The Olofson Case - Merged Threads

B

Blackwater OPS

New member
IMHO he made the error of thinking that just because he was innocent he did need top notch representation. His biggest mistake was not being paranoid enough. I hope he does win his appeal, he seems to have pretty good grounds and has a good lawyer now, but in the mean time we should be supporting him. What do you think would happen if some code pink arsehat got arrested for violating a free speech zone or something? Would all the code pick wackos be trying to throw him under the bus for some technical violation that probably does not pass constitution muster? I doubt it. Why can't we have half as much loyalty as code pink? It's like when a little kid got bullied in school, were you the kids who said "well he should have just given up the lunch money quicker". ***? STAND UP! As a wise man (who is also in my sig line) once said, "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." Now is the time to stand together, and those in this forum who would condemn someone who is being persecuted for exercising his right to keep and bear arms are the worst kind of hypocrites and cowards.
 
S

STAGE 2

New member
Now is the time to stand together, and those in this forum who would condemn someone who is being persecuted for exercising his right to keep and bear arms are the worst kind of hypocrites and cowards.
Click to expand...

I'm confused. Are you saying that we should get behind this guy simly because he's convicted of a gun related crime, or because you think he's innocent?

If its the latter then once again, this guy was convicted by peole who were there and heard the evidence. None of us were. If its the former, then give me a break. I'm supposed to support some guy that breaks the rules that I'm required to follow? I don't think so.

If you don't like the law, get it changed. If you break it, then don't sit there and start crying about rights when you knew full well what you were doing was illegal.
 
J

jrfoxx

New member
has literally no understanding of the judicial process when they say that prosecutors can sit on exclupatory evidence.
Click to expand...
Nifong anyone? It certainly CAN happen.Maybe it did here, maybe it didnt.I dont know.But to say it CANT isnt true.Its cetainly not beyond the governmet to lie, cheat and manipulate, any more than it is for anyone else.They are all falible humans, drwn from the same society as the rest of us.

Beyond that, I have no idea if the guy is/was guilty, or he got railroaded, and no one but he, and those who did the investigating and prosecuting will EVER know for certain, unless one side or the other confesses to doing something wrong, which is pretty unlikely.SOMEBODY is lying, and whoever it is probly isnt going to admit it, ever.The govt either lied and screwed the guy, or he lied and knew darn well what he was doing the whole time.

just my 2 cents
 
I

ISC

Moderator
don't sit there and start crying about rights when you knew full well what you were doing was illegal.
Click to expand...

I don't think he knew or thought he was doing anything illegal. How likely is it that if he thought he had an illegally manufactured machine gun he would have loaned it to someone?

And I feel like I'm talking to someone who has literally no understanding of the judicial process when they say that prosecutors can sit on exclupatory evidence.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying t hey can do that as in they're allowed to. I'm saying that if they do a legal dance and the judge accepts their motion to withold evidence then the evidence never gets seen. Did you pay any attention to the Duke lacrosse case? The only reason that came to light was because the lacrosse player's families had ALOT of money. The court does have policies, but the lawyers and prosecuters don't always follow them.

In this case we're talking about a man of modest means with a mediocre at best attorney and the charges are such that the typical sheep out there will assume that he's guilty just because he owns an AR.

The majority of people see an AR and assume that it's an M16 and would call it a machine gun just due to it's appearance. That is the sort of person that judged him. I think that one of 2 things will happen:

1) he'll eventually win his appeal after he's had his finances and career ruined.
2) He'll get a new trial and be offered some sort of deal that he'll take because he can't afford to go through it all over again.

wildalaskaidonthaveanyideawhatyouretryingtosayandthinkthatyoudonteither
 
P

PT111

New member
Quote:
don't sit there and start crying about rights when you knew full well what you were doing was illegal.
Click to expand...

I don't think he knew or thought he was doing anything illegal. How likely is it that if he thought he had an illegally manufactured machine gun he would have loaned it to someone?
Click to expand...

From reading through some of the posts on other boards about this case and sifting through all the BS crying about him, it appears that he knew exactly what he was loaning out.
 
W

Wildalaska

Moderator
Nifong anyone? It certainly CAN happen.Maybe it did here, maybe it didnt.I dont know.But to say it CANT isnt true.Its cetainly not beyond the governmet to lie, cheat and manipulate, any more than it is for anyone else.They are all falible humans, drwn from the same society as the rest of us.
Click to expand...

Nifong is a rogue STATE prosecutor gone bad, who, if you conveniently forgot, has paid the price.

A Federal case is started by a federal agent, who is responsible under carefully written guidelines to his superiors, who then presents the case to an AUSA who is under carefully written guidelines to his superior, the USA, who is also under carefully written guidelines from his superiors at DOJ, etc. You don't find many rogues in the Fed system. Thenits all supervised by a federal Judge, who in the majoirty of cases favours the defense anyway (if you don't understand why, let me know)

Like I have been saying, lets see what the appeal brings.

All the rest is agenda netnoise till then. I don't necessarily agree with the rules regarding machine guns, but if they are broken, thems the breaks.

WildreadtheguidelinesAlaska ™
 
S

STAGE 2

New member
Nifong anyone? It certainly CAN happen.Maybe it did here, maybe it didnt.I dont know.But to say it CANT isnt true.Its cetainly not beyond the governmet to lie, cheat and manipulate, any more than it is for anyone else.They are all falible humans, drwn from the same society as the rest of us.
Click to expand...

And what happened to nifong?


I'm not saying t hey can do that as in they're allowed to. I'm saying that if they do a legal dance and the judge accepts their motion to withold evidence then the evidence never gets seen. Did you pay any attention to the Duke lacrosse case? The only reason that came to light was because the lacrosse player's families had ALOT of money.
Click to expand...


Thats ridiculous. If the prosecution makes a motion to exclude exclupatory evidence, and the evidence is in fact exculpatory, then the defense shouldn't have to do anything because the judge should deny the motion. If the defense attorney does speak up then there is no way that this evidence is going to be excluded. "Doing a little legal dance" is just another way of saying "I don't know how the system operates."

As far as Nifong goes, he got busted because the defense attorneys kept insisting on him to release the results of the dna testing. This has nothing to do with how much they were paid, or how good they were, it has to do with common sense. You see, in most cases, certianly this one, the defense attorney is going to have access to more information than the prosecution because he has the ability to talk to his client. It highly unlikely that the prosecution would have any evidence that the defense wouldn't be aware of, especially since they usually settle admissibility issues before the trial starts. Thus, if the prosecution had any exclupatory evidence the defense would have known about it and could have easily had it admitted.

The court does have policies, but the lawyers and prosecuters don't always follow them.
Click to expand...

Again, bunk. These aren't court rules, these are laws. Refusal to follow them, especially with the prosecution, means disbarment and possibly even jail time.

However, since you are so certian that the prosecution sat on exclupatory evidence, why don't you tell us exactly what this evidence was.
 
J

jrfoxx

New member
Again, I agree it's HIGHLY unlikely it was the govt who did the lying here, but that doesn't mean its not POSSIBLE.People commit crimes all the time and don't get caught.it can and does happen, and sometimes it is people in the govt and law enforcement who commit the crimes, AND get away with it.Not saying that the case here, as I wasn't there, and cant read minds, just like everyone else here, i'm just saying that to claim it CANT have happened in this case not really being very honest about it.Just because Nifong was caught and punished doesn't mean it was a guarantee he or anyone else doing something similar WILL always get caught.THATS all I'm trying to say.I personally think it's WAY,WAY more likely the guy knowingly broke the law, and was caught and punished.But just because thats 99.99% most likely, doesn't mean it's impossible he was/is innocent, and the govt lied/cheated, etc and has SO FAR at least gotten away with it.

No matter how many laws, rules, or layers of oversight are in place, there will ALWAYS be someone who occasionally breaks them and gets away with it for one reason or anther.
 
A

alan

New member
jrfoxx wrote excerpted:


Again, I agree it's HIGHLY unlikely it was the govt who did the lying here, but that doesn't mean its not POSSIBLE.People commit crimes all the time and don't get caught.it can and does happen, and sometimes it is people in the govt and law enforcement who commit the crimes, AND get away with it.Not saying that the case here, as I wasn't there, and cant read minds, just like everyone else here, i'm just saying that to claim it CANT have happened in this case not really being very honest about it.Just because Nifong was caught and punished doesn't mean it was a guarantee he or anyone else doing something similar WILL always get caught.

Mr. Foxx went on to note the following:

THATS all I'm trying to say.I personally think it's WAY,WAY more likely the guy knowingly broke the law, (I disagree, but that's simply my take, cannot prove it)and was caught and punished.But just because thats 99.99% most likely, doesn't mean it's impossible he was/is innocent, and the govt lied/cheated, etc and has SO FAR at least gotten away with it.

--------------------------------

Looking at the possibilities herein, I find the fact that some are unwilling or unable to accept that Law Enforcement not only can be wrong, we all can, but sometimes actually is wrong, if not a lot worse, is strange, not to mention rather sad. In any event, appeals, it seems, have been filed, and as is the case with D.C. v Heller, at some point in time, the thing will be finalized. Till then we can wait patiently or stand on our heads, whistling Dixie. We can also continue to argue the thing here.
 
D

DonR101395

New member
Looking at the possibilities herein, I find the fact that some are unwilling or unable to accept that Law Enforcement not only can be wrong, we all can, but sometimes actually is wrong, if not a lot worse, is strange, not to mention rather sad. In any event, appeals, it seems, have been filed, and as is the case with D.C. v Heller, at some point in time, the thing will be finalized. Till then we can wait patiently or stand on our heads, whistling Dixie. We can also continue to argue the thing here.
Click to expand...


Law enforcement and the courts get it wrong fairly often and I don't agree with the NFA laws; however after reading this case along with his statements and the statements of the person that he loaned the rifle, I think he was guilty. Someone who is building and selling weapons isn't that stupid unintentionally.
 
C

cloverleaf762

New member
Where did you get it from that he was selling weapons? I didn’t see that anywhere but in the original complaint. If it was true they would have charged him with it. Plus the ATF never said they had any kind of receipts for weapons or receivers bought and sold, or anyone who bought a new firearm or receiver from him. Is there additional factual information out there other than ARFCOM?
I do see where he said he helped folks build guns up, but not where he said he sold them new guns or did any kind of straw buys. Last I checked helping someone build a gun was not illegal, yet. He also says he has sold around 7 personally owned guns over 20 years. I don’t think selling personal guns on such a low level is against any laws either. Correct me if I’m wrong.
 
D

DonR101395

New member
Where did you get it from that he was selling weapons? I didn’t see that anywhere but in the original complaint. If it was true they would have charged him with it. Plus the ATF never said they had any kind of receipts for weapons or receivers bought and sold, or anyone who bought a new firearm or receiver from him. Is there additional factual information out there other than ARFCOM?
Click to expand...

Item #8 of the affidavit in support of a criminal complaint. Kiernicki stated Olofson loaned him the rifle while waiting for the one he ordered from him to come in. It was a stripped receiver that they would build together. It's not a straw purchase as long as Kiernicki isn't allowed to legally own the weapon. I never saw it disputed anywhere in any of the documents, so IMO it's a fact the he was selling weapons at least on a limited basis. I'll have to dig for the article that also stated the two found each other through a grocery store bulletin board where Olofson was advertising building AR15's.



I do see where he said he helped folks build guns up, but not where he said he sold them new guns or did any kind of straw buys. Last I checked helping someone build a gun was not illegal, yet. He also says he has sold around 7 personally owned guns over 20 years. I don’t think selling personal guns on such a low level is against any laws either. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Click to expand...

I didn't say helping someone build a gun or selling a gun was illegal. I said someone who builds and sells guns isn't unintentionally that stupid. I've built several guns, but I wouldn't loan out or sell a known malfunctioning gun. I've never heard or read anything refuting that he didn't know the gun would fire multiple rounds with 1 trigger pull. IMO he knew it would do it and let it continue or he intentionally built it that way.
As I've stated throughout the thread, I don't agree with the rules, but I play by them until they are changed. He's made a habit of ignoring the rules and playing by his own set. This time it didn't work out for him.
I actually hope it gets turned over on appeal. That along with Heller if it goes our way could make for some interesting legal battles.


But either way it turns out, I won't believe that he accidentally made it.
 
C

cloverleaf762

New member
I personally wouldn’t put much trust in the statement from a young man trying to avoid a felony himself, and who got paid for his testimony later on. As I go through it he didn’t give Olofson any money, and I recall on ARFCOM Olofson stated he would have to pick it up from the local dealer who’s FFL he had for just such a reason. (As per federal law) All firearms ordered have to go to the FFL dealer on the FFL, not to him. No company I know of will ship a firearm anywhere but a FFL address. That alone should be an indicator that This Kiernicki is not on the level. And the fact that there was never any charges on it, or that the ATF can't find any other "customers" or receipts say a lot also. Either Olofson is a genus when it comes to hiding his business and the ATF is that incompetent, or the "customers" and sales of firearms by him just don't exist. (I believe Akums Razor prevails here)

And the ad seems to be for a Match Colt AR he had for many years, not new builds or completed weapons as you seem to think.

As for him knowing it was an auto, that is by no means set in stone. The government maintains it because Kiernicki says it, but he is the only one saying it, and as I pointed out his word seems to be highly suspect. Especially since he claims to be a Sgt. in the Army serving in Iraq at the time this was going on.

I believe there is more to this case. We will hear it sooner or later, and I don't think it is Olofson tossing the crap. Especially after hearing about the government covering up what may be exculpatory evidence. Why do that if they have nothing to hide and they have him cold breaking a law or laws? If he has done all the things they claimed in the beginning, why not charge him with it all, not just the one charge? It doesn’t add up. Not yet anyways.

I will admit that not having any rebuttal to the accusations bug me, but maybe there is a reason for it we don't know about yet. Time will tell.
 
D

DonR101395

New member
I believe there is more to this case.
Click to expand...
Time will tell.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. This are things on both sides of this fence that smell funny to me. The truth is somewhere in the middle. IMHO, There is just something about this guy that smells a little worse than has been portrayed......................and I love to play the devil's advocate;)
 
A

alan

New member
As to Olofson "making and selling guns" AR-15's or any type absent the appropriate federal licenses, FFL and possibly a Manufacturers License also, I suspect that such would have been mentioned in the charges/indictment against the defendant. So far as I know, and I might have missed this, nothing of the sort has come up, other than it being mentioned in a post here. I doubt that the government would have "overlooked" the possibility of charges of/for "being in the business without a license (FFL), and or of being a manufacturer, without appropriatre licsense too.
 
C

cloverleaf762

New member
More information from that thread.

"Just a note to update everyone. I was just given official notice of a post trial motion and sentencing date of 8 May. Motions will be heard right before any sentencing, with the hope that at least one of the motions to dismiss wins out. If not, then at least we have an answer on this from the court and the full story can come out. Anyone wishing to attend the hearing is welcome. It will be heard at the Federal court house in Milwaukee Wisconsin in front of Judge Cleverts at 1430. I’d be there a bit early if you want seating. The motions are expected to take 30-60 minutes; any sentencing would take an additional 15-30 minutes if it goes that far. If you want attend please plan on good behavior in the court room, and by extension the Federal court house. Neither is the place for any dissent. Opinions can be freely rendered after the hearing outside the courthouse to whoever chose’s to listen.
I will also add that additional reading on this can be done in at least the next two issues of Soldier of Fortune. In addition to that Lou Dobbs has more coverage ready to roll from some very prominent people weighing in on this subject. Most likely additional coverage will also be given to me after the fact. I will post any dates of the airing when it is decided the timing is right by the network.
I promised you more and now it’s coming. True to my word all I can say is brace yourselves, its worse than you think, and unlike the BATFE in this case we can prove it."
 
F

FireMax

New member
Lou Dobbs will be discussing this case and bringing in experts discussing the exculpatory evidence the ATF with held tomorrow (wednesday) The more I learn about this case the more I think that he'll have his conviction overturned.
Click to expand...

I hope so. Maybe they can then fire the ATF people involved in bringing this travesty of justice to the courts in the first place..... like that would ever happen. They'll probably get promoted.
 
I

ISC

Moderator
here is a link to the documents filed in his case:

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v51/cloverleaf762/

Here is a link to a broad overview of thr situation from it's beginning, including a description of the exculpatory evidence the BATF refused to release, something some here said was impossible:

http://www.firearmscoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=192&Itemid=37

Here is a discussion (much more sypathtic than here) about the case with alot of documants posted:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?a=subscribe&b=1&f=6&t=507483&sub=Update+on+Berlin+BATFE+Raid
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top