previously marked Defense Exhibit 110 for identification to facilitate the questioning.
 THE COURT:  Any objection?
 MR. HULTMAN:  I may object to the question, Your Honor. I have no objection to the procedure that we're using.
 THE COURT:  I have reference to the procedure.
{1564}
 MR. HULTMAN:  I understand, Your Honor.
 THE COURT:  That is approved.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Thank you, Your Honor. And the statement is now in the hands of the witness.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) What I want to know is whether you put your initials at least once on every page of that document?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Who wrote out that statement?
 A  Doyle, James.
 Q  And were you speaking with the agents while they were, or the agent while he was writing that statement?
 A  Yeah. But --
 Q  All right. Just answer my questions and I'll take it a step at a time with you.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Look at the third page of the statement four lines from he bottom.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Are we referring to page 3, Counsel, so I can follow?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I'm going to show it to counsel, Your Honor.
 (Whereupon, Mr. Taikeff showed Mr. Hultman Defense Exhibit 110.)
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Are you looking at the page, Norman, where the word "lunch" is crossed out and the word "breakfast" {1565} is written in?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And your initials are next to the word "lunch" that's been crossed out; isn't that correct?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Now, at the beginning of that particular sentence four lines from the bottom are the words "at approximately 11:30 A.M.". Would you read that sentence to yourself.
 A  You mean from --
 Q  From the words "at approximately 11:30 A.M." until the end of that sentence.
 A  Okay. At approximately --
 MR. HULTMAN:  Well, now just a second, Your Honor.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Not out loud. Read it to yourself.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Now, before you put your initials on the page you read each page, didn't you?
 A  I don't know. I don't remember. Yeah.
 Q  Did you say "yes"?
 A  I think so. I'm not sure.
 Q  Okay. Now, did you tell the agents that day that while you were preparing to have a meal you were with Joe Stuntz, Zimmerman and Michael Anderson?
 A  Yeah.
 I mean did I say that to them?
{1566}
 Q  Yes.
 A  I don't know. I can't remember too good.
 Yeah, I think so, yeah.
 Q  Now, on your direct examination you said that when you were in tent city just before the firing begin you weren't sure where Anderson was.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Now, isn't it a fact that Anderson was in tent city with you and the other people?
 MR. HULTMAN:  Well, I object, Your Honor, on the grounds that this question has been asked and answered and that it is an attempt on the part of counsel. No objection to him asking the question as to who was there, but on attempt on the part of counsel to confuse the witness.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I think it's a perfectly properly phrased question.
 THE COURT:  The witness may answer.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Beg your pardon?
 THE COURT:  The witness may answer.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Thank you, Your Honor.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Do you remember the question?
 A  Say it again.
 Q  Isn't it a fact that when you were preparing to have your meal --
 A  Yeah.
{1567}
 Q  -- just before the firing started Mike Anderson was in tent city with you and the other people?
 A  No, he wasn't.
 Q  He wasn't?
 A  No. This was a long time ago. This is the second time when they came to me.
 Q  June 26, 1975 was a long time ago, wasn't it?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And this statement was taken from you on October 10, 1975?
 A  Yes.
 Q  And today's date is March 25, 1977, isn't it?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Which is closer to June 26th, the day the took the statement or today?
 A  The day they took the statement.
 Q  And as a general rule is your memory better closer to an event or far from an event?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Yeah what?
 A  Yeah, my memory's good closer to the event.
 Q  Is it possible that you forgot that Mike Anderson was with you in tent city?
 A  Yeah, it's possible.
 Q  Now, I notice as I've said before that the word "lunch" is crossed out and the word "breakfast" is put in. Is it a fact {1568} that that was the first meal you were all going to have that day because you had just gotten up before that?
 A  Yeah, right.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Well, I object, Your Honor, now to the question because it included an alleged fact that was not a part of the record, that he had "just gotten up". I believe it shows, the record shows that that is not to be the record. If counsel will ask the witness that question, I'll have no objection.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I believe that Mr. Hultman accurately states the fact, but I don't think that's the basis for finding my question objectionable. I'm seeking information from a witness on cross-examination.
 It's my understanding that if I have a good faith basis for asking a question as a question rather than making a statement that it's proper for me to do so. And the good faith basis is what I saw in that statement.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Might we approach the bench just one time.
 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the bench:)
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, and Counsel, I'm not in any way trying to interfere, and I won't interfere with your questioning. I think, though, I'm under a duty with the witness of this kind with a far greater degree of necessity {1569} make absolutely certain that there is no misunderstanding in the mind of the witness that he understands what statement included. Because I think without any question a witness of this kind, and that's why I was so deliberate in the course of my questioning to make absolutely certain in all fairness that he understood the question, that he responded to the question accurately. And that's the only reason for my objection now, Counsel.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I can assure Your Honor that there was no sense on my part that the witness had not misunderstood question. I would not proceed on that basis, and I to clarify one point here so that counsel doesn't have any unnecessary exchanges during the cross-examination. Your Honor earlier in the trial made a ruling that it was for counsel to state facts as if they were facts in trying to elicit an answer because it left the wrong impression with the jury in a way that it could be said that counsel is testifying when counsel does that. But --
 THE COURT:  Not state facts, state facts which are not supported by the evidence.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Right. But I understand that it is proper to say to a witness "isn't it a fact that," if there's a good faith basis for doing it. And it is not an attempt to parade information in front of the jury for which there legitimate basis.
{1570}
 MR. HULTMAN:  I have no objection to that.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  As long as I understand that.
 THE COURT:  There's good faith basis for doing it, but my objection to it is stating, making an assertion which there is no apparent, no factual basis for it.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I understand.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, the reason I wanted to approach the bench is I want counsel to know that I feel with a witness of this kind, his demeanor, his background, his hostility, in terms of, not to counsel now, but I'm referring now as to relationships in what terms they might be, leads us to one position that I don't want counsel to reel that if I become vigorous in an objection that I'm not attempting in any way to take from counsel or to distract from counsel, but I feel with a witness of this kind there may be occasions when I would have to do that, otherwise I wouldn't.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I think, though, up to this point it's fairly clear that the witness has been responsive to Government counsel, and apparently there was a clear-cut rapport of a positive nature between Government counsel and the witness. So I don't think there can be any indication at this time that there is any hostility, either legal or personal. And I just wanted to comment on that to make sure that the record was not confused. And I see that Your Honor has closed his {1571} book.
 THE COURT:  I have closed my book.
 MR. LOWE:  That is what is known as a signal.
 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were had in the courtroom in the hearing and presence of the jury:)
 THE COURT:  Court is in recess until 1:30.
 (Recess taken.)
 AFTERNOON SESSION
 (Whereupon, at 1:30 o'clock, p.m., the trial of the within cause was resumed pursuant to the noon recess heretofore taken; and the following further proceedings were had, the Defendant being present in person:)
 (Mr. David Maring also appeared).
 THE COURT:  Are we ready for the jury?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Yes, your Honor.
 THE COURT:  The jury may be brought in.
 (Whereupon, at 1:32 o'clock, p.m., the jury returned to the courtroom, and the following further proceedings were had in the presence and hearing of the jury:)
 THE COURT:  You may proceed.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Thank you, your Honor.
 NORMAN BROWN,
having been previously duly sworn, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
 CROSS EXAMINATION (Cont'd.)
BY MR. TAIKEFF:
 Q  Norman, I want you to try to remember the time when you heard the first shot on June 26th when you were in Tent City. How long after you woke up was that?
 A  I don't know. I just got up.
 Q  Could you tell from what you saw around you in the camp what time the other people in the camp had gotten up?
{1573}
 A  Well, they got up before me, so I had just gotten up, and was talking to Joe for awhile, and that's when I heard the shots. I don't know what time.
 Q  What kind of things were being done in the camp when you got up?
 A  Well, they were cooking, they were making pancakes, and don't know. I had just gotten up, and I was talking to them so I woke up and I went with Joe and I was talking to Joe for awhile, and I don't know where the rest of the people were. They might have been still sleeping, I don't know.
 Q  Now, you spent some time up on the ridge near the houses, is that right?
 A  Yes.
 Q  After the shooting started?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And Mike Anderson was up there on the ridge with you, wasn't he?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Now, after you were up on the ridge by the houses, you then went up to this area here (indicating) which has been marked in a circle "NB", is that right?
 A  Correct.
 Q  And what was the next place you went to after you were in that spot?
 A  To the camp.
{1574}
 Q  And then from the camp you left the area?
 A  Right.
 Q  Now, when you made your way from the area of the houses to that spot, where was Leonard Peltier?
 A  When I saw him, way over there (indicating), he was right There in the circle.
 Q  To the right on the chart of this "Y" intersection?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Now, where was the next time you saw him?
 A  Inside the camp.
 Q  Did you ever see him when you were in this area marked "NB"?
 A  No. I just saw Mike, me and Mike.
 Q  From this area marked "NB", are you able to see down into the area of this intersection, the "Y" intersection?
 A  No.
 Q  Now, when you said a few moments ago that you were talking with Joe in Tent City right after you got up, you were talking about Joe Stuntz, weren't you?
 A  Right.
 Q  And is it accurate to say that Joe Stuntz was in Tent City when the shooting began?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And did he go over to --
 MR. HULTMAN:  (Interrupting) Well, may it please the {1575} Court, I didn't have time to enter an objection, your Honor.
 I object on the grounds that that is not a statement of the record, that the statement was that he did not know, that he was in the area, was the exact words; and I went into that at least on two occasions, and so I now object on the grounds that the question is a misstatement of the record.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I think we have to get one thing straightened out so that there is not unnecessary colloquy. I am not bound by answers of a prosecution witness. If I ask a question in good faith and I get an affirmative answer, I don't see what the prosecution can object to; and I think on top of that, that Mr. Hultman has made a mistake and he is thinking of the wrong person.
 I would be glad to confer with him for a moment and perhaps call that to his attention.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, I think the matter can be resolved if I just get the opportunity from counsel before the response, that's all I am asking. I think within the Rules I have a right to make my objection at the end of the question before the response in order that the response not come, if it is legitimately to be withheld and not to come before the jury. That's my only point.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I have no quarrel with that, your Honor.
{1576}
 I would like the jury to know that counsel are permitted on cross examination to put a factual proposition to a witness to see whether the witness will agree with it or disagree with it providing counsel has a good faith basis for asking such a question, and it is not improper conduct on the part of counsel.
 MR. HULTMAN:  I didn't in any way infer -- I want counsel to know flat out, I wasn't inferring it was an improper act.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  May I have a moment to confer?
 THE COURT:  You may.
 (Counsel confer.)
 MR. HULTMAN:  I withdraw my objection, your Honor.
 THE COURT:  Just a word to the jury.
 You may recall that in my preliminary instructions at the opening of the trial I advised you that it is your responsibility to listen to the evidence and to determine what weight should be given to it. The problem that has arisen here and which has arisen before, and which will arise again, is that a witness may make a statement on direct examination; and if the cross-examining lawyer may have information before him which indicates that the witness made a different statement -- and if he asks -- on a different occasion relating to the same thing; and if he asks that witness, "Isn't it true that you made such {1577} and such a statement," and the witness says "Yes," then you have a direct conflict such as has just arisen; and it is for the jury to determine what the truth is in the statements of the witness, and that same test should be applied in judging the weight and credibility of any witness.
 (Counsel confer.)
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, may I state for the record at this time with counsel that there is no -- because there may be a misunderstanding as far as the record, there is no disagreement between counsel that Joe Stuntz was with the witness at the time; and that's a consistent statement and there is no disagreement about that.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Yes. My position is that his direct and his cross are consistent in that regards, your Honor.
 THE COURT:  Very well.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) You said something on your direct examination, you know what your direct examination means?
 A  No.
 Q  When Mr. Hultman was asking you questions, that's your direct examination, so when I refer to it, I mean when Mr. Hultman was questioning you.
 A  Yes.
 Q  You said something on your direct examination about some concern about a possibility of an attack, do you recall that?
{1578}
 A  Right.
 Q  Would you explain what was the basis of your concern, what specifically you were concerned about?
 A  Well, I read in papers about goons, BIA goons, FBI, people tell me what they done to their homes, goons do, and how many people have been killed; and that's why we were concerned, not only for us, for the women and children there. Is that what you are asking the question.
 Q  (Interrupting) That's what I am asking about, the people who said certain things to you.
 Are you talking about the people who were living in Tent City or people who lived elsewhere on the Reservation?
 A  Yeah, elsewhere, and some people in Tent City. Like I say, you know, the goons, watch out for them, they are dangerous.
 Q  Now, when you went up to the area which is marked with the letters "NB", you had a certain concern about the women who were there, did you not?
 A  Right.
 Q  You had seen something just before you went up there, just before you left the area of the residences to go up there, do you remember?
 A  Right.
 Q  What did you see?
 A  Some cars and some people coming across from the road over here (indicating) towards the area where the tents were {1579} (indicating).
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I believe that the witness has motioned with his hand in such a way as to probably indicate from Highway 35 in the south pointing towards the north.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) The people you saw coming from south to north, were they Indian people?
 A  Coming from this way (indicating)?
 Q  Yes, sir.
 A  No.
 Q  They were not Indian people?
 A  No.
 Q  The people you saw arriving in cars on that part of Highway 35 which is west of the houses, where the bottom of the chart is?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Were those Indian people?
 A  I didn't see any.
 Q  Did you see any cars pull up there?
 A  You mean -- what are you talking about, right there?
 Q  No. I am talking about a place that isn't on the chart but would be on the chart -- Highway 35 comes all the way around?
 A  Yes.
 Q  And down here in the west (indicating), did you say that you saw some cars pull up just before Joe Stuntz told you to {1580} go?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Up towards Tent City?
 A  Yes.
 Q  What kind of cars were they?
 A  They were just plain cars, you know, one color of car.
 Q  Did you know who was in those cars?
 A  No, but I saw them carrying some guns.
 Q  Did you think it was possible that people would come into your tent city area and harm or shoot these women?
 A  You mean me?
 Q  Yes, I am asking you whether you thought it was possible that such a thing could happen.
 A  Yes.
 Q  Now, you said that Joe Stuntz said something to you about, "This is the time to be a warrior." Did I say that correctly?
 A  Right.
 Q  What does that mean to you, what did it mean to you?
 A  Well, I think whet he meant was, shouldn't be scared to die, that I should think of the people that were there and not of myself, I think that's what he meant.
 Q  Mr. Hultman asked you a number of questions concerning the Jumping Bull community with reference to the possibility of seeing goons in that area, and I don't remember all the places that he pointed out to you; but I think he asked you whether {1581} you ever saw any goons in the vicinity of the tan and red house and any goons in the the vicinity of the white house and a number of other places. Do you recall that, whether you ever saw any goons?
 You remember Mr. Hultman asking you whether you saw any goons in those various places?
 A  Goons?
 Q  Yes.
 A  No, I didn't see no goons.
 Q  I know you didn't. I am asking you whether you recall being questioned about that when Mr. Hultman was questioning you.
 A  No, he didn't say that.
 Q  He didn't say that, o.k.
 You have never seen any goons on the Jumping Bull compound, have you?
 A  No.
 Q  Do you know any reason why they never came around there?
 MR. HULTMAN:  Well, I object, your Honor, to this. This clearly calls for an opinion and conclusion of the witness for which there is no proper foundation.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I believe, your Honor, the question was the foundation. I asked him if he knew the reason why they didn't come around there.
 MR. HULTMAN:  That's the very reason for my objection.
{1582}
 It calls for an opinion and conclusion for which there is no foundation.
 THE COURT:  Overruled. He can state whether he --
 THE WITNESS:  (Interrupting) Could you say that again?
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) You are permitted to tell us, if you know, why the goons didn't come around to the Jumping Bull's community.
 A  Because there was already people there.
 THE COURT:  The answer was "Do you know."
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Do you know why?
 A  No, I don't know why. I don't understand the question.
 Q  All right. Let me try again.
 Goons didn't come around the Jumping Bull community, did they?
 A  No, I didn't see them.
 Q  O.k. Do you know why?
 A  No.
 Q  O.k. You said that you went to a religious gathering in Farmington, New Mexico?
 A  Right.
 Q  Would you explain what you meant by "religious gathering", what was happening there?
 A  Well, spiritual gathering there?
 Q  Yes. Maybe I wrote down the wrong word. Maybe you said "spiritual gathering".
{1583}
 A  Well, it is when a lot of people meet together, and they talk about their unborn and they talk to their elders, and to us that's sacred. That's why I said "spiritual gathering".
 Q  And who sponsored that activity in Farmington, New Mexico, in the early spring of 1976?
 A  The American Indian Movement.
 Q  Briefly tell us what you mean when you make reference to "elders"?
 A  Our medicine men, our old people, that they know more, you know, than we do so we are asking them what kind of direction to take; and they tell us things about the sacred pipe and sweat lodge, stuff like that.
 Q  I may have made a mistake before -- I want to correct myself -- when I spoke about that gathering in Farmington, New Mexico. That was the early spring of 1975, right?
 A  Right.
 Q  Not 1976?
 A  Right.
 Q  Do you know or have you ever heard the expression, "traditional Indian"?
 A  Right.
 Q  Are the elders you speak of people who are described as traditional Indians?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Can you briefly explain what that means in terms of how {1584} they live their lives?
 A  They depend on themselves and nature and the medicines; and their thoughts are always concerned about people. You mean how they live?
 Q  Yes. I am following your answer. You can continue your answer, just as you are giving it.
 A  "Traditional", what I think it is is people that live in harmony with nature and that -- well, that's about all I can say.
 Q  Is there any special connection between traditional people and the American Indian Movement?
 A  Yeah. They are the same because the thoughts are the same and both thoughts are for the unborn, I think that's what you wanted to know, I don't know.
 Q  You live on a Reservation?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  How many people live on that Reservation?
 A  About 145,000.
 Q  How many of those would you say live a traditional Indian life?
 A  Well, about 120,000, I guess, yeah, almost three-fourths of the people there.
{1585}
 Q  Do you know anything about the political activities of AIM concerning life and political matters on the reservation?
 A  What do you mean?
 Q  Well, besides the religious aspects of the activity, there are aspects concerning who governs the Indian people and how they are governed on behalf of AIM.
 A  Well, I guess they're trying to put across that native people want to live, you know, in the sovereign way and depend on themselves and their own traditional kind of government.
 Q  Were Leonard and Dino and Bob involved in any activities like that on the Pine Ridge Reservation in June of 1975?
 A  What do you mean? I don't understand.
 Q  Were they working with the people there?
 A  Right. They were. Were working with them and they were with us. Medicine man come into our camp. There was a spiritual camp and it was, we took sweat lodges together, other people. They come and talked to us and, you know, help us with the food and, you know, help us in that way. And, you know, that's what the people came to the camp for.
 Q  The people who live on Pine Ridge came to your camp?
 A  Yeah. Lot of people.
 Q  Lot of people?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Were you trying to encourage them to do something? Were you trying to get them to do something, to live a certain kind of way?
{1586}
 A  Yeah.
 Could you say that again?
 Q  Yes. These people who came to you, were you trying to persuade them to live their lives a certain kind of way and take up the old traditional Indian way?
 A  Yeah We told them that, you know, that we think that the traditional form of government would be better than the present government there because the traditional form of government is a, it's with nature, the law of nature, and we feel that no law is greater than our law, that's the law of nature:  love, peace and respect. That's what, you know, we tell them that way is better.
 Q  While you were on the reservation, did you talk to other people about their treaty rights?
 A  No, I didn't. No.
 Q  Do you know if Leonard did?
 A  Yeah. Yeah. I don't know too much about it. Oglala, their nation, I don't know their treaty. Know very little about it.
 Q  I'm not asking you about the content of the subject matter. I'm just trying to find out about the activities of the people who lived in tent city, what their work was, what their activities were. Do you understand that?
 A  Yeah.
{1587}
 Q  When you speak of treaty, or when I ask you about the treaty, what kind of a treaty are you talking about? With whom was the treaty that you referred to?
 A  With the government. I think the one you're talking about is 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty.
 Q  Yes. Tell us briefly of what your understanding is about that as far as it concerned the activities of the people from tent city, what connection they had with the subject of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty.
 A  Well, the subject, the way I understand is when they first, when our nation first signed a the treaty with the government, I guess they did with all Indian people, is when they signed that paper, or they were forced to sign it, I don't know, I think the understanding is that we go on separate roads. This road would be traditional form of government, the native people on this side and our white brothers and sisters on this side (indicating). So we're trying to tell them, you know, "Not supposed to touch, stay on this side because there come a time when," like there is two boats, two canoes, the white people on this side and the Indian people on this side. You're either in one boat or the other and you can't sit in both boats at one time.
 Like my elder told me this that when there is a wind, he said a wind is going to come and separate these and the people that live the white way and the Indian way, the boats are {1588} going to separate and those guys are going to fall to disaster. Just take this side, this is the only way. This is the creator meant for us to be.
 Q  Your message to the people on the Pine Ridge Reservation was don't live your life like a white person if you're not a white person, live your life like the native American has always lived his life, is that a fair summary?
 A  Well --
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor. Excuse me, Norman. Your Honor, I haven't entered any objection at this time and I think I have been lenient but I would at this time now interpose an objection that the matter we're now getting into there is no showing of relevancy and it's clearly beyond the scope of direct examination.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I recognize Mr. Hultman in fact has restrained himself. However, on direct examination he asked the witness whether he knew anything of the work that was being done by Leonard Peltier and the other adult males. The answer was no. I don't know that the witness understood the question at that time and I'm addressing myself to that direct testimony at this particular time.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, my objection is that I would have no objection to any showing of relevancy in terms of any activity that did go on. The only thing we have heard is a general discussion of philosophy. That's the basis for {1589} my objection. If there is any showing of any kind that there was specific activity, then there might be some probative value, but my objection goes clearly to the point there has been no showing of any kind of any specific activity.
 THE COURT:  As I understand the relevancy which defense counsel is asserting is he is attempting through this witness to establish to the extent of this witness' knowledge of the purpose of this group's presence at this particular location at that time.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  That is correct. And it is specifically addressed to the fact that the direct examination, there was a question as to whether the witness knew what Leonard and Bob and Dino, the adults of the group, were doing there and the answer was, "No" and I'm probing that answer. I think the answer was given as it was because the witness may not have understood the import or the impact of the question.
 THE COURT:  Well, within those limits of relevancy I will permit you to proceed.
 A  Could I answer that question back there? The last one?
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) I have no objection.
 A  What you say that wind is going to separate them apart with the movement, the American Indian Movement is going to. I guess that answers your question. That wind has to do that.
 Q  What did you and the other people from tent city do about {1590} spreading that word, about bringing that information to other native American people?
 A  Would you say that again.
 Q  Yes. I'll try it a different way.
 Am I correct that you wanted the native American people living on Pine Ridge to assert their rights under the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty and live independently of the white culture?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And that you wanted the native American people at that location and perhaps in all locations to live their life by the religious beliefs, the traditional native American religious belief?
 A  Right.
 Q  What did you do in order to bring this message to the people on the reservation?
 A  What did I do?
 Q  What did you and the people from tent city? You said people came to you from different places on the reservation.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Was there any connection between those people coming to you and what you wanted them to learn from you?
 A  Trying to tell of a new direction. You know, to go the direction of, like you said, traditional government, or like I said.
{1591}
 Q  And did you hold religious ceremonies?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  How often?
 A  Lots. About, used to have in the morning and then at night and came to be we had it every day. Sweat lodge.
 Q  Were the native American people welcome to come and participate?
 A  Yeah. They did come and take in the sweat lodge with us.
 Q  And was that part of your program, part of your way of persuading them, of helping them see the new way which was really the old way?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  You mentioned a place called Crow Dog's paradise. Would you tell us what that place is.
 A  It's a place where each year that they have the sacred sun dance every year and the place where people meet, like to sun dance. That's what it is. When people from all over come together and think with the same mind and thoughts and pray for all walks of life. That land there is sacred.
 Q  When you speak of all walks of life, you don't mean all different kinds of people, you mean people and animals, don't you?
 A  Yeah. People. Black, yellow, white and red. That's what the sun dance is all about.
 Q  Leonard Crow Dog is a medicine man?
{1592}
 A  Right.
 Q  His father was a medicine man before him?
 A  Right.
 Q  And you consider him a holy man, do you not?
 A  Right.
 Q  You said when Mr. Hultman was questioning you that you went to the sun dance for the first time when you were 13 years old.
 A  Right.
 Q  Is there any connection between the first time you go to sun dance and becoming a man?
 A  No, it's not. It's not that. It's like, not like, you don't do that just because you become a man. You thank our creator, we thank him. Like if we offer him tobacco or a horse or something, it's already his. We offer ourselves. We belong to ourselves but we're his children and these are our own bodies so we offer him all we have got, offering ourselves to him so that, you know, we can live in harmony and have a good understanding of nature.
 Q  From your contact with Leonard Peltier, would you say that is a spiritual man?
 A  Right. Everybody in the camp was spiritual. Yeah.
 Q  Did you think that if you had to use a gun to protect the young women that you would be giving up your spiritual nature?
 A  No. Because to me, you know, as to everybody in the camp, {1593} as we learn, I guess, since we were small that, you know, all life is sacred, you know.
 Q  Did you see all life is sacred?
 A  And we had to protect, you know, lives is what we done.
 Q  Now you traveled when you were quite young many different places in the western part of the United States, isn't that correct?
 A  Right.
 Q  Is that part of your life as a native American person, traveling from place to place and living in different places or different periods of time?
 A  What?
 Q  Did you live in different places, is that a cultural thing to live in different places at different times?
 A  Yeah. I guess so.
 Q  How long did you live on the Pine Ridge?
 A  About two weeks.
 Q  How many different times did you live on the Rose Bud Reservation?
 A  Last year. This would be my fourth time this year.
 Q  This year will be your fourth time?
 A  Yeah. How many different reservations have you lived at from time to time so far in your life?
 A  About five.
{1594}
 Q  Were there things that the people in tent city had that everybody used?
 A  Yeah, there was. What do you mean?
 Q  Well, for instance, sometimes you had one gun, then another time you had a different gun. Is that unusual amongst Indian people to use things that way so that it doesn't seem to belong to just one person?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Is that the Indian way?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  How do you describe that? Do you have a word that you can use in English to describe that?
 A  What do you mean like? Say the question again.
 Q  Yes. You shared many things.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  With your brothers and sisters, didn't you?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  You said that there were times when you saw Leonard with a certain gun.
 A  Right.
 Q  Did he sometimes have a different gun?
 A  He might have. I don't know.
{1595}
 Q  Did you always use the same gun?
 A  No.
 Q  You said that sometimes Leonard drove the red and white van?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Did anybody else ever drive that van?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Who else?
 A  Well, I drove it once and Joe and Dino drove it.
 Q  Did you share your food?
 A  Right.
 Q  Did you share whatever money you had?
 A  What money?
 Q  Did you share between yourselves whatever you had?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Is that the Indian way?
 A  Right.
 Q  You refer to Joe Stuntz as your brother. I assume you meant that in the spiritual way?
 A  Right.
 Q  Jimmy Zimmermann separated from the group on June 26, 1975; isn't that correct?
 A  Right.
 Q  Was that just about the time the group was leaving and moving south?
{1596}
 A  Yeah. This is when we all got together and we were ready to leave. And before we left when we got together, he should give himself up because, you know, he might get hurt.
 Q  Why did you think he might get hurt?
 A  Because people were shooting at us.
 Q  Now, in giving your direct testimony and talking about the two men who were at the cars, the one with the long gun and the one with the handgun, you've referred to them as agents, right? You said they were agents?
 A  Right.
 Q  You now that they were agents of the FBI; isn't that correct?
 A  Right.
 Q  When the shooting was going on did you know that they were agents of the FBI?
 A  No.
 Q  You told us that you saw Leonard shooting from that place where the junked cars are and you also said you saw the agents shooting?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Which one did you see shooting first?
 A  I don't know. It was just -- I don't know who shot first, but they were shooting at each other I could tell.
 Q  Well, when you looked, which did you look at first and see shooting?
{1597}
 A  Well, when I got up there I saw Leonard shooting. He's the first one I saw shooting. And he backed down and his shots were not very fast. Shots, just shots.
 Q  And how long after the shooting first started did you see Leonard shooting?
 A  I don't know. Just happened so fast. I don't know.
 Q  How long did it take to go from tent city over to the houses?
 A  About a minute and a half. Me and Joe went up to that little hill.
 Q  And then you went back to tent city?
 A  Yeah. And then we ran back all the way from there and then back to tent city. Minute and a half, two minutes.
 Q  Did you ever see a person by the name of Jean Day at the Jumping Bull community?
 A  No.
 Q  Do you know whether there was a woman with Leonard Peltier, either living with him or his girl friend?
 A  No.
 Q  Did you ever see a person by the name of Myrtle Poor Bear at the Jumping Bull area?
 A  No.
 Q  Do you know who she is?
 A  Now I do.
 Q  When was the first time you met her?
{1598}
 A  I mean not now. I met her, but I know who she is when I read in the paper. I don't know her.
 I never talked to her, just I heard of her.
 Q  You never saw her on the Pine Ridge Reservation?
 A  No.
 Q  Did you ever see a person by the name of Anna Mae Aquash at the Jumping Bull community?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Did you ever see a person by the name of James Eagle at the Jumping Bull community?
 A  No.
 Q  Did you ever hear, either on June 26, 1975 or before June 26, 1975 any talk from the people who were with you on the Jumping Bull compound or community, did you ever hear any talk about killing FBI agents or killing BIA police officers?
 A  No.
 Q  I asked you a few moments ago about a James Eagle.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Do you understand that that person may also be known as Jimmy Eagle?
 A  What?
 Q  Do you know anyone named Jimmy Eagle?
 A  Yeah. That's the same person.
 Q  Okay. You never saw that person at the Jumping Bull compound?
{1599}
 A  No.
 Q  Was there over any talk amongst the people or the Jumping Bull community about an ambush?
 A  No.
 Q  Are you sure of that?
 A  Yeah, I'm sure.
 Q  Are you a good shot with a rifle?
 A  I don't know.
 Q  Did you shoot out any of the tires on the two cars that came in after the shooting started?
 A  Yeah. It looked like it, yeah.
 Q  Were you aiming for the tires?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Do you think if you wanted to you could have hit the center of the windshield?
 A  If I wanted to.
 Q  What was the distance that you were shooting?
 A  I don't know. It was pretty close.
 Q  You were at the white house?
 A  Yeah, white house.
 Q  And you wore shooting a single shot 22 caliber rifle?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And the cars that you are talking about stopped about here (indicating)?
 A  Right here where the "B" and "AB' is.
{1600}
 Q  Right here (indicating)?
 A  Somewhere around there.
 MR. HULTMAN:  I believe counsel used a specific yardage when I asked him this morning. And I would have no objection if you use a distance that he used. If you want to use a spot on the map, I would just request you use both characterizations that he gave.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Is it your position that it's about two hundred yards?
 MR. HULTMAN:  It's father than indicated on the map anyway.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Is it your position that it's about two hundred yards?
 MR. HULTMAN:  It's farther than indicated on the map anyway.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Okay. Would you say you were shooting a distance of at least two hundred yards? Six hundred, seven hundred foot?
 A  Yeah, I guess so. I don't know.
 Q  Have any idea how many tires you shot out with that single shot 22 from two hundred or more yards?
 A  I don't know. I think two.
 Q  Now, when you were back up near tent city in the area marked "NB" you were supposed to keep your eye out for anyone approaching tent city because you thought that the women were {1601} up there, right?
 A  Right.
 Q  Were you watching the road, the one that runs north-south across the chart, that short little road?
 A  That was another one. It comes down this way. It's a dirt road down this way (indicating).
 Q  All right. Let me ask you an easier question, perhaps. Were you watching all the roads that lead into tent city?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Could you see the roads from where you were positioned yourself from where you -
 A  Just part of the road. But right where I was at there, I could see that main road going. I was watching for it.
 Q  How about the road that came up from the area of the houses, could you see that road?
 A  Just to where -- right there (indicating).
 Q  That's the part that runs from left to right?
 A  Right across from "Plateau"?
 Q  Yes.
 A  Yes.
 Q  Okay. That's what I was asking you about before. You could see that, right?
 A  Just the part that, just right there towards camp. Those two places.
 Q  Okay. Were you paying attention and keeping your eye open a {1602} for anybody coming?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Were you listening to hear if anyone was coming either on the road or through the woods?
 A  Right.
 Q  Did you see any cars or trucks coming that way while you were there?
 A  You mean by those two roads?
 Q  Yes.
 A  No, I didn't see no cars.
 Q  Now, when you left that area where "N.B" is, you went directly to tent city; is that right?
 A  Yeah, that's right.
 Q  And did you find Leonard Peltier there?
 A  Right.
 Q  And he was loading something, wasn't he?
 A  Right.
 Q  And what was he loading?
 A  A van.
 Q  A red and white van?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  The one that the Government showed you pictures of; is that right?
 A  Yes.
 Q  When you and your brothers and sisters left tent city you {1603} said there was some shooting at you before you got out of the area; is that right?
 A  At me?
 Q  At your group, shots were fired at the group?
 A  No. I mean when Jimmy went back, heard same shots.
 Q  How about after you left?
 A  You mean when we got through the culvert?
 Q  Well, from the time you left tent city you went south first; isn't that correct, towards Highway 35?
 A  Right.
 Q  How far is it to Highway 35 approximately?
 A  About half a mile, three-fourths of a mile.
 Q  In that distance, in that half mile or three-quarters of a mile, anybody take any shots at you?
 A  No.
 Q  Or at anybody else in the group?
 A  No. Just quiet.
 Q  But sometime after you left, there was some shooting at you, wasn't there?
 A  Right.
 Q  Where were you then, where was the group at that time?
 A  Running up the hill.
 Q  Where was that hill? Beyond 35, Highway 35?
 A  Yeah, yeah.
 Q  Okay. When you were running up the hill and shots were {1604} fired at you was anyone -- who shot first in the group, or was someone shooting at the group?
 A  At the group.
 Q  Now, the Government showed you two pistols which you said resembled the pistols you saw in the cabin one night where the ten of you stayed.
 A  Right.
 Q  How big would you say that cabin was?
 A  Small cabin. It's about --
 Q  As big as the jury box?
 A  Smaller. About halfway.
 Q  Half the size of the jury box?
 A  Yeah.
 A  little bit wider. It was just small, just small.
 Q  How many of you slept in that cabin?
 A  Eight. But Norman and somebody went on security when we came back.
 Q  So eight were sleeping in the cabin and two were on guard duty?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Now, was anybody carrying those pistols that you saw? Did you see anyone carrying the pistols? I'm talking about when they were sitting on the table.
 A  Yeah. Dino I saw carrying one.
 Q  Did you ever see Leonard carrying one of those pistols?
 A  I don't know. I can't remember.
{1605}
 Q  Do you know who brought those pistols to that cabin?
 A  No.
 Q  Do you have any knowledge of where they came from?
 A  No.
 Q  Were you at Crow Dog's Paradise in September of that year?
 A  Yeah. September, right.
 Q  How long did you stay at Crow Dog's Paradise in September of 1975?
 A  You mean how long did I stay there?
 Q  Yes. On that visit.
 A  About a week there.
 Q  I'm sorry, I didn't hear the last part of your answer.
 A  When I got there, about a week before September 5th.
 Q  You see any FBI agents while you were there?
 A  Yeah. They passed by.
 Q  Any of them come into the camp?
 A  You mean before June -- I mean September 5th?
 Q  Or on September 5th?
 A  Yeah, I saw them come in.
 Q  How many?
 A  There was a lot of them. About eighty, a hundred of them. There was a lot of them there.
 Q  This is on the reservation, right, the Rosebud Reservation?
 A  Right. Crow Dog's Paradise.
 Q  Now, Crow Dog's Paradise is a holy place, is it not?
{1606}
 A  Right.
 Q  And that's where Leonard Crow Dog and Henry Crow Dog live?
 A  Right.
 Q  Henry Crow Dog is Leonard's father; is that right?
 A  Right.
**MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, I haven't objected to this point, but I'll enter an objection at this time about anything from this point on. It is irrelevant.
 THE COURT:  Sustained.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I'd like to come to the sidebar and explain to Your Honor the relevancy.
 THE COURT:  You may.
 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the bench:)
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I am now entering upon a portion of the cross-examination which will elicit information concerning the conduct of this witness under the influence or fear. And what I am about to elicit from him, the fact that I'm about to elicit represent part or the information concerning the fear which was motivating him when he took certain conduct on a subsequent date. That conduct concerns testimony which he has given in this case.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Well, I fail to see any relevancy at all, Your Honor, in what has been indicated without some showing of some kind of that by counsel.
{1607}
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Well, certain threats were made to him by the FBI to put it more bluntly and succinctly, and the effectiveness of those threats is connected to what happened on that particular day in his presence, and did influence him in responding to those threats.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Well, now first of all I object, Your Honor, that it has nothing to do as far as the subsequent events as to what we're talking about here.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Oh, it will. I will tie it together.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Wait a minute, Counsel, until I finish. Secondly, now if you are going to, if you are going to discuss specific 302's and so forth, then, you know, I will have an opportunity and you already have. But just to have a general discussion, you haven't shown, except on one single instance with this witness, where anything he has ever said any time, any place differs from anything he said on direct examination.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  That's exactly what I'm getting to.
 MR. HULTMAN:  That's one small --
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Mr. Hultman, my position on that is that it was a mistake. It was not any kind of intentional statement of fact. I am now getting to the very subject which you just described in general terms. That's the beginning of it is --
{1608}
 MR. HULTMAN:  You mean that his testimony on the stand here, which you are now setting up, that he has given testimony at the present time which is false?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  No.
 MR. HULTMAN:  On direct examination?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  No.
 MR. HULTMAN:  That's what I fail to see, and I would continue in my objection until there's a foundation showing of some kind of relevancy.
 THE COURT:  Well, if you are not going to show his testimony is false, then it's irrelevant as to why he told the truth, whatever he told the truth, because somebody told him to.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, he previously testified in connection with this case before the grand jury and he lied before the grand jury and he lied before the grand jury under the influence of the FBI, and he will so testify.
 And he lied as to a specific fact which was testified to by another witness, something which the FBI wanted very much for him to do, and he did it before the grand jury, but was not sworn with the pipe. And he has not testified that way here only because he was sworn by the pipe and could not tell anything but the truth.
 THE COURT:  Right. But if he --
 MR. HULTMAN:  He's asking -- excuse me, Your Honor.
{1609}
 THE COURT:  Just a minute. Just a minute.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, at this point I think we should have his own counsel here because we're now talking about perjury at this particular point.
 THE COURT:  We've got enough lawyers up here right now.
 MR. HULTMAN:  I'm sorry, Your Honor.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I thought from that Your Honor said I thought you were suggesting perhaps too many.
 THE COURT:  If this witness has told the truth under the oath that he took on the witness stand and that the reason he did it is because he took the oath on the pipe rather than the customary oath that is administered in federal courts, then what probative value is there in showing that he lied at a prior time because he didn't take the oath on the pipe?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  No. He lied on the prior occasion because he was coerced into doing it by the FBI.
 THE COURT:  But unless that's, unless you somehow show that his testimony here in this courtroom is coerced I fail to see the probative value.
 MR. LOWE:  Let me say this, Judge. We will show, and I will make an offer of proof that the witness will say the he perjured himself in front of the grand jury because of the threats of the FBI and the subject matter of the perjured {1610} testimony was that he saw Bob and Dino and Leonard down at the cars where the two agents were right at the cars.
 Now, this is the very testimony that Mike Anderson gave and the purpose of adducing this is to show that Mike Anderson, to support our case, that Mike Anderson has lied when he said that because he was subjected to the same threats by his own testimony of physical violence in that case. And the relevance of showing here that this witness did succumb to those threats on one occasion before the grand jury, even though he is now candid, is for the purpose of governmental misconduct of witnesses, subordination of perjury which was not to the credibility of other witnesses. We believe the witness is telling the truth now, but we believe they're entitled to show active subordination of perjury through threats by FBI agents on this young man in the past with regard to this investigation, because it casts the credibility of Mr. Anderson, Mr. Draper and others in doubt; and would support in a general line of testimony that we would present to the Court in that regard.
 MR. HULTMAN:  That is so irrelevant, Your Honor, that I won't comment any further.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I don't see how it could be irrelevant.
 MR. HULTMAN:  They had an opportunity to attack the witness and they're now trying to attack through this witness, Your Honor, by what happened to this witness.
{1611}
 If they had any basis to attack the testimony of the witness that was on the stand, they had full and ample cross-examination. And this is an attempt by irrelevancy through this witness with no inconsistency to try and show, to put the FBI or the Government on trial here.
 There is no showing of any kind that this man hasn't told the truth.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, the Government does not succeed or should not succeed in concealing that earlier episode by not attempting to impeach the witness with his sworn grand jury testimony. The Government has a transcript of grand jury testimony in which he testified that he saw the three adults down by the car which is essentially the same testimony that Mike Anderson gave in this case.
 When asked that question here on direct examination the witness said, "No, I did not see them down there."
 THE COURT:  He wasn't asked the question. He was asked if he saw anybody else down there. He wasn't asked if he specifically saw those three gentlemen down there.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Well, but by being asked, and he said, "no." He is in essence disavowing that earlier testimony.
 Now, it would seem to me that a proponent of a certain proposition who had a witness on the stand who had previously sworn to the fact that the Government would want to adduce before a grand jury and get a different answer on {1611} trial would surely, particularly in light of the speech with a hostile witness, would surely attempt to introduce that into evidence, or at least impeach the witness with it. But they do not do so because their theory is that therefore we cannot inquire about it. They don't cut us off from an inquiry about very serious FBI conduct by failing to bring that out on the direct examination.
 It has to do with the integrity of the entire body of evidence.
 THE COURT:  The only matter that is relevant in this cross-examination of this witness are matters relating to his testimony on direct examination. Now, if you, if what you allege is relevant that is a part of the defense case if you intend to present the defendant's case.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Then I would like to adopt a witness at this time.
 THE COURT:  No. I am going to limit. I decided yesterday I am limiting the cross-examination to the relevant inquiry into the direct examination and unless you are prepared to tell me that this testimony which you seek to elicit is somehow directed towards showing that he has testified falsely on the stand yesterday afternoon or today it's --
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I will not make that representation to Your Honor because it isn't true.
{1613}
 THE COURT:  Well, then under Rule 611 the rule states specifically, I will read it, "Cross-examination should be limited to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. The Court may, in the exercise of discretion, permit inquiry into additional matters if on direct examination."
 MR. TAIKEFF:  That's what I am asking, Your Honor.
 THE COURT:  I know, and you asked me to do it yesterday
 MR. HULTMAN:  That's what I --
 THE COURT:  You asked me to do it yesterday and I declined.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I understand.
 THE COURT:  And I take the same position today.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I understand. It will require that the witness be held to be a defense witness, continue to be available to the defense.
 THE COURT:  I don't know. You have the responsibility for presenting your defense case whichever way you feel best.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I understand. I am prepared to do it that way, and I understand that Your Honor wants the Government's case to come in unaffected by evidence adduced by the defense as part of its case in chief.
 I just want to make it clear that it is our intention to call this person as a defense witness. I presume he's here {1614} pursuant to a subpoena and I ask the Court not to excuse him and advise him that he is subject to that subpoena, and he will be recalled on as many hours or days notice as he requires.
 In fact, I would specifically request that he be here Tuesday of next week to testify as a defense witness.
 THE COURT:  Well, I will certainly grant that request.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  All right. Then I'll see if I have anything on cross-examination itself and announce what my position is with respect to whether there are any further questions.
 THE COURT:  Very well.
{1615}
 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were had in the courtroom in the presence and hearing of the jury:)
 (Counsel confer.)
 (Counsel confers with Defendant.)
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, the defense has no further cross examination.
 THE COURT:  Very well.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Your Honor, I believe counsel has indicated that maybe Norman wishes to speak with counsel before I would begin any redirect.
 MR. MARING:  Your Honor, I thought that Norman had indicated that he might want to speak with me.
 THE COURT:  Do you want to speak with him?
 THE WITNESS:  Yes.
 THE COURT:  You may step down and confer with Mr. Maring.
 (Witness and his counsel confer.)
 (Witness resumes witness stand.)
 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
By MR. HULTMAN:
 Q  Norman, I have just a few questions that I would like to ask you.
 Counsel asked you some questions about your tribe, and I believe you indicated that there are about 120,000, is that the figure?
{1616}
 A  145.
 Q  How many, 145?
 A  145.
 Q  About 120,000 were the traditionals, is that what the response was?
 A  Yes, about.
 Q  Now, counsel asked you questions back and forth about traditional and AIM; and I want to make sure about members of the American Indian Movement.
 You didn't in any way by your answers want the jury or anybody to conclude that those 120,000 traditional Indians in your tribe are members of the American Indian Movement, did you?
 A  What?
 Q  Counsel asked you a number of questions at the beginning about the American Indian Movement, and about your nation, do you remember those questions?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Now, what I want to make certain, that there is no question in either my mind or the mind of the jury, you weren't saying that the fraction of 120,000 or three-quarters of your nation, because that number approximately are traditionalists, traditional Indians, that those people are members of the American Indian Movement, are they?
 A  No.
 Q  About how many of them would you approximate are members {1617} of the American Indian Movement?
 A  Lots, I guess -- I don't know.
 Q  You were also asked some questions about the event at Farmington, is that right?
 A  Right.
 Q  And you indicated this was an event that -- where is that from, where is Farmington or the place where this event took place from your Reservation?
 A  About two hours' drive, two and a half.
 Q  Two hours' drive?
 A  Two and a half.
 Q  Are there many Reservations in this general area where Farmington is located?
 A  Around here?
 Q  No. I am talking about Farmington now with you, Farmington, New Mexico?
 A  Right.
 Q  All right. Are there many Indian people that live within 200 miles of Farmington?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Would you have any idea of approximately how many?
 A  No.
 Q  All right. Now, how many approximately people were at the meeting in Farmington to which you were asked questions on cross examination, as best you can estimate and recall?
{1618}
 A  I don't know, about -- I don't know.
 Q  Pardon?
 A  I don't know.
 Q  Would you give us just the best estimate that you could?
 A  About 800, I guess, 900.
 Q  And were they from all over the United States?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Including some people like yourself from your area?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  All right. Now, did you see any guns at that meeting?
 A  No, not at -- no.
 Q  Did you see any of the people that you were with with any guns at that particular time?
 A  No.
 Q  Now, as I understand it, that you went from there then to the area that we both have been discussing on direct and cross examination, is that right?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Now, you were then asked questions by counsel that had to do with a condition that you had concerning the goons. Do you remember the questions asked about that?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Do you remember I asked you some questions about that on direct examination -- now, was there ever anything that you saw in all the time that you were at Jumping Bull's and the {1619} places that you went, why you were there, that indicated to you something that would give you fear of something in your mind called "goons"?
 A  Did I see them do anything bad or what?
 Q  Yes.
 A  No.
 Q  So that the only thing that you knew was what -- something that somebody else told you, is that right?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Well, do you normally have any fear from something that somebody else has told you that you haven't witnessed yourself?
 A  Say that again.
 Q  Who was it that told you that there was something -- there were some people named "goons" that were bad people, who was it that told you that?
 A  Well, I read it in the papers, Anna Mae told me about goons, some other people from Pine Ridge, I don't know their names. They were kind of old, and Bob was telling me about goons.
 Q  Did anybody ever tell you at any time, any place, that any FBI Agent was a goon?
 A  No.
 Could you say that again, I mean --
 Q  (Interrupting) I think you understood my question, and you responded to it, did you not, or is there something about it you didn't understand?
{1620}
 A  Explain it. Could you say the question over?
 MR. HULTMAN:  Would the reporter read the question back?
 (Question here read by the reporter was as follows:  "Did anybody ever tell you at any time, any place, that any FBI Agent was a goon?")
 A  No.
 Q  (By Mr. Hultman) There is no question about that, is there?
 A  No.
 Q  Now, counsel asked you about some vehicles, whether you saw any vehicles when you were down in the area that was marked "NB", where you were down in the general area, where the tents were located; and I want to ask just a question or two about that. If you remember, Mr. Taikeff asked you some questions about when you were here in this area here (indicating). "Did you see any automobiles?" Do you remember his questions of you and what your responses were at that time; you gave some answers about automobiles, that you had seen some, I believe, if I remember, coming in?
 A  Back there (indicating).
 Q  You remember that?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Now, you also talked about that you were looking for automobiles also on any roads that might be coming in, is that {1621} right, to the tent area?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  All right. Now, I want to ask you, did you see any other automobiles, either when you were here or when you went over here (indicating), other than the ones that you have talked about both on direct examination and in response to cross-examination?
 A  Yeah, that one up there (indicating).
 Q  All right. So there was another car there, but this is something you just didn't remember when I asked you the questions?
 A  You asked me a question like that?
 Q  I don't --
 A  (Interrupting) You didn't ask me any questions like that.
 Q  Now, by your response to me now, is that you are only responding specifically to what I ask you, is that right?
 A  Right, yeah. If you asked me that --
 THE COURT:  (Interrupting) Are you able to hear him?
 A  Would you say that again?
 Q  (By Mr. Hultman) Well, is what you are saying to me now that unless I or Mr. Taikeff asks you specifically about a specific item, such as when he was talking and asking you about cars -- I don't remember what the exact questions were -- but he asked you something, "Tell him about cars"?
 A  Yes.
 Q  Then unless he asked you specifically something such as, {1622} "Did you see any other car in this area right here (indicating)?" -- that you didn't feel that you needed to answer that question, is that what you are saying to me?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I must interrupt because there is included something which was not my area of inquiry. I asked him if he saw any vehicles go by on those inner roads, not whether he saw any vehicles inside Tent City when he got back; and because of his possible limitation in understanding, it is particularly confusing that way.
 THE COURT:  Would you restate your question?
 MR. HULTMAN:  All right, yes, your Honor.
 Q  (By Mr. Hultman) Then is it your response that there were some other cars in the area, is that a fair response, conclusion on my part?
 A  I don't understand.
 Q  All right. When you were here (indicating) or in the tent area, or going out of the tent area, while you were in this area -- and I am making a wide circle now -- did you see any automobiles other than the two that you have specifically referred to?
 A  Yeah, I saw --
 Q  (Interrupting) As being here and some automobiles that you talked about being over here (indicating), in this general area, on a highway, did you see any other automobile?
{1623}
 A  Other than those two there?
 Q  Yes, other than those two.
 A  Up in there (indicating).
 Q  Was this a car that is represented somewhere here on Exhibit 71 now?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  All right. Would you tell the jury what that car was?
 A  What do you mean?
 Q  Well, would you describe it for us?
 A  Well, it had a radio and it was going.
 Q  Had you seen that car any time earlier in the day?
 A  Yeah, down there (indicating).
 Q  One of these cars down here -- remember which one?
 A  That one right there (indicating).
 Q  Would it be this one or this one (indicating).
 A  That one (indicating).
 Q  This one here (indicating), is that right?
 A  Yes.
 Q  All right. Now --
 A  (Interrupting) It was one of them cars.
 Q  One of the cars. You said something about the radio in response to my question. Would you explain what you meant by that?
 A  I could hear people talking on that radio.
 Q  Where were you when you could hear it?
{1624}
 A  Inside the camp.
 Q  And would you tell the jury approximately how many yards away from that vehicle were you when you heard that radio?
 A  About 20 yards.
 Q  All right. So you did see another car in the general area, is that right?
 A  Yeah, right.
 Q  All right. Do you know how that car got there?
 A  No.
 Q  Did anybody indicate to you or tell you how it got there?
 A  No.
 Q  Now, counsel asked you specifically with reference to the two men that were down at the cars; and I believe your response, as he quoted it correctly on direct examination, you used the word "agent". Is that what you said when I was asking you questions?
 A  Agents, yes.
 Q  Was there any reason why you used that term?
 A  Because now I know who it was.
 Q  All right. It wasn't because I told you or told you to use those words?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, there was no such suggestion meant. Mr. Hultman knows that with the professional respect I have for him, if anyone got that idea, I disavow it. It was not my intention in asking that question.
{1625}
 THE COURT:  Thank you.
 MR. HULTMAN:  All right.
 Q  (By Mr. Hultman) What was it that you remembered -- did you remember whether they were native Americans at the time or that they weren't native Americans when you saw them that day?
 A  Well, you could tell by the color.
 Q  All right. Could you tell anything by their cars?
 A  What do you mean?
 Q  Was there anything about the cars that you remember that would relate anything to you in your mind (indicating), that would draw -- then allow you to draw a conclusion of some kind that they were agents?
 A  No, just cars.
 Q  All right. Now, you didn't have anything in your mind at that particular point -- strike that.
 How was it that at that time -- or let me withdraw it.
 Did you have any idea at that time, Norman, that the three persons and Little Jimmy down in the tent area were in any danger?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Well, explain to the jury, how did you come to the conclusion that two people, one with a gun of some kind at the back of a car, and the other with a pistol down here (indicating) in the area where they were, and with Leonard with the weapon that he had when you got here (indicating), and Dino with the weapon {1626} that he had and the others with the weapons that they had here, here (indicating), that you have already talked about, how did you conclude at that time that the two women and Jimmy Zimmerman were in any danger from the two men, one with the rifle and one with the pistol?
{1627}
 A  Well, I saw those cars. Me and Jim saw them coming around this way (indicating).
 Q  Well, now that's at a later time. You're down here --
 A  Yeah.
 Q  -- to this point here (indicating). I'm not talking about that, understand?
 A  Yeah.
 Q  I'm talking about when you first get here. You'd heard firing in this area, right?
 A  Right.
 Q  And that's the only firing that you heard to that time, right?
 A  Right.
 Q  Now how is it -- I want to ask you again, you hadn't seen any cars any other places coming and going at this time, right?
 A  Right.
 Q  What is it with you knowing right then and there when you see two men down here, Leonard here with the kind of weapon that he had doing the shooting that you saw him doing, Dino with the kind of weapon that he had, and was there anybody else here in this period that you saw here other than those two?
 A  No.
 Q  You knew Bob was somewhere in here?
{1628}
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And you don't know where he was and he had a weapon. There was Joe Stuntz with you up here and you and two more here, all with weapons (indicating). How is it that you conclude in your mind at that time that the women and children not only in the tent area but didn't you indicate something for them to get out of there or something before you left?
 A  Well, they already knew where to go.
 Q  They already knew where to go. To leave, is that right?
 A  Yeah. To leave, because what else would you do when you heard shots?
 Q  Now I'm asking you how is it that you then concluded with that circumstance, knowing what you say and what you observed and that the three women or girls and little Jimmy are leaving, down in the bottom of the hollow here, two men, one with a pistol and one with his long gun that they are going to endanger the girls and little Jimmy?
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Objection to the form of the question because the testimony was never that those two men were going to endanger the women and child and that's how the question was phrased. I think it's unfairly phrased.
 THE COURT:  Objection sustained.
 Q  (By Mr. Hultman) Just tell me what it was in your mind at that time knowing what it was that you were seeing that resulted in your statement to Counsel and restatement now by {1629} counsel that you had fear for the women and children?
 A  Well, they were shooting at me, they were shooting at all of us.
 Q  Norman, I just have one more question. Have all of your responses that you have given been on the sacred pipe?
 A  Right.
 Q  And in every instance as far as the testimony you have given here today?
 A  Right.
 MR. HULTMAN:  I have no further questions.
 A  Seems like I'm on trial.
 THE COURT:  The Court is in recess until 3:30.
 (Recess taken.)
 MR. TAIKEFF:  May we have a word with the Court before the jury comes in, Your Honor.
 THE COURT:  Yes, you may.
MR. MARING:  May I approach the bench?
 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the bench:)
 MR. MARING:  Your Honor, I think Mr. Brown will be through testifying for the day fairly shortly and, as I understand it, he's going to be called next week as a witness for the defense. I would ask that he be released from the subpoena to the extent that he can travel outside the district of North Dakota for the period until he's recalled.
{1630}
 THE CLERK:  Mr. Taikeff.
 THE COURT:  It will be necessary for you to hear this request.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I thought that Mr. Maring and I both wanted to speak to Your Honor about the same thing.
 MR. MARING:  That was the matter I was referring to. As I was saying, I think Mr. Brown will be finished with his testimony fairly soon this afternoon and it's my understanding now that he will be called back as a witness next week at some point in time and called as a defense witness.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Correct.
 MR. WARING:  I'm requesting of the Court that he be released from the Subpoena to the extent that he can travel outside of the district of North Dakota until he is recalled to testify.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I would not characterize that as being released from the subpoena.
 THE COURT:  I wouldn't either.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  But there is certainly no necessity of him staying within the jurisdiction of the district.
 THE COURT:  He'll remain under Subpoena but he will be permitted to travel outside of the district so long as he keeps somebody informed as to where he can be reached.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I would assume the best person for that would be his counsel. We would like not to have any direct {1631} contact with them except in the presence of his counsel.
 THE COURT:  He will then be permitted to travel wherever he wants to so long as he keeps you informed and so that he can be reached.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Instead of asking him to return on a specific day --
 THE COURT:  Excuse me. Keeps you informed as to where he's at and where he can be, as to where he's going and where he can be reached.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I think it would be fairest if we do not specifically request that he return on next Tuesday but make the request through his counsel at least one day in advance, then he won't have to come here and wait out our need to put him on the stand, because he apparently is not especially happy about being away from home and we certainly want to accommodate him in that regard.
 THE COURT:  His home is in Arizona.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I assume he's going back home, which raises the question of his transportation.
 MR. MARING:  It's my understanding from the discussions with the government that they will provide transportation for him either to South Dakota where his wife is presently staying and if he would like to go also to Arizona for the weekend.
 Now in regard to him contacting me or me being in {1632} contact with him, my only problem might be that I don't know if the place where he is going, if they have telephone facilities. I would have to check that out with him. Otherwise I perhaps would nave no way of being in touch with him. But it was my understanding that Mr. Mike Ness, I believe his name is, is he an FBI agent?
 MR. HULTMAN:  He's a Navajo agent.
 MR. MARING:  That he would be accompanying him to wherever Mr. Brown does go and he would be, that we'd be able to contact through the government Mr. Brown when he is supposed to be returned and Mr. Ness to make arrangements for him to return at that time.
 MR. HULTMAN:  If that matter --
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I wonder why the FBI accompanies where he goes. They brought him here under a subpoena without an arrest warrant from a great distance and I don't quite understand the escort that he has.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Counsel, all I'm saying is this is the responsibility of his lawyer and he to determine, not any of the rest of us. I certainly have made no suggestions of any kind, of this kind. I think there is a concern by you that you want him back here.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  That's my only concern.
 MR. HULTMAN:  Let me say to you, I think you may well have reasons to have very grave concerns concerning whether {1633} he would be back unless there is some means of communication of some kind.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I won't press the issue.
 MR. HULTMAN:  His counsel and the witness I think are the proper people to decide whatever that is.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I understand he's indigent and I assume appropriate arrangements would be made for him to be transported or given funds for transportation and if an agent is the one who is going to be the intermediary, then we'll surely give adequate notice of our desire to put him on the stand. There's no question we will put him on the stand.
 MR. LOWE:  I would like to have the record reflect the fact, are you saying that an FBI agent is going to be escorting him from the time he leaves here until the time he comes back?
 MR. HULTMAN:  I'm saying that's the matter for he and his counsel to decide, whatever they decide to do.
 What I am saying is I would make whatever it is Counsel wishes in terms of availability, what he might or might not want through his Counsel, that's all I'm saying, John, because otherwise I'm saying to you here right now, I think Elliot has indicated very clearly he wants him here. What I'm saying is that I think if they aren't allowed to at least, his Counsel and he, I think they have a right to do it {1634} any way. I think if not, you're under some very grave risks that somebody is not going to be here.
 MR. LOWE:  I want to make a matter of record, number one, I have no doubt this witness will come back. I'm convinced from what he said and the way he said it he's coming back here. Number two, he's going to be our witness and I think if we were to suggest that a person who is associated with the defense should be able to accompany him and escort the government witness during the time before he testifies, I think the government would go through the roof. I think to the extent that an FBI agent represents intimidation for some native Americans, and I don't mean this young man, but I want to object to the procedure that FBI agents have no business accompanying defense witnesses and that's what this young man will be when he's released from the testimony today. I want to assert, we do have a standing objection to intimidation type circumstances. I'm not saying it's going to intimidate this witness or not. I don't even know whether Mr. Maring wants this to take place. I don't know whether he'd have any options in it. I'd like to ask on the record if Mr. Maring feels he has no option in this regard or whether he has been told that an agent --
 MR. HULTMAN:  John, let me make it clear on the record that it is for this man, the lawyer, and his client to decide, and I'm stating it on the record and I'm not going anywhere {1635} beyond it.
 MR. LOWE:  Is that your understanding, Mr. Maring?
 MR. MARING:  No one has told me that that is the situation that must take place. All I want to make sure, this young man has the finances and will be able to make arrangements so he can travel to the point where he wants to go so he can see the family until he's called as a witness again. If those arrangements can be made where he can get the money and go on his own --
 MR. LOWE:  He doesn't need to have the FBI agent accompany him.
 MR. MARING:  We don't need to have the FBI agent.
 MR. LOWE:  That's a somewhat misleading atmosphere.
 THE COURT:  It's resolved.
 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were had in the courtroom without the hearing and presence of the jury:)
 THE COURT:  Counsel ready to have the jury brought in?
 MR. TAIKEFF Yes, Your Honor.
 (Whereupon, the following proceedings were had in the courtroom in the hearing and presence of the jury:)
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Am I to presume Mr. Hultman is completed?
 MR. HULTMAN:  Yes.
 MR. TAIKEFF May I proceed, Your Honor?
 THE COURT:  You may.
{1636}
 RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. TAIKEFF:
 Q  Norman, I think there are only two things I want to ask you questions about that were just brought up before the recess by Mr. Hultman.
 None of the people at the Farmington meeting carried guns at the meeting, is that right?
 A  I didn't see any; no.
 Q  Isn't it a fact that everyone who came there had to check guns if they had them at the front gate?
 A  Yeah. Front security.
 Q  And people were assigned to security to make sure all guns, alcohol and drugs, if carried, were turned in at the front door, isn't that correct?
 A  Right.
 Q  Now the other point I want to touch base with you on is Mr. Hultman's questions about your worry about goons.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  Now he asked you whether you were worried because of what people told you.
 A  Yeah.
 Q  And I think you also indicated that you were worried because of things which you read.
 A  Right.
 Q  Now the people who told you these things about goons lived where?
{1637}
 A  Pine Ridge Reservation.
 Q  And how many different people told you things about goons?
 A  Four or five people.
 Q  And did they tell you about their own personal experiences?
 A  Yeah. One did.
 Q  What did that person tell you?
 MR. HULTMAN:  I object now, Your Honor. This is calling clearly for hearsay.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I'm not offering it for the truth of the content but to show what he heard as a basis for his own concern.
 THE COURT:  He may answer.
 A  Well, told me that the reason why he got shot at was because he was an AIM supporter.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Now I think also in response to Mr. Hultman's question or questions you said that you were concerned about the possibility of goons interfering with you because of things which Anna Mae told you?
 A  Yeah.
 MR. HULTMAN:  I object to this, Your Honor. It's clearly going beyond the scope of recross-examination. That response was made on cross-examination by Counsel and there was no testimony elicited by me in any way in that {1638} particular, and that's clearly beyond and also, Your Honor, that it's irrelevant.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Your Honor, I believe that Mr. Hultman is factually mistaken. In cross-examination I asked whether Anna Mae was ever at the Jumping Bull community and asked him nothing else on the subject. It was on redirect examination when Mr. Hultman was exploring the basis or lack of it of the witness' concern for goons that he elicited from the witness that Anna Mae told him certain things about goons which concerned him.
 MR. HULTMAN:  If that's correct, Counsel, I would withdraw my objection. I don't know it was not my understanding but I will assume that is correct. I take Counsel's word, Your Honor.
 THE COURT:  Objection being withdrawn, you may proceed.
 MR. HULTMAN:  For that limited purpose.
 MR. TAIKEFF:  Yes.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Would you tell us what she told you about goons.
 A  You mean after June 26?
 Q  No. Before June 26.
 A  Well, told me, you know, "Watch out for goons," you know, "they're dangerous." That's all. Told me to watch out for --
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I have no further questions.
 Have you finished your answer?
{1639}
 THE WITNESS:  Yeah.
 MR. HULTMAN:  I have no questions.
{1640}
 MR. TAIKEFF:  I have no further questions.
 Q  (By Mr. Taikeff) Have you finished your answer?
 A  Yeah.
 MR. HULTMAN:  I have no questions, Norman. Thank you.
 THE COURT:  Mr. Brown, you may step down and you are just a minute. You are released from any further testimony today, or maybe in the next few days, but counsel have informed me that you will be called back so you do remain under subpoena. And you should confer with your lawyer who has been appointed to represent you, Mr. Maring, with reference to when you will have to come back and any limitations on your travel. You are not, you are not being limited, I mean under subpoena. You're not being limited under subpoena. You must understand that you will have to come back when you are notified. You understand that?
 THE WITNESS:  Yeah.
 THE COURT:  And Mr. Maring will explain it to you.
 Very well. You may step down.

{For those of you not familiar with trial procedure and rules, a cross examination of a witness introduced by opposing counsel as "their" witness (this individual was treated as a "hostile witness" by gov attorneys) cannot go beyond what was introduced in the direct questioning.  The matters able to be brought up on cross can only be directed toward that which the prosecution had already, even obliquely referenced in their examination.
This witness was able to exchange a hug with Leonard Peltier....
H e states what Tent city encampment was about, and as importantly what it was not....}