David Olofson, Latest Lou Dobbs Coverage
For those of you having problems reading this text, please place your cursor over the text and hold down the control key on your keyboard, (CTRL), and with the wheel of your mouse, roll the wheel towards yourself. This will increase the text size.
Lou Dobbs seems to be the ONLY News person to be covering this story. I have to wonder why that would be considering how very important this is to gun owners and enthusiasts, and even those of us who DON’T own a gun, not to mention David Olofson. So why are the other media outlets not covering this? I find that just another way in which you can tell that our media is NOT free any more.
Like myself, Lou Dobbs is not satisfied with the story as it has been told. He wants to know what is going on here, why was this even considered as a case? I have no answers for this. But let me state here and now, this prosecutor withheld evidence, evidence that could have set David Olofson free from the beginning! Had he been the defendants attorney, he would have been disbarred for shit like this. So why do prosecutors get away with it? Are there double standards in trial lawyers too? Why is it that prosecutors seem to be immune from being prosecuted? I’m not happy with this and the way things are going.
I’ll save my commenting for where it is appropriate for now, but this really stinks…
DOBBS: A gun owner, tonight, is awaiting sentencing from a federal judge. David Olofson was convicted of, “transferring a machine gun,” end quote, after he loaned a neighbor his 20-year-old AR-15. The semiautomatic rifle malfunctioned on the firing range, firing two bursts of rounds of three shots. It jammed each time.
Olofson’s sentencing has now been delayed because the court is now considering a new motion from the defense.
Bill Tucker has the very important story on the Second Amendment and truth in justice in America from Berlin, Wisconsin.
BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The government has a letter that the defense wants it to share with the court. The letter is from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to the manufacturer of Olofson’s rifle. It could be the bombshell that he needs to gain himself a new trial.
According to those who say they’ve read the letter, it acknowledges that the AR-15-style rifle made by Olympic Arms SGW and owned by Olofson occasionally is prone to a malfunction that results in multiple burst fires.
Now, wouldn’t you think, that a government mandated RECALL would be POSTED on the BATFE website??? Isn’t that a consumer “need to know” sort of thing? How the hell do they get away with NOT POSTING THIS clearly on their website under the FAQ page or under a recall page of some sort??? Because I’ve looked and it isn’t there. This seems to be an intentional deceit on the part of BATFE! Or, in other words, entrapment!
LEN SAVAGE, HISTORIC ARMS, LLC: It shows us that the firearm can accidentally go full auto without the user being aware and that the parts needed to be replaced under recall. A government-mandated recall on Mr. Olofson’s rifle.
TUCKER: The only copy of the letter is in ATF files. The company’s document was lost in a fire. The ATF successfully kept it out of Olofson’s trial, arguing that it contained privileged tax information.
But a separate internal ATF memo written in the ’80s from the then-general counsel’s office that was obtained by Olofson’s attorneys appears to show that the letter is not and should not be considered a tax document.
Now, you and I all know that the ATF did this so they could get a conviction. This just begs the question, WHY do they want him convicted SO badly that they are willing to withhold pertinent evidence, break the law by doing so, and lie about it, in order to get David Olofson convicted? And what can be done about it to make sure it isn’t worth it in the future for any government agency to lie about evidence they hold on a person that is being tried. This is the WORST miscarriage of justice I’ve seen since Ramos and Compean. Not only is the 2nd Amendment being flaunted here, but also the 4th Amendment and the 5th. People, if you do not know your Bill of Rights or the Constitution, I highly recommend you get a copy and DO learn them. This is no longer a game and abuses ARE happening. And once it gets to court, they don’t give a SHIT about your rights. I have two word docs with the Constitution and Bill of Rights if you want copies. Get them Here: the-bill-of-rights and Here: the-constitution
Olofson’s lawyers and Olofson himself are hopeful of a judge- reversed decision.
DAVID OLOFSON, GUN OWNER: I’m glad he announced the delay. It shows that he’s taking the information that we brought forward to him in a very serious light.
TUCKER: The prosecution remains silent, as they have throughout the trial, saying they will have no comment until the trial ends with Olofson’s sentencing.
TUCKER: Now it was here at the Berlin Conservation Club, Lou, that the rifle owned by Olofson misfired the couple of rounds, jamming as it did. The club has a strict anti-automatic weapon policy, so when that malfunction happened, it drew attention and the police were notified. That’s how this case came to the attention of the ATF.
Now, there are three motions currently pending before this judge, Lou. The first one by the defense is for an outright acquittal. The second is for the disclosure of this letter. And the third is for a new trial.
It’s not likely, Lou, I’m told by lawyers, that this judge will throw the case out, because they don’t like to do that in jury trials. But they do say it’s possible that this judge takes a good look at this letter might decide that a new trial is in order — Lou.
I really don’t care what the judge’s preferences are in this case. If he were actually standing for the LAW, he would dismiss this case OUTRIGHT! With the withholding of evidence on the part of ATF agents, the prosecutor and the fact that David Olofson has NOT gotten a speedy trial but instead 2 years of his life are GONE on this, shows what a farce this all is. I just get so angry when I think of this. How DARE THEY do this to a U.S. Citizen and think they can get away with it? Thank God that SOMEONE came up with knowledge of that evidence in time to get some consideration here.
DOBBS: How did this new letter surface?
TUCKER: This was done through discovery. A number of the sources in this case, Lou, talked about the fact that this letter existed. And in fact, some time back I spoke with the owner of Sheetz (ph) and Gunworks who told me he had read the letter. He had a copy at one point. He remembered the general…
DOBBS: We’re talking about a man facing a felony conviction here and sentencing…
TUCKER: Right.
DOBBS: … for years of his life. And these attorneys, this judge, are playing games over the content of that letter, which absolutely absolves him?
TUCKER: The U.S. attorney told the judge they could not share the memo with him or with the court because it contains privileged tax information. This new internal memo that Olofson’s attorneys have found indicate, Lou, that’s just not the fact, that he should have seen that letter and it apparently should have been introduced into trial. But the judge did not allow it the first time around.
DOBBS: Well, the judge didn’t allow it. At this point, it was like there’s reason for a very wide-ranging investigation into why a man who has served in the United States Army reserves, served his country, and done so with an honorable discharge.
I mean, the treatment by ATF and this judge and these prosecutors and, frankly, the absolute lack of energy and vigor on the part of the defense attorneys. And where in the world has been the National Rifle Association?
TUCKER: The National Rifle Association, Lou, has been watching the case from a distance. They’ve been waiting to be invited in. They have at this point been invited into the case, and they’re waiting for the sentencing phase. If there’s a new trial or if there’s an appeal, there are indications that they could become actively involved in the case. They don’t like to thrust themselves into cases unless asked.
DOBBS: Why in the world — why in the world would anybody be waiting here when a man’s freedom and his rights hang in the balance? This is absurd.
TUCKER: It is a terrific question, Lou. It’s great. Remember, this is not a man with any prior criminal convictions. It’s not a man with a history of violence. This is, as you point out, an honorably discharged man of the U.S. Army.
DOBBS: And a man with a family sitting there in a small town in Wisconsin, being treated like an international gun runner. Somebody — somebody had better get their heads on straight. But at least — at least appears this judge may be awakening to the need to serve justice in his case.
We thank you very much, Bill Tucker, from Berlin, Wisconsin. Appreciate it.
The Law Enforcement Alliance of America says now that any sentence for Olofson would be too severe. The Law Enforcement Alliance said Olofson did, in fact, not commit a crime.
Ted Deeds is the national spokesman for the alliance. And the alliance, by the way, is normally on the side of law enforcement and the prosecutors. So his statements, the alliance’s statements here on behalf of Mr. Olofson are significant.
Joining us from Washington, we appreciate it. Tell them. I mean, I — as I hear what is going on in this case, I’m getting furious. I don’t know about you.
TED DEEDS, LAW ENFORCEMENT ALLIANCE OF AMERICA: Lou, you should be getting mad. And just a moment to give kudos to you. Your programming is the only program that’s covering this story. And the reporting you’ve done with Bill Tucker deserves to be held out, highlighted. And good job. Thankfully, I hope other people in the media follow your lead.
DOBBS: Well, I appreciate that. We’re used to being alone here. Sometimes it just takes a while for folks who are away from them.
The reality is the Second Amendment in this country is precious. All of our constitutional rights are.
But this case with Olofson, I mean, this is a man who served his country. He has a family and is being treated like some sort of sinister a thug. And we could not find any evidence that this man has ever bent a blade of grass in the wrong direction.
DEEDS: Normally, Lou, as you know, people in law enforcement look at either the actor or the act. And if the actor is a clean person who’s not a gang-banger, rapist, pedophile, and the act that he is alleged to do. You look at it and try to balance it.
Prosecution decisions are based on, usually, bad actors or bad acts or both, such that the public policy, the public safety concern is addressed by the prosecution.
What it seems to me, that when you look at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, they’ve had a long history, 30 years plus, of having problems, it seems, with agents that can’t kind of keep it between the lines.
In this case, you had an agent who was supervised by two levels of supervisors. So the agent didn’t apparently use their discretion, didn’t apparently use common sense and didn’t have, it seems from our perspective, decent supervision. Two supervisors within that chain of command let this case go forward.
And then, as you know, the ultimate check and balance is the independent United States attorney’s office. They’re supposed to review the case, see if it merits prosecution, see if the public interest is served by spending the time and energy to bring the full weight of the U.S. government down on the individual.
Normally, you know, we cheer when they bring it down on a drug dealer or rapist or what have you. In this case, none of those facts are present. And I think there needs to be some grown-up leadership at the BATF. You know, there is no leader currently. As I understand it, the nomination is before Congress.
Congress has bills before it that they could pass to send a message. They could change the law. They could also cut funding or do other things. The leadership needs to step up to the plate here and there needs to be a grown-up in charge.
Well there is a slap in the face for the BATF! I’m so glad to see it! And yes, we do need an adult in charge there. Someone with some common sense! As for Congress, I don’t have much faith in those who get their palms greased regularly from everyone and every special interest group out there. These corrupt officials don’t impress me one bit. Were it up to me, the whole lot would be throw out and WE the People take over again, make it illegal to take bribes and payoffs from these big businesses, special interests, etc. and make DAMN SURE our government was fair and honest again. Things like this wouldn’t happen if someone big wasn’t pulling the strings, bet on it. Most importantly, ADULT!
DOBBS: Has your organization suggested to any of the law enforcement agencies, the prosecutors that, for crying out loud, somebody assert adult, responsible leadership here?
DEEDS: Lou, police in America cannot police effectively without the trust and support of the communities they serve. Most of the police departments and agencies in this country are relatively small.
Here you have a national agency that’s had a reputation of spotty performance over three decades. And they come in, and they get the local cops to kind of do their dirty work, do the SWAT service, do the dynamic entry when, from all reports, this gentlemen voluntarily presented himself to a local chief of police.
I mean, what’s going on? The locals are going to follow the federal agency’s lead, because they trust them and they should. But if that federal agency demonstrates that they can’t be trusted, they’re undermining all of the public support.
Anybody out there in this country that supports the Second Amendment that has one of these guns has to be sitting at home saying, “This isn’t the first case.” There’s another case that came out of the Ninth Circuit. And so they’ve proven that they…
DOBBS: And reversed. And reversed.
DEEDS: And reversed on appeal. But Lou, just like you’ve been saying, they took the time to bring the full weight of the federal government down on innocent people. And people should be concerned. They should be up in arms, and they should be demanding some reforms.
DOBBS: Ted Deeds of Law Enforcement Alliance, we thank you for being with us. We appreciate it.
DEEDS: Thanks for having us on, Lou.
Now, I found a place on BATF where you can contact them. I think it is something we should do as citizens and contact them and protest their actions. AND to send messages to congress, as corrupt as they are, to stop this kind of abuse of power, and to redress the wrongs that are committed through the misuse of power here. But before you pop off and send them a nasty message, remember that you won’t be helping David Olofson if you do that. We need constructive comments here and now. We need them to see the error of their ways, not come after all of us in general or put us on some kind of hit list.
This cannot be allowed to continue without protest by We the People! We CAN and we MUST become active and participate in what our government is doing. This is the only way we can affect the changes that need to be. But we have to do it in a way that doesn’t set US against THEM.
One of the excuses that the BATF used for not giving up the crucial document that could have cleared David Olofson was that it contained privileged tax information. But I don’t believe this because how many times have we seen copies of government documents where there were huge portions blacked out? This excuse doesn’t hold up in light of that realization. Therefore their actions are those of purposeful deceit. They know full well that this document clears David Olofson and they knew full well when they denied access to it that it was done so that their case could proceed and not be thrown out by this judge. Charges of misconduct, at the very least, should be brought to bear against the BATF and the prosecutor in this case. Who will step forward and take on this responsibility?
I’m not an attorney, nor do I have any sort of law background, but this stinks to high heavens. It cannot be allowed to continue without penalty against the prosecutors of this or any other case. Our Constitutional rights to privacy, to carry and own a gun, to be free of unwarranted search and seizure MUST be upheld. Those that seek to take those rights from us must understand they do so at their peril. Someone needs to bring a lawsuit against this prosecutor, the BATF, and any agency that was involved in this case. NO WARRANT was shown remember to David Olofson, not once! That is ILLEGAL!
subscribe to my rss feed
Government finally responded, but only to the motion for a full acquittal. They do a good job making our arguments for us. A lot happening very quickly now with a few working into tonight to be ready for arguments tomorrow. As such this will be the last bit of information I can post until tomorrow night. Below are some excerpts from the reply and some internal correspondence. Government keeps trying to call an apple an orange. May have worked the first time around, but I don’t think this bird is going to fly anymore.
And e-mails and other documents on Olofson’s computer showed that he had ordered M-16 parts.
1. Email referred to clearly shows Olofson turning down M16 parts, not buying them.
Firearms Technology Officer (FTO) Max Kingery testified that Olofson’s firearm fired automatically because, although it was a semiautomatic AR-15, it had M-16 fire control components installed in it. Kingery also testified that the particular M-16 components – the trigger; the selector; the hammer; and the disconnector – in Olofson’s firearm were not installed by the manufacturer. Someone had to have modified the firearm to include those four components.
2. Max Kingery testified he did not think the weapon was made with M16 parts, but that he did not check with the manufacture. Len Savage said it was and did check with the manufacture. Therefore no modification was done by Olofson.
Olofson also had a manual that described how to convert a semiautomatic AR-15 to an automatic M-16 by substituting the very M-16 parts that were in Olofson’s gun.
3. The manual does not show how to convert a AR-15 to a M16 by replacing these 4 parts. It covers much more complex conversions requiring knowledge Olofson does not have.
That the firearm failed to fire automatically on one occasion when it was loaded with special hard-primered military grade ammunition does not remove the gun from the compass of the statutory definition.
4. Shooting is undefined in the statue. It could be said it requires a intended action on the part of the person firing the weapon, and a purposeful design of the weapon to do what is intended. In this instance there is no conversion, but a malfunction. As such the weapon was malfunctioning, not shooting.
A. The evidence at trial clearly supports a rational finding that the firearm in
question was a machinegun.
Olofson argues that, because the statute is written in the present tense, a firearm
qualifies as a machinegun only if it always fires automatically and only if it fires
automatically regardless of the type of ammunition used.
Olofson’s interpretation does not flow from a reading of the plain language of §
922(o). Rather, his interpretation engrafts additional elements onto the statute, which by its terms does not require any explanation for automatic fire (such as that a particular type
of ammunition be used or that a firearm be modified to cause automatic fire); nor does the
statute require any particular number of tests or any particular “error rate.” Factors like
those identified by Olofson are relevant only to the extent that they shed light on whether
Olofson knew that his firearm fired automatically.
5. Lack of scientific testing standards makes any testimony by the ATF vague. Under the US attorneys standard if they can do anything to make a gun go bang more than once you are guilty of a felony. Doesn’t matter if they merely use ammunition it is not chambered in or modify the weapon themselves. This makes every semi automatic weapon contraband. How con an regular person figure out if a weapon is a mg if the ATF can’t get it strait? No standers makes it unconstitutionally vague.
6. There was no evidence about the parts presented in court because the government lied to the judge to cover it up. There was testimony though.
Yup, if they lied once, they will lie again and again and again to cover their asses. I’m sure hoping that your lawyer will make them stick to certain issues.
David, this is a major case. I know you know this and I know you are making them work for every inch here. Everyone here is behind you, trust me. So glad to hear that the NRA is finally there too. Not sure if you asked them in or what, but just glad they are there. Know that all of us are sending you energy, prayers, etc.
David, in case you view this, I just found a Wikipedia article on you that is very incomplete. Here is the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Olofson
If/when you have time, because I truly believe you will be acquitted, this page needs your attention.
All my best…
I was in the Marine Corps from 1958-1962, we were issued M1 Semi-Automatic rifles and on several occasions at the rifle range I witnessed an M1 fire automatic usually 3-6 rounds before jamming due to a broken sear in the trigger housing group, at which time the rifle was rendered inoperative. The M1 would be taken to the armorer for repair or replacement of trigger housing.
The U.S. provided hundreds of thousands of M1’s to our allies and the M1’s became surplus on the world marketplace and many were sold back to us. Every gun shop has M1’s from the far east and europe.
The Army has a special marksmanship program that sells M1’s through various organizations like the NRA, etc . where thousands have been purchased over the years and have help train many of our brave soldiers.
What happens durning a shooting tournament or target practice when suddenly an M1 rifle fires automatic due to a broken sear ——- do we bring suit to WW11 manufacturers, NRA,US ARMY or the BAFT for allowing citizens to be armed with potential automatic weapons or other foreign countries that sold them back to us.
M1 rifle malfuctions can be verified by any Army, Navy ,USMC drill or rifle instructor from WWII to Vietnam.
I can’t say as I understand why they chose to bring this case against David Olofson when it is clear from Kerniki’s own testimony that HE was the one to place the gun in an illegal position, HE was the one who then lied about it, and HE was the one who should have been charged with the automatic weapons fire. Interesting…
Thanks for posting! I appreciate your stopping by…