Jim Gilchrist Speaks on Shawna

January 22, 2010

JSF:  Do you think that there was an agenda by government agencies to get Shawna Forde?

JG:  No.  They might not have liked her, seen an opportunity to seize her, and to make an example of her.  Nobody will know until the trial starts, if the evidence is really convincing, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that she participated in the crime.

JSF:  Shawna indicates she knows who’s dirty, who’s taking bribes, and turning a blind eye.  Do you think they nailed her because she knew certain things and they didn’t want it to come out?

JG:  Now that is interesting!  She sent me a couple of emails about getting in deep undercover, and she asked, “please contact law enforcement and get me some protection.”  I remember thinking, she’s getting too close to some really bad people, if she’s worried about her life, about being murdered.  And I was wondering, why would she go to that extent?  I was confused; she was getting that close to bandits like that without the help of law enforcement, unless she was working with law enforcement.

JSF:  Do you have any feeling about whether she’s innocent?

JG:  I would lean toward innocence.  I never pictured her doing something like this.  I never saw her as being violent.  The 3 or 4 times I saw her, she was always very personable with everybody.  Now there were people who didn’t like her, like Jeff Schwilk, or William Gheen.  She refused to work (raising money or recruiting members) for Gheen in Washington state.  As soon as he found out she was communicating with the Minuteman Project, every time she posted something or emailed, he’d beat up on her.    Gheen and Schwilk repeatedly assaulted her in their internet postings from December 2008 through about March or April of 2009.  After she was beaten and raped and then shot, everyone—Gheen, Schwilk, Nightingale, and Simcox were posting all sorts of propaganda and bogus stuff, and I came to her defense.  Nobody ever proved that she shot herself, or that she had anything to do with her husband getting shot. 

The dysfunctional duo of Gheen and Schwilk continued their attacks with fervor in June of 2009, pronouncing her guilty without a trial.  Gheen and Schwilk, in my opinion, are predators, possible sociopaths, and without any semblance of conscience.

I am so wary of people being charged with anything, because I’ve been charged in a civil complaint.  After 2 ½ years, the judge finally exonerated me.  And Schwilk and Gheen were all condemning me (before the case even got to trial)! 

There is a certain mentality in our country from the early 1600s…the witch-hunters.  There are people who want to accuse you of something you haven’t done in the morning, arrest you and convict you of it in the afternoon and literally hang you in the street in public at 6 o’clock that same day.  And days or months later they find out you really had nothing to do with whatever they accused you of, but oh, well, that’s the way stuff happens.

I have to be very wary about anyone being charged with anything anymore.  The court system worked for me, but the court of public opinion is still out to get me.  They want Shawna, Bush, and Gaxiola to be guilty because they know they can use that against me.  They’re going to say, “Gilchrist is also guilty—he put them up to it!” 

The facts or the truth doesn’t matter.  It’s what people want to believe.  They want to believe she’s guilty.  The newspaper reporters want to believe Shawna is guilty because that is going to fit into their personal biased vision of the world.  It doesn’t matter what the facts are. 

JSF:  What do you think about Sheriff Dupnik saying Shawna’s a psychopath?

JG:  She never made me feel afraid, ever.  She never presented to me to be strange.  She was always very respectful to me, very polite, considerate.  She was different, she was a strong woman, she was opinionated.  But I meet strong opinionated men and women all the time!  She never impressed me as being psychopathic or sociopathic.  I knew she had a checkered past, but that was 20 years in the past!  It has nothing to do with who she is nowShe never presented herself as being a bad person.  I knew the people who were attacking her were also attacking me, so I put little credence in what they were saying.

Gheen, Schwilk and Nightingale went on a relentless campaign for months, posting propaganda about how she fabricated everything, and she’s a liar, because Gilchrist tells her what to lie about.  Even when her daughter went missing for 5 days, they hammered her about how she and I were cooking up a media event.  They tortured her for months on the internet.  You can’t just say that because someone is suspicious of somebody, that it must be true; they must be guilty.  That goes right back to predatory witch-hunting, and we got rid of that 300-400 years ago.  Being a victim of that kind of thing, I am very wary of anybody being charged with anything anymore, as much as I am a pro-law enforcement person.  I am very cautious that we cannot be so pro-law that we are just throwing everybody in jail and in prison because somebody says something.  Each of us has been in this situation, where you’re accused of doing something you didn’t do.

There have been times when somebody, like Johnny Sutton (Ramos and Compean’s prosecutor), has been dirty, has had an agenda, had a mission, and that mission was to get a conviction regardless of facts or circumstances.

JSF:  Who will profit if Shawna is convicted?

JG:  The open borders fanatics will prosper.  It could stall the immigration law enforcement movement, and our opponents will use any incident to stop us.  Up until a couple of years ago, I was concerned that someone wanted to frame me.

JSF:  What kind of treatment should Shawna get under the law?

JG:  Shawna is entitled to all the rights of anyone else on U.S. territory:  to a fair and speedy trial; the protocol of the court must respect her rights, and they will, and that’s what her court-appointed attorneys are for.

JSF:  What do you think of them holding her in solitary confinement for 7 months?

JG:  I think it’s cruel and unusual; I think it’s torturous. Regardless of whether she had anything to do with this or not, does law enforcement enable them to cruelly imprison someone?  I think it probably should not.  I don’t know why they were allowed to do it.  Again, I must reiterate that I am an avid supporter of law enforcement, so I cannot condemn the jail system or the police for what they are doing.  But I am concerned, I am worried, about the well-being of anybody in a jail who has not been convicted of anything.  The big difference is that we have a suspect, why would you put that suspect into solitary confinement?  This is not someone who’s been convicted of a mass murder and they’ve gotten life without parole!  Why would you do that to someone who’s a suspect, who hasn’t been convicted of anything?

JSF:  What are the implications of the Shawna Forde case with respect to the first and second amendment rights?

JG:  If the anti-second amendment, anti-constitutional crowd gets hold of an incident like this, they will say, “see what happens when you let people have guns—we have to confiscate them!”  As far as free speech, if Shawna’s being victimized because of her propensity to engage in freedom of assembly and free speech, it is certainly a very effective way of subliminally suppressing free speech.  People will be afraid to come out and present their grievances against the government or agencies of the government.  Like me, I was afraid [I would be framed]; someone would put 40 lbs. of cocaine in my trunk, the police would pull me over, and I would spend the rest of my life in prison!

JSF:  Do you think Shawna Forde was framed for this crime?

JG:  Anything is possible.


Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved

Comments