Skip to main content

Richard Marshall found not guilty in 1975 AIM slaying

Richard Marshall found not guilty in 1975 AIM slaying

Heidi Bell Gease Journal staff | Posted: Friday, April 23, 2010 6:30 am

A federal jury deliberated for less than two hours Thursday before finding Vine Richard "Dickie" Marshall not guilty of murder in connection with the 1975 slaying of American Indian Movement activist Annie Mae Aquash.

Marshall's supporters, who filled one side of the U.S. District courtroom, erupted in cheers and applause when the verdict was read about 2 p.m. Marshall stood and hugged Dana Hanna, his court-appointed attorney.

Afterward, Hanna noted that people have said a Native American cannot get a fair trial in front of an all-white jury in South Dakota. "We have proved them wrong today," he said.

Prosecutors had tried to prove that Marshall, 59, provided the handgun used to kill Aquash, who some in AIM believed was a government informant.

Arlo Looking Cloud, who was convicted in 2004 of her murder and is serving life in prison, was the government's key witness. After years of denying that he, John Graham, Theda Clarke and Aquash had stopped at Marshall's home in Allen just hours before Aquash was killed near Wanblee, Looking Cloud came forward in 2008 to say they had stopped in Allen and that Marshall had given them a handgun.

On the witness stand last week, Looking Cloud claimed he did not tell the story sooner because he was afraid of Marshall.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Mandel suggested to jurors that there was another reason Looking Cloud didn't talk sooner. If he had mentioned going to Marshall's to get a gun, Looking Cloud would have been admitting he knew Aquash would be killed, Mandel said.

Mandel cited evidence that Clarke had given Graham a note that read something like, "take care of this baggage."

"Folks, there wasn't any baggage," he said. "There was only a human being they wanted taken care of, and that was Annie Mae Pictou ... ‘Take care of it?' Hey, you can draw your own conclusions as to what that meant."

In order for Marshall to be convicted, federal prosecutors had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had both provided the gun and known it would be used to kill Aquash. Hanna suggested in his closing arguments that the government had proven neither.

"This case of the government consists of the words that came out of Arlo Looking Cloud's mouth and Serle Chapman's mouth," neither of which Hanna said were credible.

Hanna argued that Looking Cloud made up the story about Marshall in hopes of getting out of prison and because Looking Cloud believed Marshall had "ratted him out" to investigators.

And Hanna questioned why Chapman, a British writer, did not tell investigators until 2008 about an unrecorded conversation in which he said he asked Marshall about the gun.

Hanna also addressed what he called the "elephant in the room": Who ordered Aquash's death? He said AIM leader Dennis Banks, along with Leonard Peltier, had the most to fear from her because she knew about their criminal activities and had heard Peltier confess to shooting two FBI agents.

"She was killed because of what might happen in the future," Hanna said. "She could have put Dennis Banks and Leonard Peltier away for decades," he said.

Denise Pictou Maloney, the older of Aquash's two daughters, had said before the verdict that the case was a step toward justice, regardless of its outcome, because of the evidence that came forth.

The verdict "was a toss, we knew that," she said Thursday. "But it is what it is. And in our territory, the fact that he saw my mother at his house with those people, and did nothing to help her, makes him an accessory in our eyes. And he will never be forgiven for that in our territory."

A jury of five women and seven men began deliberating the case at 11:35 a.m. Thursday, more than a week after the trial began. Jurors contacted late Thursday afternoon declined to comment.

Marshall could not be reached for comment.

Contact Heidi Bell Gease at 394-8419 or heidi.bell@rapidcityjournal.com


http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_ef7b952c-4e30-11df-a36b-001cc4c03286.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

LSA History: Mt. Rushmore Gathering 1996 & LSA Statement

Students Gather at Mt. Rushmore Effort Made to explain land struggle by Karen Testerman Indian Country Today. Feb. 29, 1996. B-1. He Sapa: Not For Sale 2.29.96 BLACK HILLS, SD - Wanting to educate visitors on the struggles of the Lakota people, Lakota students recently gathered at Mount Rushmore. The Lakota Student Alliance organized a public assembly at Mount Rushmore to coincide with an MTV filming of a performance by rock band The Presidents of the United States of America, which aired nationally President's Day. The students expressed an alternative viewpoint of the four presidents carved in the mountain and the reasons why the Sioux Nation continues to refuse monetary compensation from the United States government. "We still believe the Black Hills are the heart of our nation," students said. "We must negotiate the unconditional return of our land." In 1980, the United States tried to right a wrong by awarding the Sioux Nation monies for the Black Hills,

Mario Gonzalez: Why the Docket 74-A award must be rejected

The following biography and essay are written by the author: (Mario Gonzalez is an enrolled member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe and presently serves as legal counsel to several Sioux tribes. He is the first recipient of the Distinguished Aboriginal Lawyer Achievement Award (1995) given by the Native Law Center of Canada, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Sask. He is also co-author of The Politics of Hallowed Ground: Wounded Knee and the Struggle for Indian Sovereignty (1999). He can be reached at mario@mariogonzalezlaw.com). [Part One] Why the Docket 74-A award must be rejected By Mario Gonzalez A federal class action lawsuit called Different Horse v. Salazar was filed in U.S. District Court by the Ketterling Law Firm of Yankton, S.D. on April 15, 2009, to force the Interior Department to distribute the Dockets 74-A and 74-B Sioux land claims awards in per capita payments to tribal members. The awards with (interest) now total over $1 billion. The Rosebud Sioux Tribe has taken the le

LSA Statement regarding Richard Marshall

Statement Regarding Richard Marshall’s Motion to Quash a Subpoena in the trial of John Graham: What is the truth? South Dakota justice system seeks lies as truth in Indian country. November 30, 2010 - What becomes of a country when it’s indigenous people are being taught that, in a foreign court of law, lying under oath is a truthful lie and that truthful lie will set you free? Back in the 1970s when Sovereignty was an idea of the red power movement, Indians were just beginning to examine corruption in their tribal governments. Today, Sovereignty means something different. Today we see that Sovereignty banner in every gaming compact negotiation where tribal leaders plead to states for more slot machines, while the racist state bargains for more jurisdiction in Indian Country, keeping in mind the states goal of gaining more Indian lands. In 1973, Richard Marshall was one of those early Sovereignty rights advocates as he traveled with leaders like Pedro Bissonette. In Apr