if you knew how offensive and downright annoying your post is...you would edit it harshly. Accusing people of bias because they believe a guilty person to be guilty is really inappropriate.
Peltier, Mumia, pollard, OJ - these defense cases by ethnic cheerleading tick me off to no end.
From wikipedia:
Leonard Peltier provided numerous alibis, to different people, about his activities on the morning of the attacks. In an interview with the author Peter Matthiessen (In the Spirit of Crazy Horse 1983), Peltier described working on a car in Oglala, claiming to have driven back to the Jumping Bull Compound about an hour before the shooting started. In an interview with Lee Hill, he described being woken up in the tent city at the ranch by the sound of gunshots. To Harvey Arden, for Prison Writings, he described enjoying a beautiful morning before he heard the firing.[9]
and also according to wikipedia, he admitted shooting at the federal agents, just not hitting them:
In his 1999 memoir, Peltier admitted that he fired at the agents, but denies that he fired the fatal shots that killed them.
I am sure the trial was not perfect - none of them are. But the question is why all this proof doesn't prove him, well, guilty.