Jared Loughner Indicted: Federal Grand Jury Indicts Arizona Shooting Suspect

PHOENIX — A federal grand jury on Wednesday indicted the suspect in the deadly Arizona shooting rampage that wounded U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

The indictment against Jared Loughner, 22, accuses him of attempting to assassinate Giffords and trying to kill two of her aides.

It does not include two murder charges listed in an earlier criminal complaint for the deaths of Giffords aide Gabe Zimmerman, 30, and U.S. District Judge John Roll, 63.

Those are potential death penalty charges. A statement from the U.S. attorney for Arizona, Dennis Burke, said those require a more painstaking process under Justice Department rules.

Burke said the initial indictment issued by a grand jury in Tucson was just the beginning of federal legal action against the 22-year-old Tucson resident.

Six people were killed and 13 wounded in the Jan. 8 attack at a grocery store in Tucson as Giffords held a meet-and-greet with constituents. State charges are pending.

Calls to each of Loughner's attorneys, Judy Clarke and Mark Fleming, weren't immediately returned Wednesday evening.

The indictment was expected. The federal criminal code mandates that an indictment be brought within 30 days of an arrest.

Burke said the investigation is still in its early stages, and additional charges are likely.

Before federal officials seek charges carrying the death penalty, families of the victims will be consulted and a review by a Justice Department committee is required.

Loughner remains in federal custody without the possibility of bond. He is set for a preliminary hearing on Monday in Phoenix.

The San Diego-based judge set to hear the case ordered it moved to a larger federal courtroom on Wednesday. The courtroom is the centerpiece of the downtown Phoenix courthouse and is mostly used for ceremonial and high-profile hearings.

Comments

[Hydra8]

01:54 PM on 01/24/2011

The right may wish to deny Sarah Palin had anything to do with the shootings in Tucson however her "targets" were those who supported the health care bill and one of them was Gabrielle Giffords. Although she did not shoot the gun herself she has been used by the GOP to incite hate, anger and strongly went after the democrats who voted for it. The subliminal messages in ads and photos have much to say about her motives in attacking the left. It is that very health care that has kept Dick Cheney alive with tax dollars and Giffords for that matter as well as the other victims of the shooting.
http://www.politicolnews.com/sarah-palin-targets-health-care-supporters/

[lesterbud]

11:14 AM on 01/21/2011

All the anguish and self-excuses that have been generated since the day this lunatic committed this crime.
But we are avoiding the proper question in our mutual quests to blame others and excuse ourselves.

The question is not DID the violent rhetoric between political extremists drive this person to kill these people.

The question should be IS IT POSSIBLE that the violent rhetoric between political extremists may influence someone to commit such a horrible crime.

The answer is obviously yes and there is plenty of evidence in support - gunman being stopped on his way to shoot up an ACLU office in CA, huge increase in violent threats against our President and other lawmakers, threats against judges and juries on the rise. On and On.

Given that, the next question is:
Why don't the 80% of us who consider ourselves intelligent citizens at, or somewhere near the middle of the political spectrum, demand that the zealots from both sides, including the foaming mouths on television and radio, cease their mindless rhetoric and report facts and information, rather than propaganda?
A boycott should ensue.

[Francois Bergeron]

04:02 AM on 01/21/2011

Guns should be for hunting.
You only need specific types of guns for that. And the people who hunt should be well supervised. I'm guessing that's how it is in most "advanced" societies.
Situations where people successfully defend themselves with a gun are so rare as to be statistically unimportant.
OK. Lemme have it. With both barrels.

[PCPrincess]

05:46 PM on 01/20/2011

The right is out in force on this one.

[Barton449]

04:12 PM on 01/20/2011

Aren't all you libs humiliated by all your leader's talk of talk radio and politics
being the cause of the shooting. When what now is shown as simply a deranged killer?

[johnny dio]

04:20 PM on 01/20/2011

I was unaware that "he was a deranged killer" had been established as the sole motivator for his acts.

[Barton449]

04:48 PM on 01/20/2011

What was established was that he couldn't have listened to talk radio
because he never listened to radio. iPod, dude!
What was established was that he was Apolitical.
What was established was that he is a psycho.
Your beloved bungler in Chief established that,
so the shooter could have a proper defense.

[68Namvet]

04:34 PM on 01/20/2011

You mean as Sarah Palin described him - a "apolitical, left leaning, obviously troubled mentally ill man"?

Aren't all you cons humiliated by your talking heads descriptions of him as both "apolitical" (meaning having no political bias) and "left leaning" (meaning having a political bias toward liberal)?

[Barton449]

05:20 PM on 01/20/2011

Your beloved Messiah was the one who clearly stated that he was a deranged gunman.
Then he went on to jeopardize the case more by saying the judge was not on official business.
Look to your leader.

[PC Contrarian]

01:39 PM on 01/20/2011

"If we're looking for a rationale other than "Loughner was nuts," I think the more relevant facts about him are that he was an atheist who detested religion and religious people, made lots of references to satanic New Age "conscience dreaming" (sic) and was involved in the occult.

When a fellow participant on a UFO website wrote a lengthy response to Loughner's question about "what is wrong or right with the current date?" which included the subordinate clause, "a day in Christ is as a thousand years," Loughner fixated on that one line, railing, "I won't listen to that fictitious crap without the author. This is laughable to notice a gospel or writing related to Christ."

Shouldn't we at least bring Bill Maher in for questioning?"

[PCPrincess]

05:45 PM on 01/20/2011

Athiests are NOT anti-christ or evil. We just don't believe in a deity. Don't tie the two together. If he happened to be an athiest, but also mentally ill, then that was more the reasoning I'd say.

[lesterbud]

11:24 AM on 01/21/2011

Satanists are not atheists.

They just worship a different deity and follow a different set of unethical dogmas.

I am an anti-theist.
Never hurt anyone in my life.
Worked hard my whole life to develop medicines and treatments for the sick.
Spent thousands of hours working with charities, including some sponsored by churches.
I am not unique in the least.

Irrational belief in fantasmical, impossible, rhetorical dogmas does not make one a better person. In fact, it opens a lot of opportunity for doing horrible things in the name of whatever franchise you belong to.

Those living in a more rational world are, on the whole, far more loving and giving, not because they want something, but because it is right and good to be so. Not to say religious believers can not be good - many are.

Those thinking otherwise, are just not paying attention to the world.

[68Namvet]

05:36 PM on 01/21/2011

Excellently stated - F & F'd

[PC Contrarian]

01:37 PM on 01/20/2011

"On the day of the Arizona massacre, Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva blamed the "Palin express." The father of Gabrielle Giffords, one of the victims, blamed "the whole Tea Party." The sheriff of Pima County, Clarence Dupnik, who had failed to lock Loughner up despite repeated arrests and other contacts, blamed "the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business." (Dumbnik also said: "We're not convinced that he acted alone.")

A comment on Gawker the day of the attack said: "Palin ... you now have more than just elk blood on your hands."

The next day, New York Daily News columnist Michael Daly wrote, with stunning originality: "Palin may have the blood of more than some poor caribou on her hands." (See -- he changed "elk" to "caribou.")

In an especially prissy "Special Comment" the night of the shooting, Olbermann said that if Sarah Palin "does not repudiate her own part in amplifying violence and violent imagery in politics, she must be dismissed from politics." Ditto for Rep. Allen West, ex-candidate Sharron Angle, Rep. Giffords' opponent Jesse Kelly and "the Tea Party leaders."

[Barton449]

04:19 PM on 01/20/2011

If "blood liable" had not been in her address, Olbermann would have harangued
about the number of exclamation points.

[johnny dio]

05:18 PM on 01/20/2011

He more likely would have "harangued about" the spelling of "libel".

[PC Contrarian]

01:36 PM on 01/20/2011

"The same people who had blamed Sarah Palin for the massacre at the Tucson Safeway and then taunted her for her "silence" were enraged when she responded.

Last Tuesday, the night before Palin responded, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann mocked Palin's silence throughout his show:

-- "And why is the ever self-promoting Miss Palin so quiet?"

-- "And it's quiet, isn't it?"

-- "It's too quiet."

-- "The silence is deafening from the great Northwest."

It was deemed an admission of guilt that she hadn't spoken about the Tucson shooting or denied the accusations that she had inspired the shooter.

The next day, Palin posted a video response, and Keith immediately attacked her for "the worst timed political statement ever." It's almost as if liberals would attack Palin whatever she did.

Olbermann sneered about Palin's use of the phrase "blood libel," scoffing, "This, to Sarah Palin, is analogous to what is happening to her." No, not only happening to her, but to all right-wingers, tea partiers, Republican politicians, and conservative radio and TV hosts -- all of whom have been accused of complicity in murder.

[Jacob Black]

01:48 PM on 01/20/2011

Poor Sarah Palin *is* the real victim in all of this, isn't she?

[Hydra8]

01:57 PM on 01/24/2011

Always as usual Palin plays the victim card, poor Sarah. We're glad that someone finally put some duct tape over her mouth, the silence coming from her is Golden.

[Peaceride]

12:10 PM on 01/20/2011

Death penalty vs. life without parole? Who can say for certain which one is most suitable? Thoughts?

[terry63]

01:35 PM on 01/20/2011

A person like this or like the ones who brutaly raped and burned alive those women, Should be put down. They will never be able to return to public life, they will always be a burden on the tax payer, and if they are ever accidently parolled or escape then thats a danger to society. There should not be a 12 year wait to do it, no endless appeal system. Just get it over with. If you have an animal that crosses the street and kills youre neighbor would you put it in cage the rest of its life , take away its freedom and make it live in a very small cage? all the while hoping and praying that it doesnt get out and kill someone else. Which is more humane. Keep it caged or just put it out of its misery?

[Jacob Black]

01:50 PM on 01/20/2011

How many people have ever escaped or been "accidentally parolled" from maximum security detention in Federal prison?

[Pyrum]

05:04 PM on 01/20/2011

Since when is a punishment supposed to be decided on which option is the most humane?

[jokerdanny]

12:05 PM on 01/20/2011

geesh, there sure are a lot of folks seeking vengenance....is it not enough to make society safe by putting this guy in jail...you want to see him suffer too? i can't wrap my brain around that.

[GraphicMatt]

12:25 PM on 01/20/2011

You're right. Let's all mail him candy grams and stuffed teddy bears.

[johnny dio]

12:48 PM on 01/20/2011

That would certainly represent the other side of the coin, from a revenge-hungry ghoul's perspective.

[jokerdanny]

03:30 PM on 01/24/2011

who suggested we do that? not me. you know why we don't let you shoot the tigers in the zoo or poke them in the eye with a stick?....because they are not a threat to society. seems to me a guy locked up in jail should be accorded the same privilege as a man-eating beast.

[FlaviaDeLuce]

01:11 PM on 01/20/2011

maybe they don’t want his ego to explode from all the marriage proposals he's bound to get in jail

[lesterbud]

11:28 AM on 01/21/2011

Wow.
Many of these comments are way out there and without any rational thought.
But yours.....you win.

[ellyk]

11:32 AM on 01/20/2011

This is one of those times when I wish we lived in an uncivilized country without laws... This guy is going to live so much longer than he deserves while he is on trial.

[jokerdanny]

11:55 AM on 01/20/2011

that might be the dumbest thing i've heard on the topic

[ellyk]

12:16 PM on 01/20/2011

haha well thats okay! I didn't say it to sound smart or anything... just sharing how I feel.

[rickthaluddite]

04:53 PM on 01/20/2011

I think this guy has already lived longer than he expected. I don't think he expected to lieave that safeway store alive.

[Pyrum]

05:20 PM on 01/20/2011

I agree. I'll bet he was planning to turn the gun on himself, but couldn't when a couple of people in the crowd tackled and disarmed him.

[johnny dio]

05:21 PM on 01/20/2011

I agree. The prospect of return gunfire is an intoxicant to gun-wielding psychopaths.

[Paperless Tiger]

11:06 AM on 01/20/2011

Once again a psych0path performs like a highly trained assassin. Unbelievable.

[Jacob Black]

11:26 AM on 01/20/2011

Do highly trained assassins usually spray bullets into a crowd until they are tackled and subdued?

[johnny dio]

12:30 PM on 01/20/2011

I think that perhaps his choice of weapon and the stealth with which he approached his victims gave him the appearance of a highly trained assassin. As it was he was just a guy who was able to buy a high-capacity semi-auto pistol and hide it on his person until he got close enough to shoot his victims, something any undiagnosed homicidal psychopath can equip himself for, legally, in Arizona, and throughout much of America.

[VashS5]

10:19 AM on 01/20/2011

Bubbah awaits you Mr. Loughner. He said he is keeping a spot warm just for you. Pucker up!

[johnny dio]

10:52 AM on 01/20/2011

Revenge is a real turn-on for you, isn't it?

[TakePenguin]

09:47 AM on 01/20/2011

I really fail to understand why everyone in the media seems to think he's mentally deranged. Well, if that's the case then why at the same time try to impose the death penalty and prove that he wasn't. It just seems hypocritical to me. Was he competent and knew what he was doing or was he just mentally unstable?

[kimleehan]

09:26 AM on 01/20/2011

I bet I can guess what his defense will be, Stochastic terr orism defense.