-
 A former senior FBI official has said that the agency
fired two pyrotechnic tear gas grenades on the last day of the 1993 Branch
Davidian siege, a day on which federal authorities have long insisted they
used nothing capable of starting a fire.
-
- The former official, Danny O. Coulson, said in an interview
that two devices known as M651 CS tear gas grenades were fired from FBI
grenade launchers hours before the compound erupted in flames April 19,
1993. He said that they were used with permission from FBI supervisors
but that they played no role in starting the fire.
-
- The federal government has consistently disputed accusations
that the FBI started the fire that consumed the Branch Davidian compound
with David Koresh and more than 80 followers inside. Government officials
have maintained that the FBI used only nonburning devices to insert tear
gas into the compound on April 19 because of fears that pyrotechnic tear
gas might spark a fire in the flimsy wooden structure.
-
- The statement by Mr. Coulson, founding commander of the
FBI's hostage rescue team and a deputy assistant FBI director at the time
of the incident near Waco, marks the first time that any government official
has publicly contradicted those assertions.
-
- On Monday, a spokesman with the U.S. Justice Department
again denied that any pyrotechnic devices were used.
-
- "We are aware of no evidence to support the notion
that any pyrotechnic devices were used by the federal government on April
19," Justice Department spokesman Myron Marlin said. "We've said
that all along."
-
- Mr. Coulson said the pyrotechnic grenades played no role
in starting the fire.
-
- Even if the devices played no role in the final fire,
however, a former Texas Ranger captain who headed the investigation of
the 1993 tragedy said Mr. Coulson's statement is "mind-boggling."
-
- "The stance has always been that they used no pyrotechnics
out there that day," said David Byrne, who retired from the agency
in August 1996. "There are some serious criminal violations if they
did. They have testified. They have done it before Congress. They've done
it in court. They've caused other people to testify that there were no
pyrotechnics used.
-
- "If that turns out not to be right, then somebody
will have some serious problems on a federal level," Capt. Byrne said.
-
- The issue of whether pyrotechnic devices were used by
the FBI on April 19 is a major focus of an ongoing inquiry by the Texas
Rangers and a key allegation in a pending federal wrongful-death lawsuit
filed against the government by surviving Davidians and families of those
who died.
-
- The issue was also a factor in a decision by the Texas
Department of Public Safety to persuade a federal judge in Waco to take
control of all the evidence in the case. In response to a DPS motion, U.S.
District Judge Walter Smith issued a sweeping order Aug. 8 requiring the
federal government to turn over all physical evidence, documents, recordings
and photographs related to the Davidian tragedy.
-
- James B. Francis, chairman of the commission that oversees
DPS, said Monday that Mr. Coulson's statement heightens his concern that
evidence gathered by Texas Rangers immediately after the 1993 tragedy contradicts
the federal government's account of what happened.
-
- "It goes a long way toward confirming why I say
that some of the evidence that DPS has or had in its possession is problematical
and needs to be evaluated by independent experts," he said.
-
- "A fair-minded person who looks at this evidence
would see that there is a problem with some of the things that the federal
government has said happened that day," Mr. Francis said.
-
- The Texas Rangers have had custody of key evidence from
the Davidian investigation since 1993, when they were assigned to investigate
the Feb. 28, 1993, shootout that began the tragedy.
-
- The standoff
-
- Four federal agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms died when a shootout erupted as they tried to search the compound
and arrest sect leader Koresh.
-
- The ensuing 51-day standoff ended when FBI agents used
tanks to spray CS tear gas and launch nonburning CS "Ferret' rounds
into the compound to try to force the sect's surrender. Ever since, Justice
Department officials ranging from Attorney General Janet Reno to the FBI's
chief spokesman in Waco repeatedly insisted to the media, Congress and
the courts that all of the CS tear gas used was nonpyrotechnic.
-
- But Mr. Coulson, then a deputy assistant director of
the FBI's criminal investigative division, said two M651 CS cartridges
were fired at an area known as "the pit," an underground structure
that led to tunnels that opened into the compound.
-
- "There were at least two pyrotechnic devices used
that day," said Mr. Coulson, who helped supervise the government's
handling of the siege.
-
- He said members of the FBI's hostage rescue team asked
to use the pyrotechnic devices because the "Ferret" rounds they
had been issued did not adequately penetrate the pit.
-
- He said two devices were fired after the request was
approved by FBI supervisors, including rescue unit Commander Richard Rogers.
Mr. Rogers, who has since retired, could not be reached for comment Monday.
-
- Mr. Coulson said that the devices are military ordnance
not commonly used or kept by the hostage unit.
-
- A military manual produced by the U.S. Army describes
the M651 as "pyrotechnic," with a burning time of 20 to 30 seconds.
The manual also warns that while not explosive, malfunctioning M651 canisters
have been known to explode on impact.
-
- A CBS television camera recorded footage of white smoke
billowing from the pit area between 8:30 and 9:30 a.m., and Mr. Coulson
said that smoke probably came from the two pyrotechnic grenades.
-
- "The fire did not start there. That's a lot of nothing,"
he said, noting that the fire erupted shortly after noon. Independent arson
investigators concluded it began simultaneously in three separate places
inside the compound.
-
- Fire plans
-
- FBI bugs picked up voices of Davidians discussing spreading
fuel and planning a fire hours before the compound burned. Arson investigators
also found evidence that five different accelerants, including gasoline,
charcoal lighter fluid and camp stove fuel, had been poured inside the
compound.
-
- Arson investigators have said their conclusion that the
FBI's tear gas played no role in the fire was partially based on the agency's
assurance that it used no pyrotechnic devices on April 19.
-
- Mr. Coulson said he had no idea why FBI officials did
not acknowledge the use of the pyrotechnic devices in their statements
to Congress and to investigators who conducted a lengthy Justice Department
Review of FBI actions in Waco.
-
- "The first thing they should've said, if we knew,
they should've said we fired," said Mr. Coulson, who now lives in
North Texas. "That's a problem."
-
- The evidence in custody of the Texas Rangers includes
one crime-scene photograph taken just after the compound fire that shows
what arms experts say is a spent M651 CS canister, a projectile that delivers
gas. The device was found in a pool of water outside the compound. A small-arms
and ammunition expert with Jane's Defense Information who examined a crime-scene
photograph of the device for The Dallas Morning News said its distinctive
design - a two-toned, gray-and-gun-metal canister ringed with a bright
red band - is unique to U.S. military pyrotechnic tear gas grenades.
-
- "The color coding is indicative of a 40 mm CS grenade,"
said the expert, Charles Cutshaw.
-
- Evidence questions
-
- Rangers began trying to find the device in their evidence
lockers after the photograph was brought to their attention by an independent
researcher long critical of the government's action's in Waco.
-
- The researcher, Mike McNulty, was allowed to view evidence
in DPS custody last fall and this spring when a U.S. Justice Department
official reversed the agency's long-standing policy barring all public
access.
-
- After Mr. McNulty asked to see the device in the crime-scene
photograph, the Rangers could not find it in their evidence lockers. They
also learned from Mr. McNulty that other evidence in their custody had
been mislabeled.
-
- Mr. McNulty's questions about evidence unleashed an uproar
in the Justice Department earlier this summer, federal officials have said.
Lawyers defending the government against the Davidian's wrongful-death
lawsuit did not learn he had been allowed to view the evidence until his
visits were mentioned in pleadings by the Davidians' lawyers.
-
- The matter then came to the attention of Mr. Francis,
chairman of the DPS commission, who asked Judge Smith to take control of
the evidence to safeguard it. Mr. Francis also ordered the Rangers' inquiry.
Federal prosecutor Bill Johnston in Waco acknowledged Monday that he is
assisting in the inquiry, but he declined further comment.
-
- "I wouldn't want to comment on the specifics, but
I am confident that the Rangers will get to the bottom of this," he
said.
-
- If the Rangers confirm Mr. Coulson's assertion, former
Ranger Capt. Byrne said, it could "open the floodgates" in what
is already among the most troubling failures for U.S. law enforcement.
-
- "Then we're going to say, 'Wait. Did they fire something
more? Some other kind that was consumed by the fire or was not recognized?'
I see where this is going to be an endless thing," he said.
-
- "This affects the credibility of law enforcement.
Not only the FBI, but it puts all law enforcement in question," he
said.
-
- ©1999 The Dallas Morning News
-
- ______________
-
-
- Tear Gas And The Branch Davidian Standoff 08/24/99
-
- From U.S. Army data sheet and operating instructions
on the M651 CS cartridge teargas grenade, the device that a former FBI
official said was used at the standoff:
-
- º "Type of Filling: pyrotechnic mixture."
º "Burning time: 20 to 30 seconds." º "The M651
cartridges are not explosive rounds; however, a malfunctioning projectile
may explode upon impact."
-
- Prior statements by federal officials and weapons experts
that the CS tear gas used at Waco was nonpyrotechnic.
-
- º From April 28, 1993, testimony of Attorney General
Janet Reno before the House Judiciary Committee: "I wanted and received
assurances that the gas and its means of use were not pyrotechnic. I was
concerned about intentional or accidental explosions."
-
- º From April 28, 1993, testimony of William Sessions,
then director of the FBI, to the House Judiciary Committee: "One critical
factor was that CS gas can be used without pyrotechnics. It will not start
or contribute to a fire."
-
- º From written responses from Ms. Reno to questions
raised by the committee: "With respect to the introduction of tear
gas on April 19, it was my understanding that the tear gas produced no
risk of fire. ... Again, we regarded the use of tear gas to be safe since
it is nonpyrotechnic and was injected in a liquid form that could not have
caused a fire."
-
- º From the October 1993 "Report to the Deputy
Attorney General on the Events at Waco, Texas," under heading titled
False Accusations That the FBI Started the Fire: "In addition, a nationally
recognized team of arson experts ... has concluded that the Davidians started
the fire, that the fire could not have been started by accident at a single
point of origin, and that the gas delivery systems the FBI used were completely
nonincendiary."
-
- º From the July 1995 congressional testimony of
British government chemical weapons expert David Upshall about the use
of nonpyrotechnic devices called "ferret rounds" to deliver CS
tear gas in Waco: "It is deliberately chosen, I believe in the United
States of America, to replace the pyrotechnic device because your buildings
have a very high wood content. They are wood frame buildings, and, therefore,
in the case of pyrotechnic devices, they have tended to catch fire."
|
