Help support alternative media by visiting our advertisers

Sheepdog Supplies

Extremism on Trial! Roy Murry Murder Case

The prosecution's case has been based on fear and emotion, and very little actual evidence.


Extremism on Trial!

Roy Murry Murder Case

by Shari Dovale

Roy Murry first came into the public view when he was put on the short list for an appointment to fill the seat of Sen. Bob McCaslin when he stepped down in 2011 due to health problems.

Being passed over for that position could have been attributed to an arrest in Nevada for carrying a concealed weapon as well as sleeping in public.

As a regular customer of the ‘Front Sight’ Firearms Training Institute, it was not unusual to find Murry traveling with weapons though Nevada. During one such trip, Murry pulled over to the side of the road when he became too tired to drive. This is where the police found him.

Murry is now back in the public eye as the defendant in a triple murder and arson trial in Spokane, Washington.

Murry is accused of shooting his in-laws, Terrence and Lisa Canfield as well as Lisa’s son John Constable, then setting fire to the property to cover up the murders. The murders took place in May 2015 in Colbert, just north of Spokane.

This case is important because, regardless of who committed these crimes, the prosecutor, elected District Attorney Larry Haskell, is using this case to wage war against the right-wing conservative prepping community.

It was not difficult to prove the crime of murder, nor was is hard to explain that it was arson and not an accidental fire. However, the prosecution has yet to tie Murry directly to the crime scene, with the exception of being divorced (separated at the time) from the victims’ daughter.

Murry is a veteran, serving two tours in Iraq. He currently controls his PTSD through medications, but has a distrust of the Federal government. He is a ‘prepper’ and stockpiles supplies for emergencies, as well as selling medical supplies to other like-minded individuals.

The prosecution’s case has been based on fear and emotion. They have brought numerous witnesses to tell the jury how Murry stockpiled supplies, bad mouthed the government, and didn’t like ‘dirty ammo.’

This is a very important point. The prosecution is trying to get each witness to tell the jury that Roy always collected his brass after shooting, always cleaned the bullets before loading his weapons, etc. However, the witnesses thus far have not really picked up on these clues.

Even Murry’s ex-wife, Erica Montgomery testified that Roy was not obsessive about wiping brass after target practice. He was, however, meticulous when he would reload the brass. This is the point that the prosecutors hoped would get missed, but the defense did not let it pass. Good for them!

Montgomery was a good witness. She stressed Roy’s love of guns, his insistence on teaching her self defense, and how he could ‘clear’ a house when looking for intruders. She also cried in front of the jury when she saw Murry from the witness stand. But she could not explain why the police did not find any fingerprints on the casings at the crime scene.

The prosecution has utilized several witnesses to explain Murry’s preference for military equipment, such as body armor, and how scary that is to even police officers. One officer said he was concerned when he saw a ‘smoke grenade’ and camouflage clothing in Murry’s car.

The fact is, if this man committed these crimes, then he absolutely deserves to be punished according to the law of the land.

But –

Do not put an ideology or lifestyle on trial. Do not put a political stance on trial.

It has not been long enough since the historic election of Donald J. Trump for the country to stop it’s 8-year-old habits of demonizing the conservatives. A person can believe in less government and self-sufficiency without being put on trial for these beliefs.

If the man did the crime, then by all means, he should do the time. But he needs to be convicted on the evidence, of which the prosecution has shown very little to date.

Redoubt News is in the courtroom hearing the evidence as it is presented. Watch for updates later this week.

2 Comments on Extremism on Trial! Roy Murry Murder Case

  1. This is all too familiar. I spent several years behind the Iron Curtain and had many friends who escaped from there. Life under communist tyrants meant that, If it were rumored that you did not “trust” the Soviet government and/or their satellite nation puppet regimes in their goal of liberating the oppressed workers of the world, then you were either a criminal and sent to the camps > or < you HAD to be "insane" as proven by your anti-social and anti-government thoughts and actions. To 'cure' such an illness, the protectors of the nation, would see that you are taken into a 'protective custody' to be rehabilitated through labor, deprivation and psychotropic drugs for the purpose of being 'cured' of this anti-social(ist) , acute counter-revolutionary behavior. Naturally, in either the camps or 'the hospitals' the other inmates were also useful to help to 'condition' you to correct behavior abd love of the government. The same things is done here, only a different flavor and US MSM propaganda is more effective on the general public.

    Welcome to the USSA. Time to take my meds and watch TV – to be 'cured'.

  2. “… but has a distrust of the Federal government.”

    Is his distrust of “federal government”, meaning the US Constitution and each state’s Constitution? Or is it distrust of those serving within our government who have proven to be liars, extremely corrupt – not all of them, but many at all levels.

    Being armed is a constitutional requirement. Read Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 15 & 16, with Clause 16 being the duties that those that serve within the state and general (federal) have TO the people acting as the Militias. Don’t forget that Clause 15 lists whenthose who serve within our governments are REQUIRED to use the Militias (armed and trained Americans – plus knowledgeable about the US Constitution and their own state’s Constitution. Those that serve within our governments are required to use the Militia(s) as its constitutionally contracted and assigned duties for the purposes of:
    — Enforcing the US Constitution (supreme law and contract that all who serve within our governments are bound to follow) and each state’s Constitution (highest law of the state and the contract that all who serve within that particular state are bound to follow with the US Constitution being the highest and supreme contract),
    — Enforcing and keeping the “Laws of the Union” (which are constitutional laws ONLY),
    — Protecting the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
    — “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

    That it is lawfully a crime to not be armed for those purposes unless there was a pardon from that duty, and a fee paid for the others that must serve instead.

    George Washington: “It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government…, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.” (“Sentiments on a Peace Establishment”, letter to Alexander Hamilton; “The Writings of George Washington”)

    So why are those who are serving within are government keeping bringing up being armed as if it was a crime? Are they committing a felony and the crime of Perjury? Are they domestic enemies of the USA and the American people? Possibly traitors?

    Our government is in writing, and there is no excuse for those who serve within it to not know what is and is not allowed; and that includes those that serve within the courts.

    Hopefully this man is getting a knowledgeable jury, that will require EVIDENCE not emotion. If he did the crime, then he should pay the penalty. But if he did NOT do the crime, then he should not be imprisoned by domestic enemies of the American people, of our constitutional government that they are under contract and Oath to follow.

1 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Convicting Preppers? – Murry Murder Trial - Redoubt News - Washington

Comments are closed.