The federal government allegedly suppressed evidence and edited a legal definition in a Wisconsin case against a man who ultimately was convicted of transferring a machine gun, according to an appeal document.Note on the affadavit in support of criminal complaint there was no mention of prior tests that showed the gun was not a machinegun.
I posted the appeals brief yesterday that details all the dirty tricks the government and the prosecution employed--from mischaracterizing technical points on the witness stand, to ignoring precedent established in the Staples case in re definitions, to failure to produce documents requested by the defense (the excuse was correspondence with the original manufacturer contained privileged tax information), to preventing the defense expert witness from inspecting the firearm and excluding him from the courtroom during when the "expert witness" for the prosecution testified--actually reneging on their agreement and legal requirements, and much, much more...all with the tacit consent of a complicit judge.
So far, there has been zero interest shown from the "gun blogosphere." This is news, people, as recognized by Bob Unruh and WorldNetDaily. It is important, and it affects all of us.
You can come back and kick my tail for a bad prediction later: I think there's a very good chance Olofson will get a new trial out of this.
First, I have yet to understand how this 'crime' got reported...
ReplyDeleteSecond, interesting that it's a tax issue now...ha ha.
I remember that "keeping privileged tax information protected." I think identity theft would be the least of a person's problems when they're in the sights (figuratively speaking) of the Bureau of Alterations, Tattletales and Fudging. Oh, I always forget Extortion.
ReplyDeleteThat should have been the end of the trial, all charges dropped and a precedent set. In a saner time, that's what would have happened.
They would never want me on a jury in a gun case. I would be eliminated by "voir dire" (legal jury tampering) before I had a chance to assist real justice.
ReplyDeleteIs anyone surprised that the prosecution lied and distorted the truth in this case?
ReplyDeleteThese petty tyrants have a "win at any cost" attitude when it comes to whats near and dear to their political beliefs. Especially when it's the tax payers picking up the tab.
David,
ReplyDeleteSadly, many of the most vocal, and vicious, voices in the gun blogging community, including the gun forums, tend to be pragmatists. Neither Olofson nor Fincher are 'pure' enough for them. Anytime Olofson, or Fincher are brought up, outside of a few select blogs, there is an automatic flame war drowning out any opinions other than the party line that they got what they had coming to him.
Personally, I hope that both Olofson and Fincher manage to regain their freedom.
We see the same thing when someone brings up Appleseed. Someone inevitably says something about black helicopters as grounds for dismissal. My thought: Even so, so what--is it catching or something?
ReplyDeleteBack when I decided to get more serious about the RKBA, I decided to give up worrying what other people thought, along with worrying about how other people's beliefs or actions reflect on me personally.
It's liberating. :-)
III
But, David, people insisting on justice will scare white people and it isn't pragmatic, especially when one considers the fact the convicted persons were guilty of nothing more than exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights.
ReplyDeleteWhich tells pragmatists that there are other reasons for the prosecutions. They don't know what they are, but they know damn well they don't want any, no matter how long they must be on their knees.
Mr. Olofson SHOULD get a new trial. As to whether he will or not, of course, remains to be seen. But, he should have never been convicted to start with.
ReplyDeleteOlofson will spend at least 30 months in jail before the matter is resolved soooo .. even if he beats the rap the BAT-F**kers will brag that he didn't beat the ride. And, as per the Waco rules, "no consequences".
I'm still concerned as to what the resolution of the BAT-F**kers v. Len Savage will be. How dare he dispute or question the conclusions of the government's "expert witness"!
David, thanx for the reminder to donate to the family's fund. I just signed up for $10 a month. I know it isn't a lot, but if even 100 of us put our money where our mouths are it will help.
ReplyDeletePeace,
Bruce
Personally, I hope that both Olofson and Fincher manage to regain their freedom.
ReplyDeleteSo do I. Olofson was railroaded, of that I have absolutely no doubt. Fincher, on the other hand, challenged already established precedent in the circuit in which he was tried. I don't like that he was convicted, but I understand why he was, and I was completely unsurprised that SCOTUS denied cert. This was, after all, about machine guns, and those scare the white people. Same for the 9th Circuit's Stewart decision.
As far back as Sun Tzu, the advice is to "know yourself, know the enemy, and choose your battles carefully." Mr. Fincher didn't do at least two of the three.
I don't read your blog daily, David, nor check JPFO daily either. Thanks for putting up the link. I'll write a post this evening when I get home. I hope Olofson gets another trial and an acquittal, and I hope he can successfully Nifong the prosecutor.