David R. Olofson's conviction "for knowingly transferring a machinegun in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o)" has been upheld.
A May 1 ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held on May 1:
In sum, the defendant’s proffered jury instruction was not a correct statement of the law, and the district court properly rejected it. Furthermore, the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to sustain Olofson’s conviction, and 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(o) and 924(a)(2) are not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the facts of this case. In addition, the district court did not abuse its discretion in either excluding the defendant’s firearms expert from the courtroom during the government expert’s testimony or in denying Olofson’s motion to compel the production of evidence he had requested from the government. Accordingly, we AFFIRM Olofson’s conviction.
Earlier today I reported on my WarOnGuns blog that exclusion of expert witness Len Savage from the courtroom during testimony by his government counterpart was held to be "not an abuse of discretion." The Wisconsin Law Journal case digest can be read here.
Olofson's legal options at this point appear to be to request the Seventh Circuit Court to hear the case en banc, to petition the Supreme Court, or to accept the decision. A relief fund has been established to fund his legal costs by Gun Owners of America.
More information on developments in this case will be reported as they're made known.
Click here to download the decision.
For those unfamiliar with the case, see the additional information at the bottom of this post. In short, Olofson had a semiautomatic rifle that could misfire if certain ammuniton was used. It was determined that even though it was a malfunction, it legally met the definition of a machine gun.
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Restaurant with anti-gun policy saved by a gun
- Austin: Swine flu and gun control
- Boston: Mayday, mayday, mayday
- Charlotte: Humane Society of the U.S.: Not just your Mom's animal shelter any more
- Cleveland: Necessity for protection creating new gun owners
- DC: It's springtime for gun rights in Wisconsin's carryland
- Denver: Montana seeks to test states' rights
- Los Angeles: Gun Control and some of my favorite quotations
- Milwaukee: Milwaukee Police Chief Flynn bullies gun owners
- Minneapolis: Are gun owners facing a ‘perfect storm’?
- Seattle: Public safety ‘crossroads’ in King County may reflect statewide, national problem on magnum scale
- St. Louis: Is it even possible to 'reform' the BATFE?
- Wisconsin: Montana draws a deep line for states rights
More info:
Olofson reporting from Examiner.com
Olofson reporting from WarOnGuns
Olofson reporting from WorldNetDaily
Olofson reporting from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
Lou Dobbs on Olofson (You Tube)
"How You Can Become a 'Gun Felon'" (Guns Magazine)
Comments
Story linked at The Liberty Sphere.
chugachugachuga CHOO CHO! Another railroad job.
Just think, if he appeals it to the SCOTUS maybe it can be the first case to the lightworker's court and forever seal the fate of the very arms that were meant to be protected. How very...progressive and enlightened, oh I almost forgot "patriotic" as paying taxes and bowing to out new slavemasters in DC is patriotic according to Biden.
That's all I can say that wouldn't involve a string of profanity or calls to let them reap what they have sown.
Story linked at The Price of Liberty, The mental Militia, and Free State Wyoming.
Where are the TEA parties now? Are legal funds and more foot kissing of judges going to change anything?
This is very wrong and shows a very clear break down in our justice system.
This is on topic: I just saw a show on MSNBC called Which Hunt that happened in Bakersfield CA. The DA, social service workers and the cops got together to railroad people on child sex charges. The state AG had to step in to shut the racket down. Nevertheless, some people served as much as 20 years before they were freed on the grounds they received a bogus trial. What we have here is the same kind of thing.
Did anyone seriously think that this would go any other way? The judges had this thing 'fixed' before it went to court the first time. In years to come we can use this trial as the WikiPedia definition for kangaroo court. This was all about convicting a person, not about finding the truth and letting facts speak for themselves.
And they wonder why folks are angry.
Linked at Mindful Musings. here we go.
CIII
Has Claire Wolfe looked at her clock lately?
This is just further proof that the govt will not let the truth get in the way of what they want. They wanted the guy prosecuted and they did it. They want to do us in period.
Read the decision. It is linked to in the article. The gun had a three position switch, fire, unmarked and safe. The dependent told the borrower that gun would fire multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger in that unmarked position. The gun did exactly that. End of story.
When I bring up the link, all I get is an icon that wont open the file, so I can't read the decision.
That said, however, why is this the first time we have heard of this, Jeff? And why was it necessary to deny Olofson's expert witness if Olofson's gun really was a full-auto? The BATF and their pet judges are so corrupt that I wouldn't believe the gun had a three-position switch with an unmarked full-auto position just on their say-so. I'd have to see the gun in question, and even then, I'd likely not believe I was looking at Olofson's gun, but a full-auto ringer. This man was railroaded, period. So put up or shut up.
If I interpret the law literally as written, than ANY semi-automatic gun a person uses could become a "machine gun"...
Not thru defect of the weapon, but because of a defective person or an COMPLETELY uncontrollable external event.
"pull of the trigger" could be interpreted to mean "intentional" pull of the trigger...and likely would be by an ultra-liberal activist judge. (the kind Obama--in his own words--wants to appoint to the Supreme Court)
On my single-action capable 9mm pistol, If I suffer a muscle-spasm, or am bumped while firing, and my finger twitches just a VERY tiny bit (once in single-action mode), it would be possible for my handgun to fire 2 or more times without an INTENTIONAL pull of the trigger.
This is clearly an incorrect decision from prejudiced (pre-judging) judges. They completely ignored common law, precedent, and just plain common-sense.
Unfortunately, radical left AND right-wing people rarely exhibit common-sense when attempting to force their reality-view on others.
don't mean this sarcastically---how long did they have to shop around to find this situation ? Weapon malfunctioned and owner's convicted ?
It was determined that even though it was a malfunction, it legally met the definition of a machine gun.
I spent about an hour skimming through and periodically carefully reading select sections of a variety of court filings for this case. I read the original search warrant, case filing, the father's deposition and the appeal.
All documents are available through Google.
There are problems, both for prosecution and defense. However, physical evidence makes the prosecution case. Arguments over definition of a machine gun simply are not a good defense; the defense attorney was grasping at straws. Nonetheless, this is his charge.
Ignoring tedious and rather boring technical legal points, this modified copy cat Colt AR-15, alone, is sufficient evidence for conviction.
A civilian copy cat AR-15 or Colt AR-15, neither are factory equipped with a "three selection" firing lever nor "four selection" firing lever. Civilian versions are only manufactured with a "two selection" firing lever; safe and single shot.
Olofson's rifle has been modified to a military version which cannot be legally sold to the public. Sales between federally licensed gun dealers, yes, but not to the public.
Olofson is presumed to know what constitutes a "machine gun" and his modifying his rifle to a military version displays intent to violate our laws. His modified "civilian" rifle is physical evidence of violation of our laws.
Does not matter if his rifle works correctly or not, his intent to violate our laws is well established by his intentionally modifying his civilian rifle to a restricted military version.
His conviction is a correct verdict.
Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation
Well then? This PROVES that there are 1 set of Laws for Citizens and 1 for government.
IF Military citizens in our arm3d forces(Who by law are US ciizens 1st) are allowed to obtain and use fully automatic weapons?
Then how is it the court can find that it can denounce the ownership of these same type of arms, by its own citizens?
The Government is making it clear that It has no respect for the USC or BoR's.
Only when it serves the Governments purpose?
How Obtuse is that?
If this is the case?
Then government is saying(And making it clear) it can deny it's citizens all their rights & when ever it feels like, while retaining them same rights(BoR's) for itself.
Get what I mean?
Want an example oh just what I'm getting at here, and how ludicrous this ruling is?
Okay?
A young man @ the age of 18 can be forced( If the Law is passed for conscription) or decide on his own to join the Military.
The Government will train him to Kill & carry fully automatic weapons.
He's Old enough to receive training to KILL, but not Old enough to Go buy Alcohol yet?
But he can consume Alcohol on Base if he so chooses.
Skirting the Federal law of having to be 21 in order to consume or buy alcohol off base?
Now He goes home on leave.
He cannot have in his possession a Fully automatic firearm or Buy alcohol or consume it legally?
But Just 1 hour ago he could?
Okpulot Taha, when I said I don't believe their say-so, I meant that I don't believe the court documents. This was a trumped up charge, so I believe the evidence was falsified.
Crotalus writes, "This was a trumped up charge, so I believe the evidence was falsified."
I would not agree this charge is "trumped up" but would agree prosecution was overly zealous.
No doubt Olofson's past indiscretions such as two convictions for weapons violations, his "messing" with military computers and his association with a militia group, played a part in this aggressive prosecution.
Olofson carries some responsibility for his being prosecuted with zeal.
Knowing of Olofson's past weapon violations, I would say his sentence was lenient, certainly far less than the ten years he faced.
Evidence was certainly not falsified. Olofson installed M-16 parts to convert his rifle to have automatic fire capability. This is not a manufacturer error nor fault of ammunition type. Olofson illegally modified his rifle by his own hand and by his freewill choice.
Sure, ATF tests can be questioned as to quality and fairness, but there is no question Olofson modified his rifle with knowledge he was violating our laws.
There is much about this case which is questionable, but the physical evidence, his modified rifle, stands.
Perhaps Olofson is entitled to a new trial but I am certain he will again be convicted. Only way out of this is for Olofson to make his modified rifle "go away" which will not happen.
There are ethical and moral issues surrounding this case but the underlying case for transfer of a machine gun is sound and this conviction is a correct jury verdict.
Justice has been served by a jury of his peers and this justice must be honored. This is our American way.
Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation
For trivial interest and to annoy some of you boys, this Olofson boy, in my opinion, is about as smart as a bucket of rocks. We do not want boys like him in possession of a machine gun; this is dangerous.
There is a way to attain full auto fire with almost all AR-15 style rifles, least those ten or so years old, a way which requires no modifications to an AR-15 rifle.
You boys should research "S W D auto connector."
Some links are available on the web. Best resource is "SWAT Magazine" Vol. 1, No. 1, published in 1986.
Although this small device is a "drop in drop out" device requiring no modifications to most civilian model AR-15 rifles, this device is illegal.
Olofson is not the sharpest pencil in the pencil box. If he or you, the reader, are to violate our laws, do so with throw away evidence or evidence which is not easy to recognize.
I would also contend Olofson's defense attorney is not the brightest color in the crayon box.
His lawyer is arguing "letter of the law" which almost never works. He is arguing the legal definition of a machine gun. This is pointless and only annoys a court.
Under our legal system, there a two notions. One is "letter of the law" and the other notion is "intent of the law". Enforcing letter of the law is forbidden. Enforcing intent of law is to be followed.
Almost all of us violate "letter of the law" at least once on a daily basis but we do so without true intent to violate our laws. In lieu of intent, there is no crime.
You drive with defective windshield wipers, you are violating letter of the law although you do not intend to violate a law; you did not know your windshield wipers are broken.
However, if you remove (modify) your windshield wipers, this is a violation of law; you intend to violate the law.
This definition of a machine gun is viewed with "intent of law" not with "letter of law". Intent is to keep machine guns out of the hands of civilians. This is a good law.
A jury will not entertain lame brain arguments about letter of law. A jury watches a video showing a rifle firing "automatically" and will convict. This is abiding by intent of law.
Had Olofson never modified his rifle, he would not be sitting in prison. Olofson must be held accountable for his actions to preserve the integrity of our justice system.
Same is true for law enforcement, prosecutors and our courts. Intent of law must be followed by all or our legal system becomes a travesty of justice.
Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation
Numerous current and historical fascist regimes would be proud of our "justice" department.
Taha and Jeff are both wrong. The charges stem from the second set of tests. The first time the firearm was tested by the ATF, the tester stated it was not a machine gun, it was just a rifle.
The rifle was sent back to be retested with the understood caveat that it had better be found to be a machine gun. The court did not allow testimony as to the testing procedures followed, did not allow testimony as to what if any standard procedures the ATF even had, did not follow the law and force the prosecution to turn over documents due the defense as part of the discovery process, did not allow the defense expert to examine the firearm, and did not allow the defense expert to hear the evidence presented by the prosecution so that he could advise the attorney for the defense of any mistakes or misrepresentations by the prosecution.
None of this would have been necessary if the evidence had supported the government's case. To suggest otherwise is foolish.
Foolish being the nicest word I can think of for such a defense of the ATF and the court. At the moment I would grant foolish over other less savory options.
I think Carl Marx is laughing his butt off at Current Day America and Adolf Hilter does the Goose step in his grave, at the Hypocracy that exsists in Todays America.
With little notice or fan fair.
I live in a country full of Hypocritical idiots. Especially the Ones that make the Law.
If YOu think It is OKAY for the Government to have Fully automatic weapons and not you?
You donot understand the US constitution of the Bill of Rights.
And You deserve neither.
A pox on your houses to those who support this travesty of justice.
Okpulot Taha, I agree with most of what you have written regarding the Olofsen case, but there are a few avenues or areas that you have not explored. In these areas there are further grave injustice's occuring. It seems you have a good base of knowledge of firearms & law & that is y I'm writing to you.
In the Olofsen case, if you ask me whether I believe he is guilty, I would have to answer in the affirmitive. Whether a court should have found him so is not so clear cut. I know that it is possible that he may of accidentally created the machine gun, but I believe he then knowingly tried to sell it as a machine gun.
First of all I agree the only clear defense is if he had no knowledge of the firearm being fully automatic. The federal machine gun law requires the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly possessed the firearm and knew that it fit the description of a machine gun. So if the witness was discredited or mistaken this would be a proper
defense. Otherwise some elderly gent with a 20 year old side-by-side shotgun that had a malfunction and unknown to him began discharging both rounds with one pull of the trigger might find himself in federal prison for ten years. I think this is why this case concerns so many gun owners and rightfully so.
Let's say that Olofsen proved his case under this argument and the court aquitted him. Well guess what Olofsen your still screwed because unlike every other statue, the state of Wisconsin has there own machine gun law, which by some failure of the supreme court, does not require knowledge or intent.
Right now there is a case being presented to federal court , because it was denied by WI supreme court, WI court of appeals and the original circuit court refused to take into account the fact that the defendant had no knowledge the rifle he possessed fired full auto and even signed a stipulation to that fact. So as you said "Almost all of us violate "letter of the law" at least once on
on a daily basis but we do so without true intent to violate our laws. In lieu of intent, there is no crime." I guess does not apply anymore.
While I'm sure u r thinkinking there is probably more to this case. No this person was only found in possession, not selling or discharging said firearm, was a respected member of his community, had no prior record what so ever and now has had to go to prison, live with a felony on his record and not own a firearm for the rest of his life. This is what everyone is afraid of.
And don't even let me get into gun registration (Adolf Hitler's inventiion) or the tearing up of the @nd amendment. Isn't the whole point of the 2nd amendment so the citizen can protect himself against a government from taking his civil liberties. Tell me how you do that when they get machine guns and we don't. Legal full auto kits thats a joke. The make the gun fire the same as a machine gun.
Anyway back to this case I was talking about, the reason he had a machine gun
is similar to Olofsen's and is why I bring it up. He purchased an AR-15 legally and then later on purchased a legal replacement parts kit to fix a broken part in his AR. There are normally 5 M-16 Trigger parts necessary to restore an AR-15 to fire full auto, but in certain types if you put even one of these parts which are nearly identical to AR-15 parts in the rifle it becomes fully automatic when fired with certain ammunition. These M-16 parts are so similar that they are commonly found at gun shows mixed with AR-15 parts and normally wouldn't make a difference unless u have just the right one in just the right brand rifle. The difference in these parts may only be a hundreth of an inch here and a hundreth of an inch there. So now this man is eating ?@#$ because of an honest mistake. How about that for justice? Maybe they should hear Olofsen's specialist, I can't think of any reason why not, maybe the guy he was selling it to lied to clinch clearing his own name. Most of all the
THIS COMMENT IS 5 ENTRYS LONG START 5 DOWN
Supreme Court needs to get off their $#$es and tell WI to update their vague machine gun law and add a little something called "mens rea" or intent whatever you want to call it before all gun owners end up in the clink. I'm sure they would like that. So get on your congressmen and senators to fix these injustices.
Would like to hear what others think about this????
Has anyone checked out charlotte gun and Transfers
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!