US v Olofson - Cliff Notes Version

Status
Not open for further replies.
We have an even bigger issue to resolve here than Heller/NFA. Here is a Federal Agency defying court orders and the courts in effect denying the defendant due process. If one cannot get due process in a court of law when dealing with BATFE than youcan forget any chance of getting a favorable ruling against NFA/'86 MG bans.

And this is not unusual behavior for BATFE. And if you think anyone in the administration is going to rein them in, you've forgotten just who appointed "Maximum Mikey" Sullivan to run the circus.

If the courts started throwing out all cases where the Feds refused to give up evidence for review and began making the Feds pay the defense's attorney's fees this would end overnight.

This assumes the courts want some outcome other than the outcome BATFE wants. I've seen precious little evidence of that.
 
Just found this JPFO Article you guys may find to be of intrest.

http://www.jpfo.org/smith/smith-olofson-case.htm

US V Olofson: A pseudolegal Case

by L. Neil Smith [email protected] For Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership http://www.jpfo.org


The camera closes in.

The screen swells with the wizened, hateful visage, under its ludicrous English periwig, of George Jeffreys, the original "hanging judge" of the Bloody Assizes as he sentences the innocent Doctor Peter Blood, convicted of having treated a man wounded in a battle of the 1685 Monmouth Rebellion, to a lifetime of slavery in the British West Indies.

Nobody watching the 1935 movie "Captain Blood" was particularly surprised at the irrationality of the verdict or the harshness of the sentence. Judicial processes meant to bolster authority, often at the expense of justice and humanity, were a feature of the English court system, and one of many reasons -- as most individuals of my own and older generations were taught in school -- that Americans fought for independence.

Not so today. Now our children and our grandchildren are often told by a politically-corrected educational establishment that there was no good reason for the American Revolution, and that we'd all be better off if the colonials then had respected and cooperated with authority. As far as justice is concerned, they're told the humblest person, accused of a crime, can always count on getting "his day in court".

I'm sure that's just what young Kenyon Ballew, his family, and lawyers expected when they went to court seeking restitution because a violent gang of police and federal officers, for some reason disguised as hippies, smashed through his front door one summer evening in 1971 -- on a fraudulent plea-bargained tip from a newspaper boy they had arrested for burglary -- and shot at him more than a dozen times as he emerged naked from his bathtub, paralyzing him for the rest of his life.

The Ballew case may not have been the first instance of the new police "philosophy" of fascist thuggery, moronic incompetence, and brutal unconcern over "collateral damage" that has since flooded over this nation like a dirty tide, destroying whatever pretense was left that this is a free country, but it was the first many of us knew of, and nothing would ever be the same. A line of causality stretches taut and straight from Ballew's suburban Maryland home in 1971 to Mount Carmel on the rolling Texas plains in 1993 -- and continues on to this day.

All of this comes to mind because of a recent federal trial, the case of U.S. v. Olofson in Milwaukee Wisconsin, in which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (instigators in both the Ballew and Branch Davidian atrocities) charged a National Guard Drill Instructor of "unlawful transfer of a machinegun" because, owing to a worn or broken part, it would sometimes -- very rarely, actually -- fire more than one round of ammunition with a single pull of the trigger.

This is not, in fact, any kind of illegal "enhancement", it is a dangerous malfunction. Len Savage, the expert I spoke with before I started this article tells me that when such a malfunction occurs, the particular weapon involved fires at three times the rate considered safe.

Olofson, it appears, was asked by a Robert Kiernicki to teach him to shoot. Olofson did, and even let Kiernicki take "his oldest AR-15" -- a semiautomatic version of our current military rifle the M-16 -- to a public range and practice. On Kiernicki's third time at the range, after firing 120 rounds, the rifle sputtered three times and jammed.

Law enforcement people present on the range swooped in, and in due course, Olofson was arrested, charged, and has now been convicted of a gun "crime" he never intended to commit or even knew he had committed, one that happened when he was miles away and someone else pulled the trigger.

The rifle in question was sent to the BATFE Firearm Technology Branch (FTB), who examined and test fired the weapon and declared it "just a rifle". Special Agent in Charge Jody Keeku asked FTB to re-test the firearm, this time using soft-primered commercial ammunition.

The FTB, which has no standardized testing procedures -- in fact, no written procedures at all for testing firearms -- tried again, this time getting the desired results. BATFE, with a self-admitted fifty percent error rate, then pursued an indictment against Olofson and paid Kiernicki "an undisclosed amount of money" to testify against him.

At the same time Olofson was being charged with unlawful transfer, because his rifle malfunctioned, and apparently had some M-16 parts (not the parts that would make it a machinegun) the BATFE removed another "machinegun" from its registry of such weapons because they deemed it to be an AR-15 with M-16 parts, but not a machinegun. Len can produce the documents to substantiate this extremely convenient contradiction.

Hear Len being interviewed on JPFO's podcast, Talkin' to America and see some of the legal documents associated with this case. Click on over to http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/talkamerica.htm and then proceed to http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/olofson-vs-us.htm.

Be aware, however the court never had access to this information. When Olofson's attorneys requested that the court compel BATFE to produce these and other documents proving Olofson's innocence, BATFE's Chief Counsel's Office loftily informed the court that the documents involved contained "tax information" -- namely, a $200 federal excise tax stamp -- and that the court was therefore prohibited from seeing them.

All such documents -- even a BATFE letter to the manufacturer of Olofson's rifle mandating a safety recall in 1986 (due to its going "full auto" if it malfunctioned) -- were kept secret from the judge in the case, Charles N. Clevert, and the rest of the court. BATFE's Chief Counsel told Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory J. Haanstad, who passed it along: "The Court will have take our word that the documents in question contain tax information, and contain no exculpatory evidence".

Haanstad claimed the law does not exempt a malfunction. He claims that it states "any weapon that shoots more than once without manual reloading, per function of the trigger is a machinegun". When Len, acting as a defense expert, took the stand, he asked, "Are you saying if I take my great-granddaddy's double barrel shotgun out and pull one trigger, and both barrels go off, it's a machinegun?". Haanstad cited the law (U.S. Code, Section 5845), restating that "any weapon that shoots ... "

If your semiauto rifle breaks, you are now subject to federal prosecution. Even more ironic, those in the sporting culture, who have derided so-called "black guns" and "assault rifles" for so long, now face a real possibility of their expensive double shotguns being seized, and of possible prosecution, if BATFE's no-standards laboratory -- which has no procedures in writing and does all of its testing in secret -- can make it fire more than once with a single pull of the trigger. If there is information proving their innocence, BATFE can always claim it's tax information, and prevent both judge and jury from considering it.

Len and I differ on one central point in this mess, gun expert though he is. He is a tough, decent, bright, and courageous gentleman, and I have no desire at all to argue with him in public. He believes that the judge in this case conducted himself properly and points out that the man even chastized the federal prosecutors on at least one occasion because they had attempted to deceive him and the defense attorneys.

This is not a new thing. At one of the legal proceedings against Kenyon Ballew, back in the 70s, the prosecution brought in "evidence" of Ballew's "criminality" consisting of a can of black pistol powder which they claimed he was going to use to make grenades. In fact, he used it to load his only handgun, a replica of an 1847 Colt Walker revolver.

But it wasn't enough simply to produce the can. They brought in at the center of a long, long plank, its ends supported by a pair of theatrically nervous individuals acting as though what it held was nitroglycerin.

BATFE's conduct at the Olofson trial was subtler, but just as criminally misleading. What the judge should have said is, "You will tell your agency to produce those documents immediately, or I will have you locked up until they do. Bailiff!" The fact that he didn't say that makes him a bad judge, a weak judge, and anticonstitutional judge.

BATFE's very existence is a violation of the highest law of the land, in and of itself. How can this sort of stupendously outrageous crime go on for decade after decade? Answer: who signs a judge's paycheck?

BATFE drifts, utterly rudderless, without underlying principles, precisely like the entire United States government does today. The criminally totalitarian mind-set that permitted the creation of this agency in the first place -- despite the clear language of the Bill of Rights -- encourages wars to be waged without any legal declaration by Congress, and kidnapping and torture to become working policies of what was once supposed to be the freest country on the face of the Earth.

It does so because it suits those who profit, in terms of power and privilege or other ill-gotten gains, from such a moral and legal vacuum.

(Follow the Olofson case on JPFO)

==========================================================================
"Men cannot be governed and remain men. Domesticate the wolf and he changes both physically and mentally. His muzzle shrinks, his teeth diminish, he loses size, speed, and strength, He grows spots. His ears flop. His brain withers. He becomes a dog. Men are on the verge of becoming dogs -- the changes are underway already -- unless we do something to stop it."

-- The Ceo Lia Wheeler, Phoebus Krumm, forthcoming

Four-time Prometheus Award-winner L. Neil Smith has been writing about guns and gun ownership for more than 30 years. He is the author of 27 books, the most widely-published and prolific libertarian novelist in the world, and is considered an expert on the ethics of self-defense. His writings may be seen on the following sites:

The Webley Page: http://www.lneilsmith.org

The Libertarian Enterprise: http://www.ncc-1776.org

The Probability Broach: The Graphic Novel, Roswell, Texas, and TimePeeper (August 2007): http://www.bigheadpress.com

LNS at Random (blog): http://www.bigheadpress.com/lneilsmith/


he has a few facts a bit skewed, but otherwise the article is good.
 
This Just Posted today by FMD on AR15.com

FMD: Defense was not allowed to touch, video, or photograph the gun. Len Savage was allowed an opportunity to look at it on the day of his testimony, and then only for a few moments. ATF removed the rear pushpin and broke the gun open, that's it.

No removal of the BCG was allowed.

Prosecution provided as evidence three, highly edited clips of the gun firing, along with the written reports. All related outtakes ceased to exist before trial (destroyed/erased).

I have some old photos of the gun, but nothing of the internals. All they do is confirm that there was no autosear hole drilled in the lower.





ETA: If the ATF were to have tried to prove manufacture, they would have had to allow independent forensic testing of the components for tool marks and fingerprints. As it stands, Olofson requested those tests anyway. Because the charge was "transfer" not "manufacture", the prosecution sought to suppress/disallow this testing, and the judge agreed.

Hard to provide a defense to prosecution when the chief piece of evidence against you is, in essence, a secret and off limits to you.

FYI: FMD is a "Certified AR15 Armourer" who also has a bunch more qualifications and certifications Much the same as Len Savage, and before Len got involved FMD was going to be the Expert Witness in the case.

He was at the trial folks.
 
"The Court will have take our word that the documents in question contain tax information, and contain no exculpatory evidence".

and

Defense was not allowed to touch, video, or photograph the gun. Len Savage was allowed an opportunity to look at it on the day of his testimony, and then only for a few moments. ATF removed the rear pushpin and broke the gun open, that's it.

Are my 2 biggest beefs with this case. Even if we assume that Olofson knowingly and intentionally altered the gun in question into a full-auto, he should NOT have been convicted simply based on the 2 quotes above.He should have a right to examine the evidence against him, as well have his attorney's and thier expert witnesses examine it too.And examine doesnt meen get a peek from sveral feet away, it means handle, test, disassemble (all under court supervison if they fear tampering), etc.

Also, "hey, judge, trust me, just take my word that this evidence wont help the man I'm accusing of a crime, but no one, even you are allowed to verify that" is just NOT acceptable, end of story.

I have said before I find it equally as likely that either Olofson did intentionally modified the gun illegally, or that he didnt, and the BATFE is doing some SERIOUSLY shady manipulation of facts and evidence, up to and including outright lying, manufacture of evidence, tampering, withholding evidence that would exhonorate etc. I am not inclined to trust either side on this one. But, just based on the 2 quoted sections, this guy should get a new trial and be released from jail/prison while awaiting it, as the fact those 2 things were allowed in court are ridiculous, IMHO.
 
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=VKKWSDX2

Thats a PDF I made up of the appeal on the verdict. Let me know if you have any trouble downloading it or reading it. If it works, I'll get to work converting the rest for everyone.

Also, if anyone knows of a better free host, I'd be grateful.

-edit- I guess it goes without saying since this is public record that anyone is free to use this document for any purpose and it should be considered public domain.
 
yousendit.com works pretty well for smaller stuff( unless you pay for a member ship)
 
A new appeal is being written

While the documents that are public do show some of the core and germane reasons. Olofson's new attorneys: Herb Titus, Bill Olsen, and Robert Sanders are writing a new appeal.

The Wisconsin Public Defenders Service just did not have the resources for this.

I think it is very important that you consider US v. Kwan (9th circ.), 14-18 months ago the Judge ruled Mr. Kwan gets a new trial based on ATF false testimony and jury instructions that were patently misleading. ATF [through the gov't] appealed the Judges decision. The 9th circuit has yet to decide if Mr. Kwan gets a new trial.

By the way Mr. Kwan WAS allowed to continue remain free, and is to this day. He was even given back his passports and allowed to travel. Mr Kwan was also a member of the US Army Reserves when he was prosecuted....

Sound familiar?

"De Oppresso Liber"

Len
 
I would like to see some more Media Coverage/Follow-through on this, it's quite possibly going to be one of the most important court cases in recent US history.
 
Hey none of those photobucket links work anymore, and I'm doing this for a school research paper. Does anyone know where i can get those documents?
 
Does anyone know where i can get those documents?

All Federal Dockets can be obtained here:

http://pacer.uspci.uscourts.gov/

You have to set up an account and pay $0.08/pg. However either Firefox or Chrome has an app which will give you Pacer documents for free if someone else has downloaded them with the app. I guarantee that someone has downloaded the Olafson documents.
 
However either Firefox or Chrome has an app which will give you Pacer documents for free if someone else has downloaded them with the app.
The FireFox plug-in you are talking about is called RECAP. However, there is no guarantee that the documents from RECAP have not been altered, or even total fabrications. From the RECAP website:

"How do I know that the documents provided by RECAP are genuine?
Unfortunately, you don’t. We rely on RECAP users to donate documents to the repository. If the courts used a technology called digital signatures, we would be able to independently verify the authenticity of documents submitted to us by users. But so far the courts have not done this, so we have no foolproof way to detect forgeries."


https://www.recapthelaw.org/about/

For anyone doing serious research, including a school paper, you need a source that can verified to be correct. So RECAP and photobucket links on THR aren't going to be satisfactory.
 
Does anyone know what the latest is on this case??

FWIW As unbelievable as it sounds, the ATF actually does prohibit the accused and his lawyers and their experts from examining the evidence (the gun) exactly as described in this thread. I went through the exact same thing (six feet distance and NO touching) with a friend of mine that was charged with an NFA weapons charge by the ATF. I don't know why but even the judge can not compel the ATF to produce documents or evidence or allow the defense to examine the weapon. In addition, it's long been known that the ATF rigs tests by using thin shelled primers to cause slam-fires and also to use especially made, reduced power ammo so that the bolts in open bolt guns don't fully cycle and cause uncontrollable, run-away FA firing. Heck, you can even make a Garand or a 1911 fire ful auto by manipulating the ammo!
 
The last appeal can be found here:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1407580.html

I have a hard time with this case. Olofson knew the rifle was capable of firing mulitple rounds with a single pull of the trigger. He told the person to whom he loaned the gun that on four occassion. Olofson's expert testified that the gun fired in the matter due to a malfunction. The ATF's expert testified that due to the substitution of M16 parts into an AR15, Olofson had designed the gun to fire in that manner. The gun did not fire in that manner due to the malfunction of hammer follow (which suggests that would be a legitimate argument that Olofoson did not know the weapon could fire in that manner). The jury heard both experts and sided with the government's expert. With respect to the suppression of documents by the ATF, any suppression was court approved, and reaffirmed on appeal because the documents requested neither impeached the government, nor was favorable to the defendant.

All in all, it would appear Olofson got a fair trial, and that the appeal was throughly reviewed and fairly decided.

The ATF gets a bad rap. They deserve it many cases. In this case, maybe not. Sounds to me like Olofson built a machine gun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top