Quoted:
also,


MS. LEMKE: Your Honor, there's something else I
23 would like to put on the Court's radar and it has to do with
24 the discovery letters that defense counsel are filing with the
25 Court as an exhibit.

MS. LEMKE: And, Your Honor, one of the reasons why I
21 wanted to put it on the Court's radar is asking that the
22 discovery letters just be e-mailed and mailed rather than
23 posted as an exhibit is currently there is a blog that is ––
24 has posted portions of the letter that Mr. Sanders wrote onto
25 their website talking about this case.

Gun Trouble

Arizona machine-gun probe prompts dispute over seized Maryland gun collection

By Van Smith

PUBLISHED: JUNE 6, 2012

It’s been nearly seven years since 58-year-old auto mechanic and gun collector David Bord made a purchase that has caused him no end of grief: a Hatton Industries machine gun, which he got at the Armory, a gun store near Annapolis, in exchange for 10 pistols and $10,000. What Bord didn’t learn until almost three years later—in spring 2008, when agents of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) visited him—was that the gun was suspected of being part of an allegedly fraudulent gun-registration ring based in Arizona.

In December 2009, as a result of an ATF tip involving Bord’s purchase at the Armory, Baltimore County police raided Bord’s home and business and seized a large part of his gun collection. Bord says they took 25 firearms worth $250,000, nearly all of them 35 to 50 years old, based on a faulty warrant, and that the guns are now in ATF’s possession.

“They said the guns weren’t registered with Maryland or the [United States],” Bord says of the Baltimore County police who took his guns, “but every single one of the guns is—I showed them the paperwork. They know everything is legal, and they still refuse to return them. Every single one of them is legal and registered, but the idiots still won’t back down.”

Bord’s ongoing efforts to have the guns returned to him include a lawsuit against Baltimore County, which is scheduled for trial in September, having survived the county’s attempt last year to have it dismissed. In addition, Bord says he asked the Maryland U.S. Attorney’s Office to file a federal lawsuit seeking to keep two of the guns, which it did in April; Bord hopes this strategy will mean a federal judge will review the legal issues involved in the guns’ return, and that he will prevail.

Meanwhile, in 2010, Hal Paul Goldstein—the owner of the Armory—and another Maryland licensed firearms dealer, Randolph Benjamin Rodman, were charged in a 39-page, 107-count federal indictment in Arizona, along with four Arizona dealers: George Dibril Clark III, Lorren Marc Kalish, James Patrick Arnberger, and Idan C. Greenberg (“Blunderbusted,” Mobtown Beat, Aug. 5, 2010). The six stand accused of “harvesting” serial numbers from older machine guns made before May 19, 1986, and welding the numbers onto newer machine guns they had manufactured, in order to evade a federal machine-gun ban that prohibits citizens from possessing or transferring machine guns made after 1986.

The Arizona case has been fraught with battles between the government and the defendants, who have claimed prosecutors have not been forthcoming with required disclosures of evidence. During an August 2011 hearing, U.S. District Judge Roslyn O. Silver, after hearing of evidence-sharing problems experienced by the defendants, said, “I’m going to consider dismissing the case” if the issues persist, according to a court transcript. A jury trial is scheduled for August.

The 34 machine guns at issue in the Arizona indictment include the Hatton Industries weapon that Bord purchased from Goldstein, according to court records.

In addition to the Arizona charges, Goldstein was indicted in Maryland federal court in December, charged with unlawful possession of machine guns and firearms. On May 24, Goldstein filed a court notice consenting to having the Maryland case transferred to Arizona, where he intends to plead guilty to a single count of improper firearms record-keeping.

Goldstein’s attorney, Joseph Conte, declined to comment for this article, as did the Maryland U.S Attorney’s Office, whose spokesperson, Marcia Murphy, wrote in an e-mail that “since there is litigation pending, I don’t think we will have comment on either” the criminal charges or the forfeiture case involving Bord’s weapons. Bord, though, is openly indignant about his predicament. As a collector for more than 30 years, he says “my firearms paperwork is beyond reproach,” and he’s aghast that, despite the fact that he produced proof that his weapons were registered with the proper authorities, law enforcers continue to keep his property.

Bord says ATF agents like to say that their agency’s acronym stands for “Always Think Forfeiture,” since taking and keeping people’s guns is an important part of their law-enforcement strategy. (Indeed, a few years ago, ATF suffered a dustup when it ordered Leatherman tools for its trainees inscribed with the words “Always Think Forfeiture,” then recalled the order after a member of Congress complained.)

Bord’s lawsuit against Baltimore County over the seizure of his guns asserts that the two police officers named as defendants—Detective Erik Socha and Cpl. Anthony Kidwell—undertook the raids on Bord’s home and business based on faulty warrants “in order to intimidate” Bord and cause him “economic injury,” but also “for gratuitous sport rather than for proper law-enforcement purposes,” according to court documents. The lawsuit also contends that Socha and Kidwell, when presented with Bord’s firearms paperwork after the raids, said “save it for court,” that the paperwork was “wrong” or “bull___t,” and “words to the effect” that Bord “would never get his property back.”

The county’s filings in the case, meanwhile, say the police and ATF are keeping the weapons while they continue “their investigation to determine if the weapons. . .are a violation of state or federal law.” Bord was accused of a misdemeanor firearms offense in Baltimore County Circuit Court after the raids, but in 2011 prosecutors tabled the charges.

Bord’s wife, Robbin Bord, says “we are law-abiding businesspeople,” but that their experience with the gun seizure “has just about destroyed our faith in our government.” She says that her husband’s seized gun collection “was a significant asset—that was part of our retirement,” and that the government “shouldn’t waste time on going after legal people like us,” but instead “should go after illegals, the people who sell guns out of the back of their car.” She adds that “we are not political,” and that they are not members of any gun-rights group. Collecting “museum-quality pieces” kept “locked in safes” is “my husband’s hobby,” she continues, “and he likes it.”

“I thought it was supposed to be ‘innocent until proven guilty,’” David Bord says, “but in this instance, it’s guilty until proven innocent.”

Quoted:

Meant to post this one a couple weeks ago...

Quoted:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/97973987/Motion-to-Extend-Time

Defendant, Lorren Kalish, through undersigned counsel, respectfully requeststhis Court to extend the time for filing pretrial motions from Friday, June 22, 2012until Friday, July 20, 2012. The basis for this request is that on June 18, 2012 theGovernment disclosed 14 pages of discovery, a narrative report that discusses thecontent of a meeting conducted by and between a co-defendant, his counsel and theGovernment. As a direct consequence of this recent disclosure, Mr. Kalish needsadditional time to assess the information contained therein.



hmmmmmmmmmm

Quoted:
Meant to post this one a couple weeks ago...

Quoted:

Supposedly Clark was sawing up Macs, and welding their "sideplates" into new made sideplates. That's what the ATF says.  The list looked like mostly Browning beltfeds, some Maxims, and a smattering of other beltfeds.

Trouble is, the ATF then allowed these guns to change hands numerous times. Which means they approved the transfers, numerous times.  Then instead of realizing it's a paperwork error on their part and going after the builder, they loaded the "conspiracy" shotgun and went after anyone who'd owned one of them.

"If I buy an AR15 from Walmart and it turns out to be stolen am I guilty of possessing stolen property?"
With the ATF, you are always assumed guilty.

Quoted:


Could some one mill out a slot on a browning sideplate and weld a piece of steel with a serial number on it in such a way as it would go unnoticed?

Just curious. Internet had a story about converting Sten's into Sterlings...

Quoted:
06/25/2012279 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge David K Duncan: Change of Plea Hearing as to James Patrick Arnberger held on 6/25/2012. James Patrick Arnberger enters plea of guilty to count SEVENTY-THREE of the Indictment. THE COURT ORDERS the trial date/pending hearings VACATED. Pending motions are rendered moot. Prior release order AFFIRMED. The Court directs the US Probation Office to prepare a Presentence Report.

Appearances: AUSA Kathy Lemke and James Vann for the Government, retained attorney Frederick Petti for defendant. Defendant is present and released. Sentencing set for 9/10/2012 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 604, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Chief Judge Roslyn O Silver. (Recorded by COURTSMART.) This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MMO) (Entered: 06/25/2012)

Quoted:


For the legally stupid... please elaborate and explain what the hell this means?  I think I know but I want to see it from you brother.

Quoted:
and this is interesting:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/98366617/Gary-Runge-Request-for-Seized-Prop

Quoted:


THAT is going to leave a mark!!!

Quoted:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/98366206/Arnberger-Guilty-Plea

Quoted:

Oh damn, Arnberger claims that the work done by Clark was shoddy and the damned thing barely ran.  No wonder he ratted out Clark.

Quoted:


But damn! Pleading guilty to no crime.  Sad.

Quoted:
Lets rock and roll!

Quoted:


Call me at your leisure tomorrow.  Let's get the standing issue worked out.  

Quoted:


Depending on the obamacare decision and contempt, I will prbly be fairly busy. I'll try to holler at you tho.

Quoted:

Well, yes, Tech Branch does have some standards re: conversions issued over the years, including permitting the conversion of STEns into Stenlings. First, they look at the design family, and the Sterling definitely was a direct development of the STEn design. Even so, when converting a STEn to a Stenling, you cannot touch the channel for the cocking handle (which varied between the two models and was the legal equivalent of the autosear pin hole on an AR), so Stenlings must use different bolt handles and takedown procedures unique to the hybrid.

In general, though, Tech Branch had an "80 percent" rule –– if the modification retained 80% of the original receiver intact, and the caliber was the same, they would approve letters for them. But if you only retained 79% of the receiver, or changed the caliber, it constituted making a new MG.

Ed Owens was the head honcho of Tech Branch for decades, and he was (a) nonpolitical and (b) logical. His successors started introducing the illogical rulings at the order of their superiors, who had purely political motives. Thus, we started getting illogical rulings like "a shoestring is a machine gun" and contradictory ones like "the Akins Acellerator is not a firearm / oh, wait, yes it is, and it's a machine gun, too."

With Eric Holder and his appointees continuing to issue the marching orders, expect continued illogical and contradictory rulings, issued by the same legal entity which first decides what is illegal, then arrests you for it, and finally prosecutes you.

Sorta like the Spanish Inquisition.

Quoted:

Oh damn, Arnberger claims that the work done by Clark was shoddy and the damned thing barely ran.  No wonder he ratted out Clark.

Quoted:
The Defendant by and through undersigned counsel, requests the Court to continue
the trial presently set for August 7, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. before the Honorable Roslyn O.
Silver. Discovery is still ongoing in this matter. More specifically, defendants Clark,
Goldstein and Arnberger have recently plead guilty in this matter. With each guilty plea
the Government has issued more discovery. Contemporaneously, with Mr. Arnberger’s
plea of guilty the Government disclosed further reports of investigation detailing a trace
of a firearm to the American Embassy in Mexico. The Government had never provided
this type of disclosure to defendants in the past and it raises new issues for the remaining
defendants.

Quoted:
I'll just leave this here.....

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99921857/294-Gov-Non-Oppose-Continuance

"Included in the disclosure were statements from an ancillary witness who was interviewed about one of the co-defendant’s statements. The United States provided a copy of a separate, and unrelated, investigative report for this ancillary witness. This separate investigative report contained a tracing report for a firearm that the ancillary witness purchased and that was later recovered in Mexico. This recovered firearm is not related to, nor is it relevant to, the defendants, their conduct, or their charges."