WASHINGTON, June 16 – An historian, hired by the government as an expert to examine Individual Indian Trust documents, admitted last week that top Interior Department officials have obscured problems with the Trust for more than 100 years with “glowing” reports of management and reform.
Under cross examination, Edward Angel – albeit frequently confused about key facts – confessed to a federal judge that Interior officials reported to Congress that trust systems were working at the same time the General Accounting Office and other independent analysts were finding that management and systems continued to fail.
Among other things, Angel admitted that a 1915 GAO report to Congress found “serious flaws” in Individual Indian Trust accounting systems. But Angel could not explain why he had described the trust systems as operating effectively at the time in a February expert report to the court.
The 1915 report explicitly repudiated the favorable representations then being made by Interior officials.
“Nothing was more glowing as the commissioner’s reports,” Angel said in response to a serious of tough questions by Keith Harper, a lawyer for the Native American Rights Fund. Harper demonstrated that every independent study and report filed in the 20th century has found that the trust management systems continued to fail notwithstanding claims and testimony to the contrary by Interior Department officials.
Harper showed that each promised reform failed, as he ticked off a list of reports that found that pervasive, long-term problems in trust management. The various systems have destroyed the integrity and reliability of trust records and data that the government wants to use to conduct the court-ordered accounting of Individual Indian Trust funds.
“Every report I’ve seen has been critical,” Angel reluctantly conceded under Harper’s intense cross-examination.
In one of the first reports prepared by Angel as a government expert in this case, Angel admitted that his representation to the court that Interior’s policies and practices had been effective at the turn of the 20th century were false with respect to trust management. To the extent any policies were effective, Angel said they were limited to the policies and practices associated with the “assimilation” of Indians into society as a whole.
Angel could not explain why his report failed to distinguish “assimilation” policy and practices from trust management policy, or why his assessment of the effectiveness of “assimilation” policies or practices were included without disclosure in a report on trust management issues.
Angel’s admissions seriously harms the government’s case. He has confirmed plaintiffs’ charges that the destruction and loss of critical trust records – historically as well as throughout seven years of litigation – make it impossible for the government to account for all funds as mandated by Congress and ordered by District Judge Royce Lamberth and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Lamberth and the Court of Appeals have held that the secretaries of Interior and Treasury are in breach of the trust duties – including the duty to account for all assets in the trust from 1887 – that they owe to more than 500,000 individual Indian trust beneficiaries.
Dennis M. Gingold, lead counsel for the litigation team pressing Indian claims for a full accounting, said that Angel’s confessions, when viewed in context with the testimony of Assistant Treasury Secretary Donald Hammond, demonstrate conclusively that the government will never be able to account for more than $13 billion in Individual Indian Trust revenue – plus accruing and accrued compound interest.
Interior admits it has collected that much revenue from the sale of oil, gas, coal, hard rock minerals, precious metals and other natural resources extracted or cut on individual Indian trust lands. More than 100 years of disbursement records have been destroyed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To view the latest information concerning this case, please go to: http://www.indiantrust.com
and please also see the Indian Trust articles in our International Law section.
Under cross examination, Edward Angel – albeit frequently confused about key facts – confessed to a federal judge that Interior officials reported to Congress that trust systems were working at the same time the General Accounting Office and other independent analysts were finding that management and systems continued to fail.
Among other things, Angel admitted that a 1915 GAO report to Congress found “serious flaws” in Individual Indian Trust accounting systems. But Angel could not explain why he had described the trust systems as operating effectively at the time in a February expert report to the court.
The 1915 report explicitly repudiated the favorable representations then being made by Interior officials.
“Nothing was more glowing as the commissioner’s reports,” Angel said in response to a serious of tough questions by Keith Harper, a lawyer for the Native American Rights Fund. Harper demonstrated that every independent study and report filed in the 20th century has found that the trust management systems continued to fail notwithstanding claims and testimony to the contrary by Interior Department officials.
Harper showed that each promised reform failed, as he ticked off a list of reports that found that pervasive, long-term problems in trust management. The various systems have destroyed the integrity and reliability of trust records and data that the government wants to use to conduct the court-ordered accounting of Individual Indian Trust funds.
“Every report I’ve seen has been critical,” Angel reluctantly conceded under Harper’s intense cross-examination.
In one of the first reports prepared by Angel as a government expert in this case, Angel admitted that his representation to the court that Interior’s policies and practices had been effective at the turn of the 20th century were false with respect to trust management. To the extent any policies were effective, Angel said they were limited to the policies and practices associated with the “assimilation” of Indians into society as a whole.
Angel could not explain why his report failed to distinguish “assimilation” policy and practices from trust management policy, or why his assessment of the effectiveness of “assimilation” policies or practices were included without disclosure in a report on trust management issues.
Angel’s admissions seriously harms the government’s case. He has confirmed plaintiffs’ charges that the destruction and loss of critical trust records – historically as well as throughout seven years of litigation – make it impossible for the government to account for all funds as mandated by Congress and ordered by District Judge Royce Lamberth and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Lamberth and the Court of Appeals have held that the secretaries of Interior and Treasury are in breach of the trust duties – including the duty to account for all assets in the trust from 1887 – that they owe to more than 500,000 individual Indian trust beneficiaries.
Dennis M. Gingold, lead counsel for the litigation team pressing Indian claims for a full accounting, said that Angel’s confessions, when viewed in context with the testimony of Assistant Treasury Secretary Donald Hammond, demonstrate conclusively that the government will never be able to account for more than $13 billion in Individual Indian Trust revenue – plus accruing and accrued compound interest.
Interior admits it has collected that much revenue from the sale of oil, gas, coal, hard rock minerals, precious metals and other natural resources extracted or cut on individual Indian trust lands. More than 100 years of disbursement records have been destroyed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To view the latest information concerning this case, please go to: http://www.indiantrust.com
and please also see the Indian Trust articles in our International Law section.