Pepper Spray - No Big Deal...

Zane z_thomas at ix.netcom.com
Fri Nov 7 00:25:27 EST 1997


On Thu, 06 Nov 1997 20:31:08 -0800, Patrick <patrickl at wco.com> wrote:

>The device was not motion sensitive. It was a timed device. If it had
>been motion sensitive I might believe her story. 

Btw, I was sure I recalled reading somewhere that the bomb was
motion-sensitive.  Here's what Barri had to say about it:

"Another piece of information learned through the lawsuit is the exact
make-up of the bomb. The evidence shows that, not only was the bomb
completely and unambiguously hidden under Judi's car seat, but also
that it was triggered by a motion device consisting of a large ball
bearing that had to roll to connect two contact points. In other
words, the bomb was a booby trap, set to explode when the car was
driven.

"This certainly discredits the FBI's story that Judi and Darryl were
knowingly transporting this bomb to use in some kind of sabotage
action. But even though the FBI and police retrieved the motion device
within hours of the bombing, they never told the press about it, and
they disregarded it when they arrested Judi and Darryl for
transporting the bomb."
[http://www.monitor.net/~bari/Who-bombed-Judi-Bari.html]

I obviously don't have access to whatever Barri's attorney's got
during discovery, but I can't imagine how Barri would be doing herself
any favors as a litigant by making up and publishing the above quoted
material.  It _could_ be that whatever information they got is being
miscontrued, but I see no reason to believe that at this time.  I'll
be sure to follow up with more detail if I find it.

So, Patrick, it really is looking like a motion-sensitive device. If
that turns out to be the case will you believe her story?

Zane










More information about the Ag-forst mailing list