Monday, May 19, 2008

The Video in Question

A comment in "Down the Rabbit Hole: Part II" asked if it would be possible to post the BATFU video used to help convict David Olofson. As what was introduced was an edited tape, I asked if his attorneys had an unedited tape--to include failures to achieve a malfunction--so we would be able to judge for ourselves the manipulations needed to produce desired results.

"They will not release it." Olofson wrote back. "Not even to my attorneys."

Last night I received the following from Len Savage, also copied on my query.

The Govt. flat refused to even give Olofson's attorney a copy [he had to view it at the AUSA office only]. The judge backed the govt's play. There were word to effect "We don't want to see it in a documentary" or some such nonsense to that effect.

I can tell you:

All of about 15 seconds long, played again and again for the jury.

The entire magazine dumped, no bursts.

The rate of fire was between a MAC-11 [1200rpm] and a Glock 18 [1850rpm]. approx 1600rpm if I were to guess.

A full auto M-16 fires about 750-800rpm +/- depending on ammo.

Was filmed at a distance, I can't tell if it was even Olofson's rifle.

I would have never fired that rifle, instead a shooting vise would have been used.

Max Kingery [ATF/FTB] was terrified to fire the rifle, holding it away from his body like a stick of dynamite.

Without ever making a good inspection of the internals I can only guess how they did it, [I have a pretty good idea] This is most likely why I was never allowed to inspect it.
In an email I just received this morning, Len added:
You may want touch on that HR 1791 [Fairness in Firearm Testing Act] would have prevented editing, and we would all know "how" it was done....
Yeah...right...let's see:
Last Action: Apr 20, 2007: House Judiciary: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
He's right. I may want to touch on it. But it sure looks like nobody in government does.

10 comments:

DJK said...

One can comment on the bill here

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1791.html#commentform

Anonymous said...

Time for a FOIA request.

Anonymous said...

I thought it was unconstitutional not let the defense see the evidence.

David Codrea said...

I thought it was unconstitutional to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Anonymous said...

This is demonic. The USSR's NKVD didn't die, it just moved overseas.

When I was growing up in the fifties/sixties, I took Political Science in school. We were taught (okay, maybe propagandized) that this kind of political theater was the norm in Communist countries, where inconvenient but innocent people were railroaded into the Gulags simply to terrorize the rest of the local population into submission.

I can't believe it's happening here. I have got to find an effective way to fight this other than just sending money to JFPO & GOA.

Anyone know how to protect windows from flashbang and teargas grenades?

Anonymous said...

They need a law to force law enforcers to enforce unconstitutional laws honestly?
Just like the states are passing laws to force their governments/governors to not unconstitutionally confiscate guns in emergencies.
Will another law be needed to make them obey the law meant to make them obey the law, ad infinitum?
"It's just a piece of paper." Was to Nagin of New Orleans.

Jake (formerly Riposte3) said...

"They will not release it." Olofson wrote back. "Not even to my attorneys."

There's grounds for appeal (and disciplinary action) right there (among many others) - Failure to produce potentially exculpatory evidence.

This has all the signs of a kangaroo court and a sham trial.

I hope he wins on appeal, and can take it all the way to the Supreme Court if he has to.

Anonymous said...

File a formal FOIA request. Yeah, they may sit on it for years, but eventually will have to either release the video or provide typically asinine and unsupportable reasons for withholding it. And that too can be used to publicize their unlawful, willing, and conspiratorial actions .......

M1Thumb said...

Meanwhile a man's life has been ruined.

What if it was you? What if it was me? What if it was David?

When do we stop taking it?

Anonymous said...

Illegal, criminal. Pure thuggery.

Who bought the judge, or was he a communist from the beginning?

Who appointed him? Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II?

I suppose it doesn’t matter since law schools and the Bar are a farce anyway.

According to Quentin, they never even taught the Second Amendment in law school, just kind of "mentioned" it. I suppose they never taught proper court procedure either.

When they overthrow the authority that brought them into existence, they make themselves usurpers, thieves, thugs and murderers.