Transcript of Firearms Expert's Testimony in Albert Kwan Machine Gun Case

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Transcript of Firearms Expert's Testimony in Albert Kwan Machine Gun Case

Posted: 7/31/2007 3:32:33 AM EDT

If you all remember the Albert Kwan case from a few months ago, this is the transcript of Len Savage's testimony. Very interesting reading, and good info to have if you're ever accused of having an unregistered machine gun. Wrenn was acquitted of the machine gun charge.

Transcript

Posted: 8/8/2007 3:57:48 AM EDT

[#1]

Update on the Kwan case: last Friday the judge set aside the guilty verdict on the SBR charge, and gave the BATFE & prosecutor three weeks to decide whether or not to retry Wrenn or drop the case completely.

Posted: 8/8/2007 4:16:10 AM EDT

[#2]

a travesty of justice

I'm hoping for "B" all charges dropped!

Posted: 8/12/2007 10:26:29 AM EDT

[#3]

What is the story here? The only transcript at that link involved a Mr Kwan... can someone give a back story?

Posted: 8/13/2007 3:51:46 AM EDT

[#4]

You are correct; I edited my post.

Background info on the case:

seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002242123_gunshop15e.html

archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=webcollector22m&date=20070621&query=kwan

Posted: 8/17/2007 1:23:03 AM EDT

[#5]

Here's a link to the Kwan decision; it's interesting to read and provides support for the possession that possessing a spare short barrel upper while owning a M16 and a AR15 is OK.

armsandthelaw.com/archives/KWAN%5B1%5D.NEWTRIALORD.pdf

Posted: 8/17/2007 5:31:33 AM EDT

[#6]

The last two pages of the ruling are especially relevant.

A fundamental precept of our justice system is that citizens may not
be “required at peril of life, liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal
statutes.” City of Chicago v. Morales, 527 U.S. 41, 58 (1999) (quoting Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451, 453 (1939)). The ATF’s interpretation of the NFA lends credence to
defendant’s contention that the jury instructions failed to adequately allow defendant to
argue his theory of the case. See Vicaria, 12 F.3d at 198. The principles of due process
require, in this case, some additional instruction, regarding defendant’s right to possess both
shoulder stocks as accessories for his VP70M machinegun. Rather than lacking a purpose
other than converting the VP70Z into a firearm, the shoulder stocks had possible ostensible
utility in connection with another weapon that defendant was legally entitled to possess.

Translation: ATF, if you decide to retry this case I am instructing the jury to find Kwan not guilty.

Posted: 8/17/2007 5:42:48 AM EDT

[#7]

wow

Posted: 8/17/2007 5:50:52 AM EDT

[#8]

Interesting...

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Transcript of Firearms Expert's Testimony in Albert Kwan Machine Gun Case

General » Legal Section

Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us