PDA

View Full Version : Tribal police = real police?



kirch
10-14-2002, 03:43 PM
No offense intended to any tribal police officers out there. But the little I know about tribal police comes from Tony Hillerman novels, and that ain't much.

A few questions I have:

Are tribal police employed by the tribe, or the federal goverment? If it's the government, does that make them federal LEOs entitled to gov't. benefits and pay scales? And do different tribes' officers have different responsiblities?

Is their jurisdiction just tribal land, or do they have arrest powers in other areas of the states in which they reside?

I believe I saw something in a movie that said the FBI has to investigate murders on tribal land (I think it was Thunderheart [?] with Val Kilmer). Is this accurate? If so, are there other crimes that fall under this ruling as well?

And a related question -- what government agency oversees tribal land? Is it the Bureau of Indian Affairs (which sounds notoriously un-PC these days) in the Department of the Interior? Do they have their own law enforcement personnel?

Thanks for any assistance.

garyg
10-14-2002, 06:23 PM
Kirch,

Get comfortable, you asked alot of questions and this may take awhile.

Some Tribal cops are employed directly by the Tribe and some are employed by the Fed. Govt. (BIA) It's up to the individual Tribe to decide what route it wants to go. As they are technically, "soveriegn nations" they develop their own constitution and legal code. Each Tribe can and do handle this differently. Where I work, we are employed directly by the Tribe, and to my knowledge there are no BIA Police in the area, but could be wrong about that.

As for responsibilities, again it depends on how the code is written. Ours are no different than any other city or county in the state. The Tribe more or less adopted the RCW. There are a few things missing and some additions. Where it gets sticky, is that the Tribal Code applies to Indians, but not "non-Natives" who either live on the Rez or are travelling through. For them, we revert to the RCW. It's confusing at times, but it works. In our situation, there are about 1200 Tribal members on the Rez, and about 4000 non-natives. Which code book we use depends on who the suspect is. To make it even more confusing, Tribal Court has no criminal jurisdiction over non-natives, and the county District court has no jurisdiction over natives for crimes committed in Indian Country (the accepted term).

Many tribal officers are cross-commissioned with the County Sheriff's office. We are, and have a great working relationship with them. This cross-commission in effect makes us Deputies off the Rez and when dealing with non-natives...and gives us the ability to write cases into District Court. We take part in all the County wide emphasis patrols, search and rescue efforts, waterborne events, etc.

All our officers meet the same standards as every other cop in the state. Go to the same Academy, meet (and often exceed) the minimum state mandated training requirements, etc. But, that is just our Dept. There are others in the area that don't. Their Ofc's go to the BIA academy which the State of WA does not recognize as an equivilant. These folks are not eligible for cross-commissioning and so can't venture out into the world to play.

As for the FBI, yes and no. Again, technically we have two organizations that are by statute there to handle major crimes (felonies). This goes back to the court jurisdiction and corruption problems. Tribal courts are limited jurisdiction courts and cannot hear felony cases. As such, the FBI or BIA can and will at times take over felony investigations and subsequent charging and writing into Fed. Court. With some tribes this is a very good idea!!!! But, in our case, we have an excellent track record of professionalism and thoroughness and the FBI signs off on our investigations and off to court it goes. When we have a felony case developing, we contact them, and 10 times out of 10 they kick it back to us. If we get involved in something to big for us to handle (we are a small dept after all) then we ask for help and they will function as our Detectives but this hasn't happened in years. Not that we don't have major crimes, we've developed the resources to investigate without much assistance.

The long and short of it, is that each Tribe is it's own entity and decides how it wants to handle law enforcement. The Fed. Gov't. established some limits on how far Tribal Courts can go and this in effect placed some limits on Tribal L/E. It has evolved over the years and some Tribal Depts are very good, others are awful. There is one in the area where the Sheriff has threatened to arrest any of its Ofc's who go off Rez in a marked unit or in uniform for impersonating a Police Officer. This is the same Sheriff who cross-commissions us. It's a strange world sometimes.

And finally, yes the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is the overseeing body.

I'm sure I only confused you with this, as I tried to hit the highlights without making this to long.

Chimi_WS6
10-14-2002, 07:37 PM
Here in CA, unless it has changed which I don't think it has yet, tribal Police are not recognized as LEO. They do meet the same requirments and have to attend an academy, but the state doesn't recognize them. I know the Tribes are fighting it and trying to get their Officers to be recognized, but as it stands, if they leave the reservation, they can be arrested for impersonating a Peace Officer.

KenM
10-14-2002, 11:38 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by danceswithfools:
<strong> As they are technically, "soveriegn nations" they develop their own constitution and legal code.

As such, the FBI or BIA can and will at times take over felony investigations and subsequent charging and writing into Fed. Court. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I never understood this part. If a reservation is its own sovereign nation and has its own constitution and laws why is our federal govt intervening? And why do my tax $$$ go there? I don't understand the whole treaty thing.

Jim Burnes
10-15-2002, 12:19 AM
It's not the reservations that are separate, it's the Indian Nation itself that is soverign. The reason for that is that the nations were already here, acting as nations on this land thousands of years before Europeans arrived. European settlers lived here from 1492 until 1776 (284 years) and only in 1776 became America, and seen as soverign in it's own right.

America is not yet 300 years old. We are far older, and legally, morally and rightfully soverign and apart from America.

Once in while, the news reports certain states trying to overcome an Indian Nation that resides on land within the states borders. But each time the attempt fails, because the Indian Nation, being soverign (not technically, but really ) is well known to be equal to the Federal level and all states are inferior to the status of the Indian nation. Any dealings with Indian nations therefore has to be from the Federal level (although the states make a big deal of compacts).

The BIA was established with its stated mission to assist indians, but has a track record of abuse. Including the loss of 10 billion dollars of royalties which it received as trustee but has lost. Royalties, not tax money.

The BIA by rights ought to be dismanntled and will be through politics.

Jim Burnes

DesertRat
10-15-2002, 12:31 AM
Dances with fools hit it all pretty much on the head. The only difference I've seen with any of that was in Idaho where I believe, non-natives can be cited into tribal court for certain status offenses and traffic misdemeanors. I assumed that was due to some state statute allowing them too. Otherwise, they just did it and figured if no one knew the difference they might as well bank the fine money.

The caliber of officer's on tribal agencies can vary a great deal. All the BIA guys I've known have been super troops. An old partenr of mine in Rapid City left us to go work for BIA. When I went to POST in SD in 1984 there were 5 tribal officers in there from different tribes.

I'm not going to say which tribe, but there were two guys in there that literally had the equivelent of a 4-5th grade education and failed every exercise we had but since they were tribal, that didn't matter. They got the jobs because they were relatives of people on that tribe's council. Back then, it was a very corrupt system on that particluar reservation. Don't know if it is still the same way anywhere or not? Dance may have more insight into that? We only deal with the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe here and they are all top notch folks that I've met.

As for jurisdiction, we actually have a chart in our policy manual that breaks different crimes down into race of the victim, race of the suspect, and if it occured off reservation lands or on as to who will handle it. To make it more difficult here, this is an urban reservation so one side of the sidewalk is tribal, the other is ours.

Jim Burnes
10-15-2002, 12:31 AM
The American government covers the indian trust lands through the Major Crimes Act. This was accomplished due to a murder which took place on the Rosebud resevation, S.D. involving two men, one Crow Dog and his cousin Spotted Tail. They had bad blood, Crow Dog killed Spotted Tail and the US government discovered they could not legally take Crow Dog to trial for that crime.

Thus, the Major Crimes Act came about.

(Crow Dog did go to trial though, was found guilty and was to hang on a certain day. He was released, took care of personal business and reported several weeks later. Said good by and stepped off the gallows under his own steam.)

BTW, Tribal police are about as real police as any found in any city. It's insulting to think otherwise.

Jim Burnes

Jim Burnes
10-15-2002, 12:41 AM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by DesertRat:
<strong>.

. They got the jobs because they were relatives of people on that tribe's council. Back then, it was a very corrupt system on that particluar reservation. Don't know if it is still the same way anywhere or not?
.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">On some lands, it is that way still. On the Rosebud, SD., the council members seem to be more European and less Lakota. There is a real problem there with official corruption which the people see and object to, but the sitution hardly changes month to month.

The Crow, the Blood and Onineda are in the same leaky boat. It's hard.

Jim Burnes

Sotex
10-15-2002, 02:04 PM
Jim and Dances have it down as far as I know. If all goes well, I will be working for a Tribe here soon. I do know that their patrol force is a mix of Tribal officers and BIA police officers.

kirch
10-15-2002, 03:20 PM
Thanks for all the great information. With only a few reservations in our state, and those being up north primarily, I don't have much interaction with tribal police. You've all taught me a lot about tribal police and the reservation system.

As I suspected, tribal police are no different than any other cops. Most are good, diligent law enforcement professionals. A few are jagoffs that don't belong in uniform.

The California situation surprises me. Is that because of bad blood between the state and the individual tribes? Or is there some other reason?

I was also wondering, if the tribes are part of a soverign nation (I got that right, didn't I?), how can a state have any jurisdiction over them? I'm thinking primarily of the whole gambling issue, but hunting & fishing rights come to mind as well. Someone mentioned 'compacts', but I'm not sure what those are. Is that some sort of an agreement between the state and its indigenous tribes?

I'm just full of questions, aren't I?

AD6MJ
10-15-2002, 04:40 PM
The California situation surprises me. Is that because of bad blood between the state and the individual tribes? Or is there some other reason?

California is a funny place. In my area there has been bad blood off and on between some agencies and tribal councils. The county had raided tribal smoke shops and busted people leaving the rez. Then there was the fight over gaming. It would porbably surpirse most here that I actually voted for Davis in the last election. The reason was that the Republican wasn't really any better on gun rights and the Republicans were fighting Indian gaming. I believe in tribal sovereignty and believe it is the governor's job to defend the sovereignty of the state and how can he do that if he denies the soveriegnty of the nations?

I was also wondering, if the tribes are part of a soverign nation (I got that right, didn't I?), how can a state have any jurisdiction over them? I'm thinking primarily of the whole gambling issue, but hunting & fishing rights come to mind as well. Someone mentioned 'compacts', but I'm not sure what those are. Is that some sort of an agreement between the state and its indigenous tribes?

As I understand it Federal law "allows" the nations to conduct whatever type of gaming that is legal within the state they are in. The tribes can make "compacts" with the state to allow more if both parties agree. I haven't seen where states regulate Indian fishing and hunting and they shouldn't. I regularly hunt and fish on tribal land and get my license from the tribal government.

garyg
10-16-2002, 03:24 AM
Kirch,

You got it right, there is no difference. Just one more part of the larger L/E family.

drunkhunter
10-16-2002, 11:23 PM
A United States Supreme Court decission in 1838 held that Indian Nations were "dependent" nations existing within the borders of the United States.

Just for empahsis sake, I did mean to type "dependent". That was the term used. The ruling also stated that the US and Georgia governments could not remove the Cherokee from Georgia. President Andrew Jackson told the Supreme Court to get an army and stop him from removing the Cherokee.

PeteBroccolo
10-17-2002, 10:45 AM
The Canadian Federal Government, all Provincial Governments and the First Nations peoples are still working out their relationships. (As Pete tip-toes REAL careful here!)

Anyway, there are some full-service Police Services on some of the Reserves, and some are Peace Keepers that work under the guidance of either the RCMP, OPP or SQ.

I believe that the First Nations Police Service members HAVE to be sworn in as Peace Officers under Provincial legislation in order to be able to conduct their duties off the Reserve, as well as to enforce Provincial laws on the Reserve. However, I THINK FNPS members are sworn in by their own Reserve under the governing powers of the Indian Act and can then enforce that Act, certain other Federal laws as to other LEO/PO (drugs mainly) and the Criminal Code.

If anyone is interested, go to <a href="http://www.blueline.ca" target="_blank">http://www.blueline.ca</a> to see an article about the Dakota Ojibway Police Service in Manitoba.

ghostsix
10-18-2002, 10:13 AM
The situation here, as I understand it, is tribal police have jurisdiction over their own on their ground.They are not Peace Officers,as we know them.
I have several tribal patches and badges as I was adopted by the Shoshone and have an interest.
This was long ago and far away.
As a result of pre European conflicts, tribes claim territory by right of conquest or adverse and hostile possesion.eg: the Chippawa ran the Sioux out of MN.The Winabago, who now call themselves Ho Chunk, almost extincted themselves twice with bad and dishonorable decisions with the Illonois, for one, since the French kept records. They did not have real estate lawyers.
They had grounds that expanded and contracted with the waxing and waning of their power.
Dances would be a Tlinket, I`d guess.
Why the U.S. chose this policy was to make a deal rather than fight with limited resources.
Lewis and Clark found friendlies and hostiles.So it would go; as it went with the tribes.The Navaho, Zuni and Hopi were the natural prey of the Apache. They left them enough to live on and to grow another crop for the Apache.The Commanch preyed on everybody within reach.Until The Texas Rangers killed them all or drove them down into Old Mexico, where the Yaqui killed them.
I have heard that there are a few Commanche left. I doubt it.They would be mestizos,at best.
Then the U.S Cav. came along to keep the peace.We all know how good soldiers are are at that.
The BIA puts Apache police on the Arapaho rez.
Rezes are still Fed Propty. Thus FBI jurisdiction.
I`m confused too.
Art.1 says that Congress shall have exclusive jurisdiction over fed propty. How do states get involved with rezes?

AD6MJ
10-18-2002, 10:22 AM
An interesting link for those interested:

<a href="http://profs.lp.findlaw.com/gaming/" target="_blank">http://profs.lp.findlaw.com/gaming/</a>

kirch
10-18-2002, 02:09 PM
A VERY interesting and educational article. Answered almost all my questions about Indian gambling.

Jim Burnes
10-18-2002, 05:50 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by drunkhunter:
<strong>
Just for empahsis sake, I did mean to type "dependent". That was the term used. .</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The term 'dependent' was not meant in the way Americans want it to mean. We were never dependent. Cherokee were a nation then and now. Folks have got to do their homework and not just absorb whatever sounds OK.

Fellow Justice(s) Johnson stated: '..., it has never been questioned, nor any any attempts made at subjugating them as a people, or restraining their personal liberty except as to their land and trade.'

Dissenting Justice Thompson wrote the following to buttress the national and foreign status of the Cherokees: '...Consequently, a weak state, that in order to provide for its safety, places itself under the protection of a more powerful one, without stripping itself of the rights of government and sovereignty does not cease on this account to be placed among the sovereigns who acknowledge not other power.'

further...

'...Testing the character and conditions of the Cherokee Indians by these rules, it is not perceived how it is possible to escape the conclusion that they form a soverign state.'

The term 'dependent domestic nations...was actually a concept used to effect a compromise between the political realities of the day and the ideals of Marshall's fellow judges, who viewed the status of the Cherokee nation as much closer to an independent nation that Marshall would allow the court to maintain publicly.'

(Extracted from Cherokee History, Trail of Tears...and Behind the Trail of Broken Treaties, Vine Deloria, Jr, Chapter 6.)

THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS HISTORICAL REALITY, AND BASED ON LAW.

Jim Burnes
USA, E8 MP (ret)
American Indian Movemment
Cherokee
(Benge, Reese, Lowery, Double Head)

Jim Burnes
10-18-2002, 08:49 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by PeteBroccolo:
<strong>The Canadian Federal Government, all Provincial Governments and the First Nations peoples are still working out their relationships. (As Pete tip-toes REAL careful here!)

.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Pete,

Both sides appear to be working for a consensus. Lots of bumps in that road, but if all parties keep talking, we can reach accord. Thanks.

Jim Burnes

Jim Burnes
10-19-2002, 11:28 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ghostsix:
<strong>.The Commanch preyed on everybody within reach.Until The Texas Rangers killed them all or drove them down into Old Mexico, where the Yaqui killed them.
I have heard that there are a few Commanche left. I doubt it.s?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Is there no one who will counter this information, the majority of the post being absolutly untrue and inaccuarte in most of the paragraphs?

The author is a senior army officer, a real '6 Actual'; he will be aware of American history.

Anyone at all?

Jim Burnes

AD6MJ
10-20-2002, 10:30 AM
Jim, my knowledge of Indian history is limited but I believe that Quanah Parker and the Quohada settled in Oklahoma after the Buffalo War. Also another thread has mentioned the movie Windtalkers about Navajo code talkers, the Comanches served in Europe in both WWI and WWII as code talkers.

<small>[ 10-20-2002, 10:54 AM: Message edited by: Bill R ]</small>

Don
10-20-2002, 12:00 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Chimi_WS6:
<strong>Here in CA, unless it has changed which I don't think it has yet, tribal Police are not recognized as LEO. They do meet the same requirments and have to attend an academy, but the state doesn't recognize them. I know the Tribes are fighting it and trying to get their Officers to be recognized, but as it stands, if they leave the reservation, they can be arrested for impersonating a Peace Officer.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">When I was with Imperial County, the Quichan Tribal Police were also sworn Imperial County Deputies. They drove county radio cars, were dispatched by ICSO dispatch, and worked closely with the Winterhaven Substation Deputies.

When I was with Inyo County, there were NO tribal police on any of the reservations. The sheriff's office handled everything. If we tried to get BIA involved (which we actually tried NOT to do) 99% of the time, they either ignored any requests for help, or told us it was our problem. There are four seperate reservations scattered throughout Inyo County, with no single one being large enough to support tribal police.

Jim Burnes
10-20-2002, 04:07 PM
My Own Personal Disclaimer... Although it may appear in the following posts that I am flaming Ghost6. I am not. This history, however is ours, and it's not going to be slighted. Whole nations of human familes will not be dismissed as historical dust.

Jim Burnes
A.I.M

Jim Burnes
10-20-2002, 05:34 PM
I'll just use bold to highlight those portions of Ghost6 posts that are in immediate need of correction.

'The Winnabago, who now call themselves Ho-Chunk, almost extincted themselves twice w'bad & dishonorable decisions with the Illonois for one since the French kept records. They did not have real estate lawyers.'

Response: 1. <a href="http://www.dickshovel.com/win.html" target="_blank">Actual Winnabago history, by Winnabago Nation hisotrians.</a>

'They did not have real estate lawyers. They had grounds that expanded and contracted with the waxing and waning of their power.'

Response: 2. Winnabago actually believed the treaties (the first 2) were signed by honorable men. Thereafter, they just tried to stave off the flood. There were 9 treaties, moving them from one location to another, dtd 1816-1828-1829-1832-1837-1846-1855-1859-1865. Not a single one was honestly kept in spirit or in word or in fact.

Why the US chose this policy was to make a deal rather than fight with limited resources.'

Response: 3. Without treaties with the indians, allowing safe and unmolested passage, the Europeans would not have been able to overcome the British troops. The treaties also allied the Indians with the Settlers, which added more weapons against the British. The British (and other countries) had their own game going on.

Immediately following the revolution, the new America turned on its indian allies.

'The Navaho, Zuni and Hopi were the natural prey of the Apache.'

Response: 4. Nope. The relationship was of war and allies as needed.

'The Comanche preyed on everybody...Until the Texas Rangers killed them all or drove them down into Old Mexico, where the Yaqui killed them. ...there are a few comanceh left. I doubt it.

Response: 5. My Comanche relatives say Bulltinnkle LOL! <a href="http://www.comanchenation.com" target="_blank">Comanche, still in Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and California. Thanks Rangers!</a>

The Col. overlooked about 10,000 Comanche living on their approx 132,000 acres of Oklahoma land. This does not include another 12,000 not on the rolls and living in other states. But passsing through the Fort Sill area he might have stopped at some Comanche-owned service stations, truck stops, stores and malls.

Why would the Yaqui kill Comanche? They were trading partners at the old style fairs. That claim is extranous.

That concluded my partial rant. Thanks.

Jim Burnes
Still Cherokee for the rest of the day.

garyg
10-20-2002, 09:13 PM
Jim,

I feel your pain, but the post in question is simply to absurd to bother with.

"Dances would be a Tlinket, I`d guess."

Mostly British (Irish, Scottish) with a smattering of German in the family tree.

The Tlinket are in B/C and Alaska. I'm in the Seattle area.

Next time you wish to come in and run off like you did, please check the facts a bit more closely.

Jim Burnes
10-20-2002, 09:34 PM
Corrections continued, & Still not flaming. Part two.

'Then the US Cav came along to keep the peace. We all know how good soldiers are at that.'

Response 1. They did not come as peacekeepers, nor to keep settlers and indians apart (although treaties required that). The actions of the US. military can be divided between two periods of time: from 1776 until 1864, that time taken by the new nation clearing out the eastern portion of America and spreading through Texas-California. All nations east of the Mississippi were being removed by force or guile into Canada, and Florida, Mexico and transported into occupied lands west of the Mississippi. The end of the civil war allowed the US to increase its actions against the central plains and that is the second time period: 1864 to Dec 29, 1890. Twenty-six years of unrelenting war of attrition against entire families.

Now, I am a soldier. Those men, led by the likes of the Methodist Minister Col Chivington ("Kill them all, nits make lice.") and Custer (one of the poorer examples of Army leadership ever graduated from West Point) and Kit Carson (who used Navaho as living rifle targets on the Long Walk), they are not soldiers.

Gatling guns and Field pieces at point blank range into the backs of fleeing women and children is not keeping the peace. It dam sure is not what any US Cav unit I know of nowadays would ever do.

'The BIA puts Apache police on the Arapaho reservation.'

Response 2. The BIA police officers are assigned to those places they are needed, according to the supervisors of the program. Nothing more can be read into that.

'Rezes are still Fed property.'

Response 3. The reservations are the land left to the indian nations. Within the borders of the reservations can be found a patchwork of property owned by non-indians, allotment land still owned by the indian families, Federal park lands, and others. It's a mess of responsibilites and that has been addressed by others on this thread.

To blow off the comment it's still Fed property is to ignore the rights of the people who have always owned that land.

We however, are using our own indian lawyers to regain acre by acre lost land. Once regained, it is put into trust. Such is progress.

'I'm confused too.'

Response 4. Concur.

That's it. I hope this sheds a brighter light on the statements. It certainly clarifies the facts, which once known, are not in dispute.

Jim Burnes

ghostsix
10-21-2002, 02:49 PM
Gee, Jim thanks for not "flaming me."
I am a bit out of my field here.
I never expected fellow Police Officers U.S.Officers or NCO`s to missunderstand me.
I have no reason to care what the R.C.M.P.think.
One more govt. change and they will be K.G.B.
I know what I hear or what I read,same as everybody else. I don`t invent history.
Admin pukes do it.I am elected.I don`t have to deal with them too much. I don`t much care if folks vote for me in Nov.I am the only candidate.
Just what this has to do with LE, I don`t know.
But, here we are.
The information, in one case, comes from the Ho Chunk / Winnabago Casino info folder that I asked for on their history.You can get it too. They have an 800 no.They wrote it, not me. Actually, other scholars wrote it, not Indians. It looks valid to me. The footnotes and references are there. One could check it.
All of a sudden 200 Indians have a lot of money.I think there 2,500 scattered about,if you count the mixed breeds.
There are mixed feelings within this mini tribe,believe me.
Many are opposed to giving up the old ways. That will happen to the youth with unearned wealth.

You know perfectly well that a senior Army officer and a Marshal is not going to knowingly make a false statement.

That does not mean that I have all of the information.
However, I have read a lot on the subject from the 1500`s.1605,1804,and then,1820 to 1830,is a period that I know a lot about. Of course I read of the Iriquois, the Huron,Senaca and the last of the Mohicans in the East.
As little as it is, I learned what is known about the Winnabago.
Now,I`m thinking of the S.Va.tribes. The BIA must have a list.Some extinct.Some absorbed.
The diggers in Calif. and Baja....I used to know a few names. Only Warriors are remembered. You don`t get noticed if you run around naked throwing sticks at rabbits, never mind the bow, the wheel or metulurgy.
We are dealing with the stone age he

Jim Burnes
10-21-2002, 11:35 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ghostsix:
[QBThe diggers in Calif. and Baja....I used to know a few names. [/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">DIGGER INDIANS...A term indiscriminately applied to many Native Americans of the central plateau region of NW America, including tribes in Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Nevada & Central Calif. It has no ethnological significance & was a term of opprobrium.

From The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia cc 1994-2000.

In short: Human communities select their own identity, and it is just good sense to use those names, rather than dismiss them out of hand with disrespectful and emotionally charged names.

But, that's just one indians opinion.

Extracted from the Sacramento Agency by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, published in or about April 1922:

Hereafter the term "Digger" as representing the name of a tribe of Indians in the Sacramento jurisdiction, and appearing in the records of this Bureau, will be discontinued, objections having come from others that this term is one of contempt and regarded by the indians as humiliating and opprobrius. It will, therefore, be replaced by the name Mewuk, which upon accepted ethnological authority, is the true tribal name disignation of these indians.

That just covers the Mewuk, there are about 70 other tribes that have actual names, by which they would be pleased to be known by, rather than that term 'Digger.'

Jim Burnes

Jim Burnes
10-21-2002, 11:59 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ghostsix:
<strong>.
. Only Warriors are remembered. You don`t get noticed if you run around naked throwing sticks at rabbits, never mind the bow, the wheel or metulurgy.
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Nah, people who fought to defend their homes and families are remembered. Like mine, raised corn and tobacco one day, was a sheriff sometimes, was a Baptist Preacher with a small church on Sundays, was translating the Bible from English into Cherokee, but he was not white. So the US nearly killed him and his tossing him off his own farm. That man, his sons they were not white, they were Indian so they had to become warriors. Do you recall them?

I do.

This country is full of the descendents of such families of warriors. Most likely, a few were under your command; apparently you never knew that.

Jim Burnes

Jim Burnes
10-22-2002, 12:12 AM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ghostsix:
<strong>of You know perfectly well that a senior Army officer and a Marshal is not going to knowingly make a false statement.
.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yes, I do know that. Maybe it's ingrained training, but I accept your word on your word alone. But have you ever wanted an NCO that would not tell you the truth?

There some statements which were posted that were not correct in their historical requirements, so what I'm doing is setting it straight, with a minimum of my own opinion. The result is you will have a factual profile of the subject and the indians - who are only human - laid before you.

Jim Burnes

PeteBroccolo
10-22-2002, 12:28 AM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Jim Burnes:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ghostsix:
<strong>of You know perfectly well that a senior Army officer and a Marshal is not going to knowingly make a false statement.
.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yes, I do know that. Maybe it's ingrained training, but I accept your word on your word alone. But have you ever wanted an NCO that would not tell you the truth?

There some statements which were posted that were not correct in their historical requirements, so what I'm doing is setting it straight, with a minimum of my own opinion. The result is you will have a factual profile of the subject and the indians - who are only human - laid before you.

Jim Burnes</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Check your PM

Jim Burnes
10-22-2002, 04:09 PM
I'm getting beefed by my relatives for not just unloading on this thread. But if I did bring down smoke, there would be just this huge useless argument.

Jim Burnes

PeteBroccolo
10-23-2002, 08:32 PM
I have had some problems with some LEO/PO of First Nations heritage, but no more than LEO/PO of any other heritage/racial background.

Ever since I started posting to this forum I have always found the posts by Jim Burnes, who happens to be of First Nations heritage, to be thoughtful, respectful of others and on-point. There are many other current, and ex-, LEO/PO/Military personnel that post here that I could say the same about, and whom I was unaware happened to be of First Nations heritage until this thread came up.

I am very proud to tell people that I post to this Forum, and I promote this site due to the overall professionalism of the posters who claim to be LEO/PO (some of whom I have been able to independently confirm their claimed status). I find the generally good-natured inter-agency, or inter-unit, ribbing that goes on here to be common to what goes on within my Force or between members of my Force and other Law Enforcement Agencies here. What I find troublesome is when people come onto this Forum and post topics, opinions or comments that are dis-respectful to supposedly brother (and sister) LEO/PO.

I guess what it comes down to is, are each of us a professional who chooses to take the high road, or are we each the stereotype that many cynical civilians tend to label us as?

Masscop
10-23-2002, 09:38 PM
I am curious, some Tribal Police Officers can be arrested for impersinating a Police Officer if they leave thier juristiction? That is the most ediotic thing I have ever heard, what are the elements for impersinating a P.O in your states? Here in Ma you can walk around in a full uniform, as long as you don't take or attempt to take any official actions a P.O would take.

SpecOpsWarrior
10-24-2002, 07:03 AM
Pete, very good reply. You took the high road, which is good, but I'm not.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Ghostsix:
<strong>"I have no reason to care what the R.C.M.P.think. One more govt. change and they will be K.G.B."</strong> </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If you dont care about an R.C.M.P. opinion, then why are you disparaging them by comparing them to the K.G.B.????

<small>[ 10-24-2002, 07:04 AM: Message edited by: SpecOpsWarrior ]</small>

Jim Burnes
10-24-2002, 10:26 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Masscop:
<strong>I am curious, some Tribal Police Officers can be arrested for impersinating a Police Officer if they leave thier juristiction? That is the most ediotic thing I have ever heard, </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Masscop,

That would be a sorry incident if it happened, and in some states it might. I was in the Tulsa County, OK Federal courthouse today on business and I noted that in the parking lots were parked units from the state, cities of Tulsa, Okemulgee and Wagnoner (3 different counties right there); in the halls waiting on court were officers from state, cities and tribal police officers too.

My own tribal police, the Cherokee Marshals have to patrol our lands in what used to be a reservation (which was disolved in 1907) and to do that must cross over Oklahoma state land, and use state roadways to get from one place to another. Well, the county SO has to cross Cherokee land to conduct their business too. Sometimes, more often than not, both agencies work together.

The Cherokee have a tactical squad that is trained and has made many meth raids in their county and have been used in neighboring counties too, at the request of those non-indian agencies. Because they are professional and they perform as promised.

So it depends on what state, and what part of the state. It also depends on how the indians on their reservation are seen as good neighbors or not.

Bottom line is of course, is that tribal police are not false, they deal with the same crap as any other agency.

Jim Burnes

Jim Burnes
10-27-2002, 04:42 PM
Kirch,

Has any of this answered your questions regards tribal police?

Jim Burnes

Masscop
10-28-2002, 08:17 AM
Well as far as I'm concerned your a cop weather you work for Tribal, College, hospital or any other agency. Were all brother and sisters in my eyes.

ASOinFL
10-28-2002, 04:22 PM
Agreed. You put that badge and make a committment to the public and society....and make an effort to be a postive effort in society....then your on the team.

Jim Burnes
10-28-2002, 05:04 PM
That's my whole point.

Jim Burnes

ghostsix
10-29-2002, 04:11 AM
It would have been the Haida that far south, I suppose.
As you might imagine, I travel a lot. I like history, in fact I majored in it and phil.

I know next to nothing about Tribal Police save what books say. Until lions write books history will honor the hunter.

I have no reason to not consider sources that a reasonable and prudent man would consider.

The Ho-Chunk historian sent me info. I never did find out what it means, for a certainty.
I have been to many sites between the costs.
Waco has a lot at the Texas Ranger CO.E HQ.

My business was killing people and breaking their stuff. Now I am a small township Marshal.
I fail to see the relevance of my pay grade. I am a Mustang, since Jim brought the subject up. ABN, Ranger, CIB should be enough.

Hardly credentials for any other than repeating what I read and hear. I was not there. Some of my friends Grandfathers were. However, this is 19th. Cent.

The U. of OK has published many books on the Tribal subject. Believe them or not,I have less interest than I did.

None the less,the fact that things are FUBAR can escape no one.

I used to go to Canada to hunt and fish; no more. Afghanistan is more friendly to gunmen.

Nov.2002 of The NRA mag has an interesting artical on a US Marshal, Wiley Hains, who worked with the Osage Indian Police in the Indian Territory.

Believe what you want. I was not there.

I ret. in 1984 thus missing the klinton pc nonsense.

They still send me the cheque.

Don
10-29-2002, 11:47 AM
Jim Burnes, check your PM.

PeteBroccolo
10-29-2002, 12:17 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ghostsix:
<strong>I used to go to Canada to hunt and fish; no more. Afghanistan is more friendly to gunmen.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Check your PM

kirch
10-29-2002, 12:47 PM
Not only has it answered my original question, it's taken it in a whole new way I could have never imagined.

Jim Burnes
10-29-2002, 09:22 PM
Don, I got your PM from a few days ago. Saved it too.

Jim Burnes

Mike Sullivan
10-29-2002, 09:29 PM
I don't think bringing a movie into this is relevant, is it?

Jim Burnes
10-29-2002, 10:11 PM
Sure it is, if the movie is Smoke Signals. We can have popcorn and watch a film about indians without all that longknives crapola :p

But, where is a movie mentioned in this thread?

ghostsix
10-30-2002, 07:46 AM
OK, I give up. As a Peace Officer, my purpose is not to disturb it.

I am not surprised that the BIA is a mess after reading this most educational post.

<small>[ 10-30-2002, 07:50 AM: Message edited by: ghostsix ]</small>

navyfiveo
10-30-2002, 08:16 AM
Another Question.....
Do the Tribal Police hire or are there "non-native" Police Officers. If so, how do the Native react to them enforcing Tribal law on them?

Jim Burnes
10-30-2002, 11:53 AM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by MA2 Jason Brush:
<strong>If so, how do the Native react to them enforcing Tribal law on them?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The term 'tribal police' is that used for the police agency that works for any particular tribe of American Indians. But a tribal police officer is often non-indian and just as often not a member of that tribe. Like any other, the goal in hiring is to obtain the best available.

There will be on some reservations, instances of tribal police officers who are hired just because of their connections. That's common.

Regards how the non-tribal member tribal police officer is treated, well, they enforce the law. They get more respect from the ones who are in their 80s than they do from the ones in their 20s. There it is.

Jim Burnes

PeteBroccolo
10-31-2002, 11:16 AM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by ghostsix:
<strong>I used to go to Canada to hunt and fish; no more. Afghanistan is more friendly to gunmen.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Click on the "my profile" line and check for a message that I sent you that I am waiting for your reply to.

kirch
10-31-2002, 12:45 PM
Since we're on the topic of law enforcement and Indians, did anyone see the front page article in the Wall Street Journal today?

Politics of Race Roil a Quiet County

A clash between white county sheriffs and Sioux Indians in Bennett County over a campaign to reduce outstanding arrest warrants has set the stage for the most contentious elections in the rural South Dakota county in years.

Jim Burnes
10-31-2002, 02:29 PM
I could not get your link. Can you try that again?

Although I am certain I know the background, I'll wait to read the article before replying.

My cousins in that county say however, its just the samo-sameo.

Jim Burnes

kirch
10-31-2002, 02:56 PM
Sorry, the link won't work because you have to subscribe to the WSJ Online to view the article. It was a pretty lengthy article or I would have transcribed it. If you don't have a copy of the WSJ handy, PM me and I can fax it to you.

Jim Burnes
10-31-2002, 08:22 PM
Don't bother with the fax, I'll call my cousin. He can explain in detail what's up.

Jim Burnes

ghostsix
11-06-2002, 03:11 AM
I E-mailed the RCMP.
Good, bad or indifferent, our agencies are working together.
As we have rights, I can see the court mess coming.

Cheyenne Woman1
03-29-2003, 05:20 AM
The movie, "Thunderheart" was actually based on some historical events on a number of Reserve lands. Good movie and well liked for a variety of reasons. I understand Mr.Val Kilmer has Cherokee ancestry.I think that is right.Some of the actors were also real A.I.M leadership.

Federal Reserves are lands in a following a Protocol that many times can overlap and then shift.Major Crimes Act and Assimilative Crimes Act is the Rule of Law on Federal Treaty Lands.

U.S.Govt.Federal Law Enforcement Agencies holds highest Law Enforcement Jurisdiction.Because they are Federally Recognized Treaty Lands.The U.S.Govt.B.I.A. Agents are deployed by the U.S.Govt too.They work together in Federal Laws Cases on Federal Reserves.The U.S.Govt Dept of Justice also has a Tribal Justice Dept force of AG's(Attorney Generals)now too.U.S.Govt.F.B.I. is directed by the Dept.of Justice protocol.

The RCMP's hold jurisdiction on First Nations Reserves of Canada and U.S.Govt.F.B.I. Agents are also in International Countries too.Some one from Canada might want to claify that comment too.No problem for me to learn more.

Do you mind sharing why you are choosing Tribal Cops? I am interested.

Cheyenne Woman1....

Cheyenne Woman1
03-29-2003, 05:34 AM
As far as the comments Mr.Burnes made on the Crow Nation and the problems occuring with the Tribal Police? They need only contact our National Congress of American Indians for some dispute intervention.I am really proud of the great work they are doing. They can do a great deal in finding what the problems are and making recomendations to the citizens of the Tribe (Nation)to start. Just my thoughts.

Many of the Nations have long held in respect LEO Tribal Agencies Officers too.They might want to have a meeting with some of them too.Additional training or as the Blackfeet Nation of Montana brought in the B.I.A to take jurisdiction and sort it out and review each Officers performance and job history.Then go through and new rehires or fire them. Maybe some seasoned Officers from other Tribes might do short to long term job change.At the Nations discretion of course.

What do you think Mr.Burnes?

Cheyenne Woman1....

Cheyenne Woman1
03-29-2003, 06:20 AM
ghostsix, The Shoshone are a well known respected Nation to our Tribes history. I have a lot of great information on them too.

The name "Sioux" means enemy as it Noudawasioux or Real Adders or Snakes. I just don't call them that out of respect.We had great insults back then. Sat around campfires before the battles and trying em out and perfecting them. The Dakota/Lakota/Nakota are kin Tribes.But we Chippewa were the Traditional enemies with the Dakota but we sang their war songs in honoring our enemies also.As they did ours too. Intermarriage was very common.A fact of the greatest of our Leaders and Nations.

The Great Illinois Confederacy warriors killed a respected Seneca Wolf Clan Sachem Cheif and the war was on.They nearly exterminated the Illinois Confederacy.But the women and children were brought among the Iroquois Nations Confederacy and the bloodlines are still there. They were not slaves but accepted as family.

The Comanche are called the Masters of the Horse because they first took them from the Spaniards in trade and raiding.Their Buffalo herd hunting chase was a huge territory.The Lakota called the Lords of the Plains. The Comanche are well respected among the Nations too.The U.S.Military knows them as tough warriors and the Comanche Code Talkers were highly respected as are the most well known of the Navaho Code Talkers."Wind Talkers" is a great movie on the Navajo Code Talkers.

Apaches? They are highly respected in the Tribes and the U.S.Military in serving with distinction. They also do not run from trouble either.Comanche are tough fighters and I don't think they even will budge in a warrior stance fight.I never heard of such a happening. Apache and Comanche are tough enough.

I understand they are planning a movie about the great Comanche leader and Statesman and War Cheif and a Rancher too Mr.Quanah Parker.It is being called "Eagle of the Comanche".Good name as he was really respected. In the Comanche Nation and WA DC too. He was a smart businessman and a real Gentleman and treated women well too.

Old U.S.Army records show the Army Calvary was pretty scared of the tough Apache guerilla fighters.They had a real healthy respect for them.

On jurisdiction if State Recognized only they are in State jurisdiction.Federal Reserves are Federal jurisdiction.Hope that helps some.

Cheyenne Woman1....

Grum K
03-31-2003, 01:38 PM
This may be a little off topic for this thread but for an interesting read and for a different perspective on the relationship between Police and First Nations, the history of the RCMP is an excellent read.

Here's a little background on it

The force was founded August 30, 1873 in response to the general lawlessness on the Canadian Prairie. Of particular concern was the slaughter of the Blackfoot and Assiniboine by whiskey traders operating out of Fort Benton, Montana. It was to originally be called a "mounted rifle" unit but the name was changed to "mounted police" to avoid giving the impression to the Americans that a military force was heading west.

In the summer of 1874, the "old originals" marched west from Fort Dufferin Manitobe to Fort Whoop-up located close to present day Lethbridge Alberta. The force was soon busy policing the area of southern Alberta which was home to the Assiniboine, Blackfoot, Bloods, Peigans, Sarcee and Saulteaux.

In the summer of 1876, the Sioux asked the Blackfoot nation to help them fight the U.S. Cavalry, and in return would help them exterminate the whites north of the border. Chief CROWFOOT of the Blackfeet refused stating the the white men are our friends, to which the Sioux threatened reprisals for the Blackfoot inactions. Chief CROWFOOT met with the force who pledged to protect the Blackfoot from the Sioux, and in return CROWFOOT pledged to make 2000 warriors available if the Sioux should invade Canada.

In December 1876, the Sioux crossed into Canada to seek refuge from the U.S. cavalry. Inspector WALSH met with Sitting Bull and told the Sioux that they must obey the Queen's laws and not attack any Americans from Canadian soil. The Sioux agreed and remained in Canada.

In 1877, the first treaties were signed with the First Nations. Chief REDCROW stated that "Three years ago, I met and shook hands with Stamixotokan ("Bull's head" in translation, meaning Assistant Commisioner MCLEOD" Since that time he has made me many promises. He kept them all. I entirely trust Stamixotokan, and will leave everything to him, I will sign with CROWFOOT. About fifteen other chiefs spoke in the same vein. MCLEOD would later resign from the Force to protest the Federal Government's failure to keep its treaty promises.

The Force today continues to provide policing services to First Nations all across Canada. The delivery of policing comes in many forms, such as stand-alone policing, formal and informal partnerships with band constables, partnerships with First Nation police forces such as the Dakota Ojibway Police Service from Southern Manitoba.

I'm sure Pete or myself would be more then happy to suggest titles to read or answer any questions about the subject.

Grum

Sleuth
03-31-2003, 02:11 PM
I used to work with an attorney who was considered one of the top US experts on Indian Laws. He told me there are 5 different types of reservation, and the nature of the officers on each type were slightly different. Then there is the BIA police (I used to guest lecture at their academy).

The Indian Nations are Soverign Dependancies, meaning that (in most cases) the US is only responsible for National Defense and Currency. Within Tribal lands, what is legally called "indian country", they are (depending on the treaty) independent. Some tribes issue their own licence plates, and at least one Nation issues their own passports, recognized by lots of countries. They also define their own requirments to be an enrolled member of the nation.

As to their police, on the reservation they have jurisdiction over all crimes except the "seven deadly sins", major crimes under the FBI. It becomes confusing when a Indian, not of that nation, commits a crime on a tribal member (usually goes to Federal Court), or a non-indian comits the same crime against a tribal member (usually goes to state court). More confusing is non-indian on non-indian crime on a reservation.
On many reservations, the officers are cross designated as sheriff's deputies.

I was stationed on, and worked very closely with the officers of one Nation. They had officers who were enrolled members of several Nations, and a few who were not Indians. Many of our officers were former BIA or tribal officers from other nations. Our officers informed us never to hire an Apache, as they would not work with him/her. Some traditional hatreds still ran deep.

None of us, Federal or Tribal, cared who stepped out of the car when we needed backup. We we spred thin, and glad to see anyone with a badge.

kirch
04-01-2003, 11:43 AM
Jim:

Yes, my questions have been answered, and then some. But recent news has me thinking about this again.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court is now hearing a case where a sheriff's dept in CA attempted to serve a search warrant on a casino on tribal land. They were looking for payroll records for two employees charged with welfare fraud, I believe. The casino refused and the county asked the tribe to intervene. The tribe refused, so the county went to the building where the payroll records were kept, broke open the locks and conducted their search.

Lower courts have ruled that this is a violation of the tribe's sovereign status. The county is arguing that the tribe is not an independent sovereign state and, therefore, they can serve search warrants since the tribal land is within their county.

Thoughts?