Viper Sentenced, Makes Statement

PHOENIX -- Dean Carl Pleasant, the last of the Viper Team (called "Viper Militia" by the media) to be sentenced after pleading guilty in the case brought against them by the federal government, was sentenced to 71 months in federal prison, three years subsequent supervised release, $300 in special assessments, and a $1,500 fine.

Prosecutors, who had intended to turn the sentencing into a one-sided show trial, entering into public record the so-called "target-tape" made by Pleasant and two other defendants in 1984 (long before the Viper Team existed), were frustrated when Judge Earl Carroll sustained a defense objection, ruling that the video would not be shown in court.

Carroll cited his concern that the video, if made public at this stage, could prejudice the trial of the two remaining Vipers, Chuck Knight and Christopher Floyd, which began this week and is delayed due to a heart attack suffered by Floyd's attorney soon after opening statements were made to the jury. Family and friends of Pleasant were astonished at this move by Carroll, having expected he would acceed to all the prosecution's desires.

The government was not to be denied, however. Carroll allowed without objection a prosecution description of the video, along with their claim that any reasonable person who had viewed it could only conclude that Pleasant deserved a sentence at the high end of federal sentencing guidelines. Indeed, Carroll ultimately handed down the maximum jail time set forth in the guidelines, tempered only by the fact that he imposed a lesser sentence on two of the three charges Pleasant faced -- 60 months on counts 1 and 3 of the indictment. The 71-month sentence on count 5, however, represents the actual time Pleasant is to serve, as the time for all three counts will run concurrently.

Pleasant's sentence will be reduced by the nine months he has already spent in custody, plus up to a 15 percent reduction for good behavior.

Pleasant intends to appeal the sentence. There are questions concerning the constitutionality of all counts raised against the defendants in this case, and with respect to Pleasant, about the rationale behind the sentence he received. Count 5, for which he received the stiff 71-month maximum, is due to his failure to pay a tax of several hundred dollars on a machine gun in his possession. The typical sentence meted out to such "offenders" is two to three years; other Vipers facing the same charge received lighter sentences. One theory is that the government wanted to make an example of Pleasant, using the "target-tape" to portray him as a domestic terrorist bent on spreading violence. But this aim is more directly related to count 1, involving conspiracy to teach others about the manufacture and use of "destructive devices." Since teaching of any kind has long been protected by the First Amendment, it is not implausible that the nominally lighter sentence Pleasant received on this count was downplayed, and the weapons charge used as a pretext for meting out the punishment the government wanted to visit upon him for his teaching role in the Vipers.

Most Americans will presume that the 'guilty' pleas entered by 10 of the Vipers is a forthright admission that they did wrong. In most cases, nothing could be further from the truth. As a career law enforcement officer (and expert on paramilitary and terrorist groups) put it, with today's interrogation techniques, police can get anyone to confess to, say, child molestation within three hours. Arizonans needn't strain their memories much to recall that three Tucson men "confessed" to the brutal slayings of Buddhist monks in their temple, only to be wholly exonerated when the real culprits were apprehended.

Sadly, in the case of at least one Viper, the government's persuasion was so effective as to undermine that defendant's belief in the Constitutional rights the group had formed to defend.

Immediately following yesterday's sentencing, Dean Pleasant released the following statement explaining how he came to plead 'guilty', what the true nature of the "target-tape" was, and other aspects of the way this case has been handled. Its eloquence speaks volumes.

--Kent Van Cleave

April 3, 1997

For fear of judicial reprisal, I have, as well as my co-defendants, remained silent during our ordeal. Now is the time to correct the lies, misinterpretations, and disinformation.

Falsehood #1.

Never did the Viper Team, nor any of its members, have any plans to blow up, attack, set fire to, or otherwise damage any building, occupied or otherwise. This was acknowledged by the case supervisor himself during our bond hearing five days after our arrests. The allegation made by Janet Napolitano on July 4th was an absolute propagandish lie and is actionable.

Falsehood #2.

The so-called "target-tape," made by me, was not an effort to pre- investigate any target of destruction by myself or the team, as the prosecution has alleged, but an anti-terrorism study, designed to be an educational tool in tactical analysis. The prosecution knew this from the very day they first learned of the tape on May 19, 1996 as their transcript of the surveillance audiotape attests to. On page 10 of the transcript I say "it was an anti-terrorism study. That's all it was." The tape recorded a conversation that was meant to be among trusted compatriouts who would trust each other with their lives. I had no idea I was being recorded. If my purpose in making the tape was as the prosecution alleges, I would have declared it there. I did not.

The prosecution knew also that the tape was made long before Viper Team existed and before most of its members had ever met. To allege that the making of the tape was an act of the conspiracy we are charged with is to lie.

Falsehood #3.

The oath taken upon inclusion into Viper Team did not call for the murder of law enforcement officers who may infiltrate or attempt to seize our weapons, as evidenced by the fact that no one did so during the raids.

The actual text of the oath reads: "I swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and especially the original and genuine Bill of Rights. I will support and defend my fellow militiaman. If need be I will enter into mortal combat against the enemies of the U.S. Constitution and U.S. Militia to carry out this oath. So help me God."

Of the 61 video and audio tapes made of us during the investigation (which ran from June of 1995 until June of 1996), the group did not pledge to kill infiltrators or seek retribution if arrested. In fact, we were relieved to have not been slaughtered outright, and looked with misplaced faith to our coming court date as the vindication of our actions and intentions as the legal practices we knew them to be.

Falsehood #4.

The alleged illegal weapons, firearms and explosives alike, were in fact specifically allowable to possess under Supreme Court precedent in U.S. v. Miller, 1938. We looked forward to proving this point in court, but were denied the ability to argue constitutional points of law.

Additionally, U.S. v. Rock Island Armory, 1991 (6th Circuit) and U.S. v. Dalton, 1992 (10th Circuit) illustrate the fact that A.T.F. has been legislatively ordered to capitulate and abandon their regulation of newly manufactured machine guns and, as such, had no grounds to charge any of us with an illegal machine gun, as all in our possession were of recent manufacture. But the court ruled that such arguments would not be heard.

The explosives were purchased legally through regular channels and with A.T.F. approval. Being of "binary nature," they were stored in a manner consistent with safety procedures by a former expert employed in the field of their storage. No hazard existed.

Falsehood #5.

The devices that some Viper Team members detonated in familiarization and safe-handling training, were not designated as fragmentation bombs or weapons of any kind. They shed no shrapnel nor were placed in areas inhabited or occupied by humans. As such, they did not meet the criteria of "destructive devices" (which are taxed in private hands), but were "explosive devices" (untaxed, and therefore unregulated). The only "destructive devices" seized were 1/4 pound projectiles that were not loaded into the necessary ammunition shell-casing, making them not readily useable and thus incomplete and not a device.

My thoughts:

It is my wish that the public understand that Viper Team was defensive in nature. It may seem that if one has impressive weaponry and the skill to use it, that they are a threat. But the only people Viper Team ever presented a threat to (other than ourselves) are those who would attempt to maliciously, violently, and illegally victimize us with use of deadly force. All of the members of Viper Team were life-long owners of firearms who had never even been accused of misuse of that power. Nor had any member ever been convicted of, or even charged with, a felony.

In fact, we were very selective of any members to ensure their moral fiber. Liars were not tolerated, felons were not welcome, and dedication to the community was required.

The team rejected incitements by the infiltrators to participate in patently criminal acts such as bank robbery, theft and fraud. The lead infiltrator, who became head of security, even tried to get the group to distribute racist literature, but he was refused and nearly expelled. It had been decided the very week of our arrests that this individual was not living up to the character standards expected and was scheduled to be expelled. This is, in part, why our arrest occurred when it did.

When asked why we felt it necessary to possess explosives, I answer that, in a place where rogue agencies of the government shoot up churches containing women and children, crush them under the tracks of tanks and armored vehicles, then burn the evidence of their crimes and lies, then bulldoze it, and go unpunished for their crimes, justifying the whole affair because the victims may have owed some tax, you had better damn well be prepared for the same to happen to you. We were.

We knew that, despite having law and precedent on our side, that propagandish rhetoric within these agencies preached that we were actively seeking confrontation, and that those like us must be found and railroaded, making examples of us for those who would dare retain their rights. Thus, we prudently sought secrecy and anonymity, seeking to remain peacefully unto ourselves.

It should be known that on at least one occasion while under surveillance, plans for a peaceful and productive meeting with local and state law enforcement to share mutual concerns about each other and to open and maintain a dialogue, were rejected by them. The lead infiltrator, as head of security, was involved in the attempt at diplomacy. Whether he and his agency nixed the plan and instructed the law enforcement agencies to vacate, or whether the local agencies never represented themselves in good faith from the beginning, is unclear. But we were very disappointed that we were turned away from such a potentially productive event. This is on page 13 of the June 10, 1996 transcript.

I have pled guilty because I do not have the funds to fight. The court has refused at every turn to allow funds for our expert witnesses, while sparing no expense on theirs. Disclosure of evidence has been (and continues to be) incomplete. Constitutional issues ruled "dead on arrival." Precedents in our favor have been deemed unallowable. I believe all of these barriers could have been surmounted had we had sufficient funds to fight the government, but we don't. Though it is against my desires, I am limiting the damage to my life by not going to trial.

It is sad to note that, as the government succeeds in preventing me from pleading my case in court, they demonstrate that no other patriot accused in the future can expect a fair trial. As that becomes widely accepted as fact, future subjects of arrest by federal forces will likely choose to resist. All this over tax and the lust for unquestioned or unqualified obedience. It wounds my soul.

To the law enforcement personnel of Arizona and the nation, I extend my pity.

These people you now seek were formerly your most ardent supporters. I, myself, sought a career in law enforcement once, wishing to serve the community as my father had by example, as a police officer. I saw no profession as fulfilling or as important than being a peace officer. But before I attained that goal, I recognized the trampling of rights I would be required to do as unacceptable, so I abandoned the pursuit.

These people you seek out are infinitely more motivated than you, often superiorly armed, and almost always superiorly trained and skilled. You are taking on the most difficult and lethal adversary you ever will, outside of war. While they currently don't outnumber you, they will. The resulting tragedy of pursuing them is unfathomable to you, or I know you would not proceed to pursue them.

The reason only four officers died at Waco is because when the officers ran out of ammo and were forced to retreat the residents let them. Such restraint and compassion should never be expected again. This is not a threat or warning, but a sorrowful prediction.

For the record, I have never had any contact or knowledge of the events surrounding the Oklahoma City tragedy or the Hyder derailment, other than that known through public information in the wake of those incidents. The responsible parties are not associated, and should not be confused with, any militia group. Such claims are speculation fostered by politicized enforcement heads.

If in fact those currently accused in the Oklahoma City blast are guilty, then may they be left to the wrath of the families that were victimized. I have no pity for murderers.

Please use your browser's "back" function to return to the previous page -- or, to exit, please take this link to Arizona Liberty Nexus (if you haven't been there this visit), where your visit will be counted!