David Olofson, Lou Dobbs 5-15

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.

NEW UPDATE AVAILABLE!!! CLICK HERE:

As promised, here is the transcript of the Lou Dobbs show last night. Lou was livid over the whole affair. He has demanded that Bill Tucker continue to watch this unfold. That this appeal will take another 6 to 9 months is outrageous but I don’t suppose there is anything we can do about that. We can write letters though and start to get the word about about the injustice here. We can force them to redefine this wording so that everyone isn’t trapped by it. OK, here you go…

DOBBS: Well gun owner David Olofson today saying he hopes to be free while his conviction on federal weapons charges is appealed. He was sentenced Tuesday to two and a half years in prison for owning an AR15 semiautomatic rifle that he contends simply malfunctioned.

Olofson’s rifle fired two multi-round bursts after he loaned it to a neighbor to use on a local shooting range. This gun isn’t supposed to fire multi-burst rounds and it jammed the two times that it did so. But instead of ordering Olofson to repair that rifle, the federal government charged the Army Reservist with transferring a machine gun. And he just got hit with a 30-month sentence to prison. Bill Tucker has our report from Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: David Olofson showed up for his sentencing in Wisconsin with mom and dad by his side. They watched as Judge Clevert sentenced their son to two and a half years in prison and two years probation for transferring a machine gun. Afterwards, he offered this brief statement.

DAVID OLOFSON, DEFENDANT: Definitely disappointed. It went in a direction that we definitely were not expecting. And we hope that the issues will be resolved at a higher level at this point.

TUCKER: The sentence was consistent with what the prosecution wanted. A sentence they argued Olofson deserved. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Hanstot (ph) noted that Olofson had two prior gun charges on his record. And he does, but he doesn’t have any gun convictions. Both charges concerned Olofson carrying guns in public.

The first incident was at a park, the charge was dismissed. The second was a complaint that he was carrying a gun while trick-or- treating with his children. That complaint resulted in a conviction for disorderly conduct. Olofson’s lawyers admitted that he had shown bad judgment but also noted that the behavior was within the law because in Wisconsin a person can openly carry a gun.

I just have to interrupt here. In Wisconsin it is legal to carry a gun in public. A gun owner has the right to protect his family and what better way than to carry a gun? I’m sure that David Olofson wasn’t out there waving it around in everyone’s face, so whoever complained is just an ass. You notice he was NOT convicted of carrying the weapon!

The government also contends that Olofson was the target of an investigation while he served in the Army. Noting that Army investigators were concerned about possible security breeches in military computers. The defense replied they had never heard of the investigation and noted that if true, Mr. Olofson went on to be honorably discharged and then to enlist in the Reserves with noobjection from the Army. Olofson through his father denies ever knowing of any investigation.

DAVID L. OLOFSON, FATHER OF DEFENDANT: He told me just before that is not in his military records. So he does not know where it came from.

TUCKER: According to the prosecutor, there is a letter of administrative reprimand in Olofson’s files. We spoke to the Army and a spokesman told LOU DOBBS TONIGHT that if an investigation had found anything serious, Olofson would not have been honorably discharged or allowed to enlist in the Reserves.

The arguments were enough for Judge Clevert who was outraged by Olofson’s behavior. For Olofson’s lawyers, the issue is not their client’s behavioror bad judgments , but the nature of the offense he is convicted of, transferring a machine gun.

And again I have to interrupt. Here the Judge in this case has allowed his EMOTIONS to interfere with his judgment. In becoming emotionally involved the Judge has lost perspective on the case and gone off base here. This court decision should definitely be throw out!

They argue the ruling has implication of gun owners all over the country.

BRIAN FAHL, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: As I said in court, somebody who has an AR-15, for example, or some other semi-automatic rifle, they’ve got to worry that if you have some semblance of M-16 parts, well, you just may have a machine gun now.

Another thing is if you have an accidental misfire, it looks like you might also have a machine gun. And that accidental misfiring will go to things that aren’t semiautomatic rifles.

TUCKER: The government does not see any new precedent in the case issuing this statement, quote: “The jury, based on the court’s instructions, found beyond a reasonable doubt that Olofson knew that the firearm was a machine gun when he transferred it.”

“The court’s jury instructions on knowledge and the definition of machine gun were statutory definitions which have been in place for more than 20 years. We do not believe this is a new precedent or that legal gun owners have reasons to be concerned.”

Now this is purely speculation on my part here, but I have known other jury trials where the judge purposefully gave the jury misleading statements or withheld pertinent information FROM the jury and so the resulting decisions were different than they could have been. I wonder if that is what has happened here? I’m sure the attorneys for David Olofson know better than I what was said and done and cannot say here. But with the vehemence of the prosecution for this case, it would not surprise me in the least to see that more than a few illegal, immoral, and outright lies were told in order to get David Olofson convicted.

The case is being appealed at the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.

TUCKER: Now Olofson’s attorneys have appealed to the Seventh Circuit, Lou, and asked that their client be allowed to remain free pending the outcome of his appeal. It is the strict definition of machine gun in this case, which has gun enthusiasts paying attention.

Prior to this ruling, the ATF did acknowledge that certain semi- automatic rifles with M-16 parts were legal as long as they did not contain a part known as an auto sear (ph), an auto sear indisputably, Lou, turns that rifle into an automatic gun.

This is a clear indication they are going after ANY SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPON! They are working towards making it illegal for these guns to be in the hands of citizens. I’ll keep my thoughts private as to why, but I’m sure you are all smart enough to understand the reasons for it…

But Olofson’s rifle did not have an auto sear. So as a result, a lot of gun enthusiasts are now worried that any gun which fires more than one bullet with a single pull of the trigger, even if unintended, is a machine gun they’re subject to prosecution and — Lou.

DOBBS: We’re talking about six rounds of ammunition, two bursts, two rounds, which in the first burst went clear, a third jammed. Two rounds went clear, the third jammed. And this man goes to jail for 30 years? Is the U.S. attorney and the federal judge there absolutely — are they out of their minds?

TUCKER: Well, you know, I’ve spoken with the U.S. attorney today — spoken with his office. They clearly believe…

DOBBS: I mean, 30 months.

TUCKER: … that they’re doing the right thing, Lou. And, you know, that’s all I can say. It does seem extreme that this guy, a veteran and a reservist, would end up in this position.

DOBBS: Yes, well, it’s also peculiar that ATF would go after him. I said 30 years, I mean 30 months. I mean, this is extraordinary, ATF had said that they’re going to deal with only violent crimes, you know, like narco-terrorists and so forth, and they go after David Olofson taking care of his three kids, a man who has been serving in the U.S. Army Reserves?

This is — and by the way, the local paper there reporting that they testified that he knew it was an automatic weapon. That’s not true at all. We went through — I thought I was imaging things. We went through the transcript today. In point of fact, that is not what he said at all.

TUCKER: No, he acknowledged to the ATF and to the prosecutors that he knows what a machine gun is, but to my reading of any of the transcripts, he never said he knew this gun, this rifle was, in fact, a machine gun. It has been his contention all along that it was a broken gun and it was malfunctioning and needed to be fixed.

DOBBS: Well, this smells to high heaven. I want this thing absolutely continued to — I want your investigation, if you will, to continue. I want to know exactly what’s going on there with Mr. Olofson and why these forces, these powers have decided to come down so hard on an individual American citizen who served his nation and done so with an honorable discharge.

And I want to find out why they’re playing such games with the media, as well. Because this is absolutely outrageous. The people of Wisconsin putting up with this nonsense from their federal court bench and from their local officials there. I mean, it’s crazy. Bill, thank you very much. Bill Tucker.

TUCKER: You’re welcome.

DOBBS: Gun owner David Olofson’s conviction on federal gun charges is, as Bill Tucker reported, being appealed. His attorneys are hoping that the appellate court will allow him to remain free while the appeal is decided. One of David Olofson’s attorneys is Brian Fahl, and you just met him there in Bill Tucker’s piece.

And the issue is, what did the jury think and why? Why did they bring such heavy charges with such, such severe penalties against David Olofson? So we’re going to talk to Brian Fahl right now.

And it’s good to have you with us, Brian Fahl.

FAHL: Thanks for having me here.

DOBBS: I’ve got to say, reading the paper there, this morning, I couldn’t believe everything there. They suggested that Olofson was a lot of a problem in the military, that he had gone after computers, that he was a member of a militia, that he was some sort of — you know, absolutely crazed gun nut.

What in the world is going on there?

FAHL: Well, I can’t comment entirely on this because the matter is going to be subject to further litigation. But what I can tell you is that Mr. Olofson, after this alleged incident, was — received an honorable discharge and was allowed to reenlist to the Army.

And in fact, I think — I believe he received an accommodation for his service during that time period. I’m not aware of anything else at this time. We have…

DOBBS: Have you ever heard — had you ever heard such allegations before reading it in the paper?

FAHL: No — well, I heard it, the government’s sensing (ph) memorandum indicated these things, but that was the first I had heard of it.

DOBBS: This is — so how did you lose this? This seems like such a stupid — I mean, a completely irresponsible action on the part of the prosecutor, the U.S. attorney’s office, frankly, and the ATF for whom I’ve got great respect, they’ve got tough jobs, but to come down against an American citizen like that for what happened on a range, it’s incomprehensible. How could you not win that case at jury?

FAHL: Well, Lou, the issue here again was the matter of the statute. And the judge adhered to the plain language, which says, no matter what happens, no matter how it happens, if it fires more than once, it’s a machine gun and that’s the plain language of the statute.

The link I added above goes to the Wisconsin State Law Library. Now I couldn’t find which of the laws there this case refers to. I’m sure someone can if they are really interested, but I included the link anyway. I figure those in Wisconsin have a vested interest in this case and should bone up on the laws there, especially with a prosecutor gunning for them…

What we had argued for was for a more common sense reading of the statute, one that wouldn’t say that malfunctions shouldn’t count.

DOBBS: You’ve even got precedent. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appealsoverturned a conviction very similar to this one.

FAHL: Correct, and there’s an ATF ruling, ruling 81-4 (ph) that discusses this. I mean, this is not without some precedent in the law. But again, the plain language is also a strong thing. And the judge issued a — you know, a very reasoned decision.

And the way the system works is we now have to go on and take this to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and make sure that there’s a clarity in the law. This case can act to give clarity to what actually should be considered a machine gun.

DOBBS: What should be considered a machine gun? Without the auto sear, without a statement that he knew that moving the position — the selector position to the third slot created automatic weapon, and then to suggest because it had a multi-burst, you can pull the trigger as you know on a double barrel shotgun or an over and under and get a simultaneous discharge as well, which would be in the clear, technical language a machine gun, it’s an absurdity.

FAHL: Right. And that’s correct, and that is the legal argument that we’re going to pursue through the court of appeals, is that the statute as written, you know, lends itself to these absurd results. And therefore, the statute should be tailored or construed in a manner that…

DOBBS: Well, is the judge – is that judge completely lacking in common sense? What happened to the jury?

FAHL: No — and again, the judge, his decision was reasoned and well thought through. And it’s one reading of the statute. And when the judge’s reading adheres to the plain language of the statute. And that is clearly a reading that has some teeth. And I can understand where he’s coming from.

DOBBS: Well, you may be able to because you have to practice before his bar, but I’ve got to tell you, I think the guy is out of his cotton-picking mind. I mean, there is no semblance of proportion here, 30 months in prison? This is outrageous.

FAHL: Right, and it was a very difficult time for Mr. Olofson, his family, and you know, they’re just looking forward to taking this to the next level and pursuing whatever remedies we have.

DOBBS: Does anybody in that town care? In that state care what’s happening to one of your fellow citizens? I mean, they’re just sitting there like sponges watching it go by. And those — by the way, what’s going by are the Second Amendment rights of every American.

FAHL: Right, and there’s — the good thing is there’s plenty of cases with the Heller (ph) case in the Supreme Court that may get some teeth to the Second Amendment and may provide relief, ultimately for Mr. Olofson.

DOBBS: All right. How soon do you look for that relief? How soon relief — a decision from the appellate court?

FAHL: About six to nine months at the earliest. It could take longer than that depending on the issues.

DOBBS: You’ve got to be kidding. You’ve got to be kidding. Six to nine months.

FAHL: And that’s why the first order of business for us is to ask for a stay from the Seventh Circuit, to stay Mr. Olofson’s sentence while we…

DOBBS: Is this – I’ve just got to ask you, Brian, is this the United States of America? Is Wisconsin still a part of it? Six to nine months? This is crazy.

FAHL: Yes, and that’s just — you know, it takes that long because the number of cases they have. You know, the process takes time. And we’ve just got to hope that in the end, you know, the process will come out with the right decision.

DOBBS: I have to say to you, I don’t even — I can’t even believe we’re talking about the United States. I mean, this is ridiculous. Six to nine months, what is — the full weight of the federal government prosecuting this man, I think it’s outrageous, I can’t believe that the people of Wisconsin are putting up with this nonsense.

But then again, there are a lot of things I can’t believe are being put up with in this country. Brian, thank you very much. We wish you luck with the appeal. Appreciate it.

FAHL: Thank you.

DOBBS: Brian Fahl, from Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

OK, there you have it as promised. It boggles my mind the hack job that is going on in the Wisconsin papers there, that the people of the state that know David Olofson haven’t rallied around him and shown their support. That things just aren’t right here somehow. What am I missing here? There is so much more going on than meets the eye.

When I look at what is being done here and with Ramos and Compean, something STINKS to high heavens! It is plain to me that our government is moving against the people and is willing to use even criminal and illegal aliens in the bargain just to get convictions. Your feedback is appreciated…

Here is an email from David Olofson, copied from another site I’m sure:

How You Can Become A “Gun Felon”

http://gunsmagazine.com/DGR0708.html

“If you pull the trigger once and it fires more than one round, no matter what the cause it’s a machine gun.”

At 2:15 PM on January 8 of this year, the Milwaukee jury in the trial of United States vs. David R. Olofson convened. Forty minutes later they emerged, returning a unanimous verdict against the veteran and National Guardsman: “Guilty.”

Olofson, you see, had loaned one of his rifles, and it malfunctioned at a range, firing off short bursts before jamming. This was called to the attention of local authorities who seized the rifle, an Olympic Arms AR-15. They in turn called BATFE, who decided to make a federal case out of it, charging Olofson with illegally transferring a machinegun.

Enter Len Savage (See “Failing the Test,” July 2005), President of Historic Arms, LLC, brought in by Olofson’s defense to testify the automatic fire was not by design or intent, but rather by mechanical failure, and that the firearm in question was simply a semiautomatic rifle that needed to be repaired.

The opposition would have none of that. Savage was not permitted to personally examine the rifle — not even to touch it. He was required to observe as the ATF officer opened it for inspection. His professional credentials were challenged by the prosecution, who wanted his testimony excluded, even though Savage is a firearm designer by profession, and the government’s expert witness received all of his training in the 2-1/2 years he’d been with the bureau. Then the prosecution reneged on its pledge not to sequester witnesses, and had Savage removed from the courtroom so he could not hear the government’s testimony.

So in the end, it didn’t matter this was merely a case of a “hammer follow.”

It didn’t matter the rifle in question had not been intentionally modified for select fire, or that it did not have an M16 bolt carrier or sear, that it did not show any signs of machining or drilling, or that that model had even been recalled a few years back.

It didn’t matter that, when asked if he’d test fired the gun, Savage testified “From my examination and from what I saw on the [ATF test] video I wouldn’t want to attempt it … the video shows the guy who was shooting it was so afraid to fire it from the shoulder he had to hold it out in front of him. So he knew it was dangerous.”

It didn’t matter the government had repeatedly failed to replicate automatic fire until they replaced the ammunition with a softer primer type. It didn’t even matter that the prosecution admitted it was not important to prove the gun would do it again if the test were conducted today.

What mattered was the government’s position that none of the above was relevant because “[T]here’s no indication it makes any difference under the statute. If you pull the trigger once and it fires more than one round, no matter what the cause it’s a machine gun.”

No matter what the cause.

Think about if your semiauto ever malfunctions. Because that’s how close you could be to becoming a convicted “gun felon.”

In another email from David Olofson he has released one witness statement. I’m attaching the email here as is but will also attach a word document that is a copy of the witness statement for an easier read as what came through for me was very small with no way for me to enlarge it. Here you go…

David Olofson

Now a while back I promised to show everyone how deep this rabbit hole is and let them see the whole story. As such I am releasing a number of witness accounts. Most have nothing to lose or gain from speaking up other than the fact they make themselves a target of the feds. These will be released one at a time over the next few days. Draw your own conclusions about who has been telling the truth through this, who has been full of BS, and who is out of control. Now with no further ado here is the beginning of the rest of the story from those who lived it.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/cloverleaf762/Kell_A.jpg[/IMG]

And here is the file I saved: david-olofson-witness1

~ by justmytruth on May 15, 2008.