Check out this video and story. Could've been handled better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsSfiqxpvDITo Set the Record Straight
Fremont Michigan Grapevine | 8/17/03 | 2tellthetruth
Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 1:44:58 AM by 2tellthetruth
I believe that the police authorities in Michigan murdered Scott Woodring. Read the following - demand evidence that supports the police inuendos and accusations. Demand evidence that these testimonies indicating Scott's innocence are false. Then weigh the evidence on both sides, and YOU DECIDE.
There has been no evidence offered or even alleged that Scott Allen Woodring was ever guilty of anything but hurting the feelings of two fifteen year old girls who witnesses say were panhandling Scott - except the recanted story of only one of the two girls involved. The witness who was pumping gas at the time said that the girls were "hanging out", and that they called Scott over to them. He did not speak to them until they called out to him. There was a brief exchange of words, and then Scott left. (Locals say that the witness heard the girls ask him for money, and heard him tell them to get a job.)
Scott was co-operative with local police when questioned, and gave a written statement regarding what occurred between him and these two girls. The statement says that the girls asked him for money, and that he told them that he had none to give them, and only had 25 cents of his own (which is likely the truth - as he was never known to carry any money, and he was delivering newspapers to the gas station that would give Scott a gross income of $2.40 - but only if they all sold. Personally, I wouldn't leave my yard for $2.40). He states that he told them to get a job and do something more possitive than loitering at gas stations.
People who knew him say that it was in Scott's character to have preached morality to the girls, and perhaps even to use some biblical words that may have hurt their feelings, such as whore or jezabelle. It was not in his character to have offered them $50 for "a couple hours of fun" - as only one of the two girls contends that he did. The other girl would not participate in the complaint against Scott - so how strong was this she said he said complaint? Those that knew him say that his thought process was far too serious to even consider that fun was a goal.
Even if Scott said precisely what this girl contends he said - Are these words enough to warrant an armed attack against the home of a lifelong resident that was shared with his wife? This was not a revolutionary wacko drifter - as the puppet media portrayed him. He was a principalled citizen who walked his talk (lived as he preached).
There is no evidence that he even fired a shot when the troopers stormed his home in the dark - without night vision goggles, and firing indiscrimantly. There IS strong evidence that Scott was not even in physical proximity to the fire fight which resulted in the accidental death of one of the storm troopers - apparently by "friendly fire".
First of all, the police had no reason to attack with such stunning violence. Scott was not accused of committing a violent crime; had no history of violence; was a lifelong member of the community; had numerous published writings on the decay of morality; was known as somewhat of a religious "nut" (the police preferred to say "fanatic"); AND the local police knew that he was a Constitutional Scholar that believed that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are the righteous "Law of the Land". This well known, highly principled character, clearly displayed a personality that was likely to defend his wife and his home against any unconstitutional invasion. (The vast majority of citizens in this area believe the same way. Which apparently p*sses off a segment of warped and power mongering police officers in the area.) These small town police in a lightly populated rural area also knew that Scott rode his bicycle into town several times a week. They could easily have arrested him without incident the next time he left home on his bike. They chose the more dangerous confrontation with a very predictable outcome.
Evidence: 1) Witnesses verify that Scott was not on the main or upper floor of his home when the troopers converged from several directions in the dark - without night vision goggles - and shot each other. Scott was sealed in his tornado shelter (called an "underground bunker" by the gendarme's to sway opinion against him). He was talking on the ham radio that is installed there (not portable) telling the witness "Do you hear that? They broke in and they're shooting the house up! Can you hear that?" It is not possible for Scott to be upstairs in that melee, AND talking on his ham radio in the tornado shelter. It is not physically possible in the less than 30 seconds that transpired, and it is not reasonably believable that he would choose to leave the safety of his shelter to enter that wild exchange. It IS reasonable to believe that the police were so angry about his defiant stance - that he would not surrender to be jailed when he had committed no crime, and he knew that they could not have any evidence that he had - that they left law and reason behind in order to force their will upon him, and that they killed one of their own in their inadequately organized temper tantrum.
2) A neighbor watching the fiasco with binoculars fully describes the incident, as she saw it from her vantage point - and the police have not refuted any of this description. The entire encounter took less than 30 seconds, the home was dark because they had cut the power off the night before. The police broke in, many guns blazed immediately, and seconds later they retreated dragging a person - which turned out to be the officer that later died.
3) A police spokesperson told a group of locals days before they murdered Scott that the autopsy of the killed officer revealed that he was struck in the elbow with a bullet which ricocheted into his side through the gap in his Kevlar vest and then entered and exited his heart. This is irrefutable evidence that the troopers death was an accident, not a murder. They had told the media immediately after the trooper was shot that Scott was some kind of expert sniper who had pulled off this stunning exhibition of marksmanship. I never heard the media correct that stupid story.
4) In what smells to me like a cover-up, that spokesperson claims that it is impossible to discover the caliber of bullet because it exited the body - so there will be no investigation as to the origin of the bullet.
5) Under intense questioning by irate locals, the police spokesperson was forced to admit that there was no physical evidence to link the shooting to any weapons or ammunition found on the property. Note that they have not stated that any unregistered or illegal arms or ammunition were ever found. They merely made statements that left the erroneous impression that he was armed to take over the government.
You should know that this area is a world renowned hunting destination. Almost all locals hunt - including the women - and take great pride in their hunting rifles and paraphenalia. (I'm a transplant from the city, and do my hunting at the grocery store - but if I find the chipmunks eating my blueberries again tomorrow, it's goodbye Alvin.)
6) The burning down of Scott's home in the Waco style introduction of the perported "stun bomb" using a Bradley armored vehicle was shown via live feed by network television. And then, of course, replayed for days. A local pyrotechnic expert with military and aerospace background states unequivocally that the "stun bomb" - that literally raised the roof right off from the house - was actually 2 bombs. One was used to detinate the other, and the other was a substance that he called "white phosphorous" - he says that it was designed for armor piercing, and that it burns so hot that it melts steel. It's guaranteed outcome would be the total destruction of this frame house and everything and everyone in it - including the shell casings and bullets fired the night before in the friendly fire shooting of the state police officer by one of his own, AND including it's own residue. The only evidence left of a white phosphorous bomb would be that television tape. Wanna bet they are pulling out all stops in an attempt to obtain and destroy that video tape?
7) 30 minutes after the bombs set fire to the house, police had the smoldering remains of the home bulldozed - still as the live television coverage continued. Locals wonder where they got bulldozers from on such short notice, in this rural area, if they didn't know that the house would burn down? They said they only expected to stun and disorient Scott. The only possible result of this bulldozing was to completely obliterate any remaining evidence of their folly.
For those of you who don't know that Scott Woodring escaped from his tornado shelter after that police firefight, and alluded them for 6 days. Unfortunately, someone tipped off the police firing squad that he was sleeping in a car behind a barn a few miles from his home. They executed him as he surrendered. Several bullets struck him in the head & neck, none in the limbs or torso. They definitely shot to kill. No witnesses this time.
The police say that he gave them no choice; that he was getting out of the car even though they ordered him to stay in it. Right! They always order the perp to stay in the car where they can't see what he is doing. They never want him to come out with his hands up and then lay on the ground so they can search him for weapons. Sure! I believe that - when hogs fly.
Just remember that if we let this continue unchecked, someday they will come for you.
The Constitution and Bill of Rights MUST BE DEFENDED! We must work within our political system to reinstate our rights and priviledges while we still can. The assault against us is coming from within. Crimes against the people, such as the Scott Woodring murder, will leave the militia's no choice but to overthrow the government that is aiding and abetting, supporting and protecting these terrorist police.
The vast majority of citizens swallow the swill regurgitated by the spineless, smut peddling media; and cheer like the crowds turning thumbs down to the gladiators, while their fellow Americans are mercilessly murdered by the police simply because they demand their rights under the constitution.
Flood the FBI, State of Michigan's Governor Granholm, and Michigan's Attorney General with demands for a speedy and public investigation.
