< ^ >
J __ u __ s __ t __ i __ c __ e ____ f __ o __ r ____ W __ o __ o __ d __ y
J.F.W. Home
Analysis
Sanctuary Request
Right of Sanctuary
Was Woody Threatened?
Unanswered Questions
December 2001
January 2002
October 2002
November 2003
Extreme Secrecy
What Evidence Shows
Shooting Was Unprovoked
Shot After Falling
Denied First Aid
Evolution of Confession
Woody Needlessly Killed
Failures of Investigtion
Conflicts of Interest
Dan Davis
Attorney Generals Office
Department of Justice
Statements Contaminated
Questions Not Asked
Sloppy Work
Sorrell's Errors
Guide to Analysis
Summary of Biases
DETAILED FINDINGS
Contradictions
Shooting Theory
Manipulative Language
Witnesses Discrediting
Misrepresentation of Facts
Omissions
Response Needed
Press Spin
Insults to Bereaved
Talks
Report
News & Events
About JFW
Contribute
Contact
Sitemap
Search
Version 3.8
Copyright 2001-2008
JusticeForWoody.net site last revised 1/17/06
fair use notice

Killing Reaction Cases Evidence Analysis Media Woody

Conflicts of Interest: The State

The state's investigation of the killing of Woody was fatally flawed from the beginning by a bias that was revealed in a remarkable press release by the Vermont State Police on December 3, which stated "officers Hollbrook and Parker discharged their service pistols when they believed their safety and members of the congregation's safety were threatened." This statement on the day after the shooting is the answer to precisely the question the State Police were tasked with investigating under the direction of the local State's Attorney and/or the Attorney General, and supposedly continued to investigate until April 2. But even if one could overlook this incredible disclosure, they could still easily find conflicts of interest both with State's Attorney Dan Davis and with the various players in the Attorney General's Office.


page last modified: 2005-12-14