UPDATE: JANUARY 2, 2003

UPDATE JANUARY 3, 2003

{NOTE: We have been in contact with the author of the following letters and are persuaded to both the content and facts presented within the following documents.}

The following reproduced letter was written to The Honorable Donald B. Stenberg, Office of the Attorney General at 2115 State Capitol; Lincoln, Nebraska 68509 on December 23, 2002.
 
 

Dear General Stenberg,

I graduated from Yale College in 2000 and matriculated at Northwestern University School of Law last fall. I co-authored the first study of the number of women in National Institutes of Health cardiac trials, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on August 17, 2000. I am currently taking time off to found a charity to combat terrorism, Biometrics Council of which I am President, and I plan to resume my legal studies next month. The statements that follow do not reflect the views of my colleagues.

I am enclosing evidence relating to the alleged rape of Jancita Eagle Deer by William Janklow on January 13, 1967 for which he was disbarred in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court on October 31, 1974 by Judge Mario Gonzalez. A summary of the evidence is as follows:
 

Ms. Jancita Eagle Deer Sheldahl was struck by an oncoming car near Aurora, Nebraska while outside of a vehicle on April 4, 1975 and died. This was hundreds of miles away from where she lived, and only a few months after she had testified in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court that she was raped at gunpoint by William Janklow. At the time, Mr. Janklow was undergoing Senate confirmation as a Board Member for Legal Services Corporation, and in this context, the allegations were raised. In the absence of her testimony, the Senate committee was impaired, which led to claims of insufficient evidence - a fact that has been much touted by Janklow as the imprimatur of his innocence. No analysis was done on the admissibility of her prior in-court testimony - whether it bore adequate indicia of reliability since it was not subject to cross-examination. Mr. Janklow well-knows that absolution does not come at the hand of a Senate inquiry, but by a jury of his peers, but that requires the Attorney General of South Dakota to care about the sanctity of a Lakota child.

In his disbarment order of October 31, 1974, Judge Gonzalez writes that Ms. Jancita Eagle Deer Sheldahl testified under obvious emotional difficulty that she had been raped by William Janklow, and that he threatened her life with a gun. Portions of her testimony were corroborated by her high school guidance counselor (Kaye Lord) (1), her foster parents, a rape examination, and a BIA investigator.

Eric Sheldahl, the divorced husband of Jancita Eagle Deer Sheldahl, executed an affidavit in connection with the probate hearing for her estate. The affidavit is referenced in a letter from United States Department of Interior Administrative Law Judge Frederick W. Lambrecht to an administrator of the Wagner Service Unit of the Indian Health Service on August 30, 1976 and on January 21, 1977. According to Judge Lambrecht, the affidavit states that Jancita Eagle Deer was raped on January 13, 1967.

In a polygraph, Ms. Eagle Deer was too emotional to be tested when she was asked if she was raped by William Janklow and if he threatened to kill her.

In an affidavit executed in the context of Janklow v. Viking Press, Dr. Kent Bergh, formerly of Indian Health Service, states that he viewed the medical record of Jancita Eagle Deer and that it identified Janklow as the alleged assailant. I spoke with Dr. Bergh independently on December 22, 2002, who confirmed his prior affidavit.

A subpoena was granted by Judge Gonzalez in connection with the disbarment hearing of Janklow for the BIA investigative record of the rape. The BIA Aberdeen Area Director, Harley Zephier, directed BIA Officer Norman Bear not to honor the subpoena on the grounds of confidentiality and privilege in a telegram dated October 30, 1974, 4:15 pm.

 

I have additional recently executed affidavits, which are stored in a bank vault and with friends of mine in the media and legal academy, and will be turned over to your office, provided guarantees can be made by you for the witnesses' safety.

I spoke with Dr. Donald J. Larson, the general practitioner, who examined Ms. Eagle Deer's body after she was hit by a car. He recalled that she had multiple fractures, but did not think that an autopsy had been performed; the procedures for which required removing the body to Lincoln. While the State Patrol might not have known of the extent of the rape allegations and the respective proceedings, the immediate circumstances of her death should have been enough to arouse suspicion and conduct an autopsy. Where was her car? How did she get hundreds of miles away from home in the dead of night? Was she drugged, beaten, thrown in front of the car prior to impact? When I ask myself if Ms. Eagle Deer had been a wealthy young woman of a different race found in the dead of night on a stark, desolate Nebraska highway would the State Patrol have deprived themselves of the opinion of a board certified forensic pathologist, the answer haunts me.

In 1918, Justice Whiting, writing for the Supreme Court of South Dakota, held: "The welfare of society requires that the law recognize the uncorroborated testimony of a ravished woman as sufficient to warrant a conviction for the crime of rape or of assault with intent to commit rape." (State v. Schultz, 41 S.D. 184; 169 N.W. 547).

The fact that Ms. Eagle Deer had offered such testimony in the context of a tribal disbarment proceeding, and that portions of it were corroborated by an examination hours after the incident at the Rosebud Service Unit of Indian Health Service; the guidance counselor of the Rosebud Boarding School; the foster parents of the alleged victim, and a rape investigation conducted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs at which the alleged perpetrator was present and made threats, leads me to believe that we are well-beyond the islet of uncorroborated testimony of a ravished woman. I believe it is plain that the prospect of her testifying before the United States Senate, or a federal or state court, would have created a motive for her murder.

We are all familiar with the long and odious history of the treatment of Native Americans, which unfortunately extends into the realm of jurisprudence. Possess it merely - that it should come to this. There is no statute of limitations for forcible rape in the state of South Dakota. As James M. Landis wrote, "A statute rarely stands alone. Back of Minerva was the brain of Jove, and behind Venus the spume of the ocean."(2)The fact that charges were not brought for the rape itself is a matter for which the Attorney General of South Dakota will be compelled to answer - the Attorney General of South Dakota elected five days after the disbarment, of course, was William Janklow.

Accordingly, I am suggesting that an investigation into Jancita Eagle Deer's death commence forthwith by the Attorney General of Nebraska.

Thank you.
 
 

Very Truly Yours,
 
 

David J. Harris
 
 

1) In State v. Peterson, 1996 SD 140, 557 NW 2d 389, the Court held: "Evidence available to the court at the motion hearing supported court's finding that child's out-of-court statements were sufficiently reliable where social worker testified testified to what child told her in their two interviews." The firmly-rooted hearsay exception of excited utterance also would apply to statements Ms. Eagle Deer offered to all of these individuals since they came in the immediate minutes following her alleged rape and abduction. See also Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion in White v. Illinois, 502 U.S. at 356, 112 S. Ct. at 742-43: "A statement that has been offered in a moment of excitement--without the opportunity to reflect on the consequences of one's exclamation-may justifiably carry more weight with a trier of fact than a similar statement offered in the relative calm of the courtroom."

2) James M. Landis, Dean of Harvard Law School, in "A Note on 'Statutory Interpretation,' " 43 Harvard Law Review 886, 891 (1930).
 
 

Source Documents:

(Please print for optimal viewing)
 

U.S. Department of Interior Judge Frederick Lambrecht's 8/30/1976 letter to Administrator of Wagner Service Health Service citing affidavit from Eric Sheldahl mentioning rape of Jancita Eagle Deer on January 13, 1967

Judge Lambrecht's 1/21/1977 letter to Indian Health Service - Second Request

Judge Mario Gonzalez's Disbarment Order of William Janklow from practicing law in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court

Page One of Disbarment Opinion

Page Two of Disbarment Opinion

Page Three of Disbarment Opinion

Page Four of Disbarment Opinion

Page Five of Disbarment Opinion

Fort Thompson Agency Tribal Chairman Robert Philbrick's Affidavit alleging Indecent Exposure, Public Inebriation, and Driving under the Influence, and Assaulting an Officer by William Janklow - Page One

Fort Thompson Agency Tribal Chairman Robert Philbrick's Affidavit alleging Indecent Exposure, Public Inebriation, and Driving under the Influence, and Assaulting an Officer by William Janklow - Page Two

Dr. Kent Bergh Affidavit in which he swears he reviewed the medical chart of Jancita Eagle Deer, which contained an examination of her immediately following the rape, and identified Janklow as the assailant

Jancita Eagle Deer Polygraph regarding alleged rape by Janklow and if he threatened to kill her

Letter from Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Aberdeen Area Director Harley Zephier to BIA Rosebud Officer

Judge Gonzales Finding of Probable Cause of Assault with intent to commit rape by William Janklow and Carnal Knowledge of a Child under the Age of 16 years -- Warrant to Apprehend

Judge Bogue's Writ of Habeas Corpus -- releasing Norman Bear from jail for his refusal to comply with Judge Gonzalez's subpoena

UPDATE
The following reproduced letter was written to The Honorable John D. Ashcroft Attorney General of the United States Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530 on January 2, 2003.
 
 

Dear General Ashcroft,

I graduated from Yale College in 2000 and matriculated at Northwestern University School of Law last fall. I co-authored the first study of the number of women in National Institutes of Health cardiac trials, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on August 17, 2000. I am founding a charity to combat terrorism, Biometrics Council of which I am President, and I am transferring to Catholic University of America School of Law to be nearer to my efforts. The statements that follow do not reflect the views of my colleagues.

I am enclosing evidence relating to the alleged rape of Jancita Eagle Deer by William Janklow on January 13, 1967 within the boundaries of the Rosebud Reservation for which he was disbarred in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court on October 31, 1974 by Judge Mario Gonzalez. A summary of the evidence is as follows:
 

Ms. Jancita Eagle Deer Sheldahl was struck by an oncoming car near Aurora, Nebraska while outside of a vehicle on April 4, 1975 and died. This was hundreds of miles away from where she lived, and only a few months after she had testified in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court that she was raped at gunpoint by William Janklow. At the time, Mr. Janklow was undergoing Senate confirmation as a Board Member for Legal Services Corporation, and in this context, the allegations were raised. In the absence of her testimony, the Senate committee was impaired, which led to claims of insufficient evidence - a fact that has been much touted by Janklow as the imprimatur of his innocence. No analysis was done on the admissibility of her prior in-court testimony - whether it bore adequate indicia of reliability since it was not subject to cross-examination. Mr. Janklow well-knows that absolution does not come at the hand of a Senate inquiry, but by a jury of his peers, but that requires a prosecutor to care about the sanctity of a Lakota child.

In his disbarment order of October 31, 1974, Judge Gonzalez writes that Ms. Jancita Eagle Deer Sheldahl testified under obvious emotional difficulty that she had been raped by William Janklow, and that he threatened her life with a gun. Portions of her testimony were corroborated by her high school guidance counselor (Kaye Lord) (1), her foster parents, a rape examination, and a BIA investigator.

Eric Sheldahl, the divorced husband of Jancita Eagle Deer Sheldahl, executed an affidavit in connection with the probate hearing for her estate. The affidavit is referenced in a letter from United States Department of Interior Administrative Law Judge Frederick W. Lambrecht to an administrator of the Wagner Service Unit of the Indian Health Service on August 30, 1976 and on January 21, 1977. According to Judge Lambrecht, the affidavit states that Jancita Eagle Deer was raped on January 13, 1967.

In a polygraph, Ms. Eagle Deer was too emotional to be tested when she was asked if she was raped by William Janklow and if he threatened to kill her.

In an affidavit executed in the context of Janklow v. Viking Press, Dr. Kent Bergh, formerly of Indian Health Service, states that he viewed the medical record of Jancita Eagle Deer and that it identified Janklow as the alleged assailant. I spoke with Dr. Bergh independently on December 22, 2002, who confirmed his prior affidavit.

A subpoena was granted by Judge Gonzalez in connection with the disbarment hearing of Janklow for the BIA investigative record of the rape. The BIA Aberdeen Area Director, Harley Zephier, directed BIA Officer Norman Bear not to honor the subpoena on the grounds of confidentiality and privilege in a telegram dated October 30, 1974, 4:15 pm.

I have additional recently executed affidavits, which are stored in a bank vault and with friends of mine in the media and legal academy, and will be turned over to your office, provided guarantees can be made by you for the witnesses' safety.

In her boarding school admission papers, Mr. Janklow signs as Ms. Eagle Deer's guardian, and in a letter dated September 22, 1983, Mr. Janklow, writing on his Gubernatorial stationary, instructs Mr. Larry Parker of the Rosebud Boarding School to "send [Mr. Janklow] copies of any and all records relating to the residence of Jancita Eagle Deer in the boarding school during the period from 1966-1969 which reflect actions taken by me as her guardian, including any admission forms."

Depending on the nature of this guardianship, it may constitute consanguinity and implicate the South Dakota incest statute in a prosecution, which would apply due to the Assimilative Crimes Act (See United States v. Renville, 779 F.2d 430) in addition to federal law. (2) (3)

In 1918, Justice Whiting, writing for the Supreme Court of South Dakota, held: "The welfare of society requires that the law recognize the uncorroborated testimony of a ravished woman as sufficient to warrant a conviction for the crime of rape or of assault with intent to commit rape." (State v. Schultz, 41 S.D. 184; 169 N.W. 547). The standard for incest is similar, as is rape at federal law.

The fact that Ms. Eagle Deer had offered such testimony in the context of a tribal disbarment proceeding, and that portions of it were corroborated by an examination hours after the incident at the Rosebud Service Unit of Indian Health Service; the guidance counselor of the Rosebud Boarding School; the foster parents of the alleged victim, and a rape investigation conducted by the Bureau of Indian Affairs at which the alleged perpetrator was present and made threats, leads me to believe that we are well-beyond the islet of uncorroborated testimony of a ravished woman.

The BIA's decision not to comply with the Tribal Court subpoena for the documents relating to the BIA investigation of the alleged rape of Jancita Eagle Deer is of much interest. After Officer Norman Bear did not produce the documents for the Tribal Court, Judge Gonzalez found him in contempt of court. The United States Attorney for South Dakota successfully petitioned the United States District Court for South Dakota for a writ of habeas corpus for BIA Officer Bear. Given the petition, the United States Attorney's office had a great familiarity with the evidence of the alleged rape. In what alternate universe could that office not have committed obstruction of justice due to its failure to prosecute Mr. Janklow for the alleged rape of Jancita Eagle Deer?

I wrote the Attorney General of Nebraska on December 23, 2002, conveying the same evidence and writing, in part: "I spoke with Dr. Donald J. Larson, the general practitioner, who examined Ms. Eagle Deer's body after she was hit by a car. He recalled that she had multiple fractures, but did not think that an autopsy had been performed; the procedures for which required removing the body to Lincoln. While the State Patrol might not have known of the extent of the rape allegations and the respective proceedings, the immediate circumstances of her death should have been enough to arouse suspicion and conduct an autopsy. Where was her car? How did she get hundreds of miles away from home in the dead of night? Was she drugged, beaten, thrown in front of the car prior to impact? When I ask myself if Ms. Eagle Deer had been a wealthy young woman of a different race found in the dead of night on a stark, desolate Nebraska highway would the State Patrol have deprived themselves of the opinion of a board certified forensic pathologist, the answer haunts me."

We are all familiar with the long and odious history of the treatment of Native Americans, which unfortunately extends into the realm of jurisprudence. Possess it merely - that it should come to this. As James M. Landis wrote, "A statute rarely stands alone. Back of Minerva was the brain of Jove, and behind Venus the spume of the ocean." (4)

Accordingly, I am suggesting that the Attorney General of the United States prosecute Mr. Janklow for the crime of assault with intent to commit rape and carnal knowledge of a female under the age of sixteen years and all crimes concordant.

Thank you. Mitakuye Oyasin.

Very Truly Yours,
 
 

David J. Harris
 
 

1) In State v. Peterson, 1996 SD 140, 557 NW 2d 389, the Court held: "Evidence available to the court at the motion hearing supported court's finding that child's out-of-court statements were sufficiently reliable where social worker testified testified to what child told her in their two interviews." The firmly-rooted hearsay exception of excited utterance also would apply to statements Ms. Eagle Deer offered to all of these individuals since they came in the immediate minutes following her alleged rape and abduction. See also Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion in White v. Illinois, 502 U.S. at 356, 112 S. Ct. at 742-43: "A statement that has been offered in a moment of excitement--without the opportunity to reflect on the consequences of one's exclamation-may justifiably carry more weight with a trier of fact than a similar statement offered in the relative calm of the courtroom."

2) In Williams v. United States 327 U.S. 711, the Supreme Court of the United States held: "After a cession of jurisdiction by the State and after being memorialized to do so by the legislature of South Dakota, Congress, in 1903, granted jurisdiction specifically to the courts of the United States for the District of South Dakota over actions charging any person with certain major crimes committed within any Indian reservation in that State. 32 Stat. 793; 35 Stat. 1151; 36 Stat. 1167; 18 U. S. C. § 549." (emphasis added) However, in United States v. Lawrence 51 F.3d 150, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held: "Under the Indian Country Crimes Act, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1152, federal courts do not have jurisdiction over offenses committed within Indian country unless either the defendant or the alleged victim is Indian. See Duro v. Reina, 495 U.S. 676, 680 n.1, 109 L. Ed. 2d 693, 110 S. Ct. 2053 (1990); United States v. McBratney, 104 U.S. 621, 624, 26 L. Ed. 869 (1882)."

3) In Renville, the Indian Major Crimes Act was involved; since the alleged perpetrator is non-Indian, the Indian Country Crimes Act, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1152 would apply.

4) James M. Landis, Dean of Harvard Law School, in "A Note on 'Statutory Interpretation,' " 43 Harvard Law Review 886, 891 (1930).

Jancita Eagle Deer Rosebud Boarding School Admission Papers - Page 1
Jancita Eagle Deer Rosebud Boarding School Admission Papers - Page 2

Letter from Janklow to BIA written on Gubernatorial stationary in which he characterizes himself as Jancita's guardian and requests her school records

from David J Harris

The Attorney General of Nebraska refuses to investigate based on the fact that a Senate Committee concluded the allegations were unfounded. Harris writes Senator Kennedy and former Vice President Mondale, requesting that they review evidence that has come to light since that Mr. Janklow's confirmation to serve on the Board of Legal Services Corporation.

The letter from the Attorney General of Nebraska  is available at http://www.jancitaeagledeer.com

The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy
United States Senate
317 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

VIA FACSIMILE 202.224.2417

Dear Senator Kennedy,

I graduated from Yale College in 2000 and matriculated at Northwestern University School of Law last fall.  I co-authored the first study of the number of women in National Institutes of Health cardiac trials, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on August 17, 2000.  I am founding a charity to combat terrorism, Biometrics Council of which I am President, and I am transferring to Catholic University of America School of Law to be nearer to my efforts.  The statements that follow do not reflect the views of my colleagues.

On June 12, 1975, the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources approved the nomination of William Janklow to serve on the Board of Legal Services Corporation for a vote before the full Senate.

I was informed by former United States Senator James Abourezk that the alleged rape of Jancita Eagle Deer by William Janklow was raised in the context of his Senate confirmation.  Mr. Janklow filed a defamation lawsuit against Newsweek for their reporting the rape allegation, which was dismissed. In the opinion by the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, the Court held:

“Rape is one of society's most reprehensive crimes. The claim of rape referred to by Newsweek was made over fifteen years earlier, and was investigated at that time by federal law enforcement officials who found insufficient evidence to prosecute. It was investigated again in 1975 by the F.B.I., the White House, and the Senate Judiciary Committee when Janklow, then the Republican Attorney General of South Dakota, was nominated for a position on the board of the Legal Services Corporation. The Senate Judiciary Committee was composed of, among others, Senators Ted Kennedy, Walter Mondale and Allen Cranston, none of whom have [sic] any reputation for whitewashing misdeeds of Republican officeholders. The F.B.I., the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee determined that the rape claim was unfounded and without any factual basis…” (Janklow v. Newsweek, March 29, 1984).

 I have written Attorney General Ashcroft regarding the failure of the United States Attorney for the District of South Dakota to prosecute Mr. Janklow for the alleged rape of Jancita Eagle Deer. I believe that failure was tantamount to obstruction of justice.  I encourage you to review that letter, as well as a Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court disbarment order of William Janklow dated October 31, 1974 in which Ms. Eagle Deer testified that she was raped at gunpoint by Mr. Janklow. Additional evidence includes an affidavit executed by Dr. Kent Bergh, formerly of the Indian Health Service, who also testified in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court that he had reviewed the medical chart of Ms. Eagle Deer, which contained an examination that had findings consistent with a rape and identified Mr. Janklow as the alleged assailant.  Ms. Eagle Deer’s former husband, Eric Sheldahl, also executed an affidavit in the context of her probate hearing in which he swore his former wife had been raped on January 13, 1967.  At least one federal employee testified in the Tribal Court that a file relating to the alleged rape of Jancita Eagle Deer was removed from the premises of the Bureau of Indian Affairs without authorization and could not be subsequently located.
 

These documents are available in their entirety at http://www.jancitaeagledeer.com

I would be grateful for your review of this evidence, much of which became available subsequent to the Senate confirmation of William Janklow.  It seems a slight-of-hand for Mr. Janklow to rely on the decision of Senators who were at minimum bereft of the alleged victim’s testimony before that body.. Her death on April 4, 1975 came a few months after she had testified in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court that she was raped at gunpoint by William Janklow.

In a letter dated December 31, 2002, the Attorney General of Nebraska refused my request for an investigation into Ms. Eagle Deer’s death, and has declined my invitation to review recently-executed affidavits due to the fact that “Senators Ted Kennedy, Walter Mondale and Allen Cranston, none of whom have [sic] any reputation for whitewashing misdeeds of Republican officeholders” apparently approved Mr. Janklow for a vote before the full Senate.  I am suggesting that you offer a statement that new evidence has been presented, and without forming an opinion as to the validity of the accusations, in light of the evidence, your prior vote concerning Mr. Janklow is not a justification for failing to proceed with criminal inquiries.

 
Thank you very much.

Sincerely yours,

David J. Harris