Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 3/29/2006 7:36:11 AM EDT
From the Shoot n Scoot case:

www.knoxnews.com/kns/local_news/article/0,1406,KNS_347_4578187,00.html

Regardless of what you think of his felony (appears to have been an assault on a copy, BTW), or the post conviction firearms disability there's some serious bad mojo going on here.

He's apparently being accused of manufacturing for distribution based on posession of "a drill press, a precision mill drill, blocks of aluminum used to create receivers, metal flats and ... schematic drawings on how to build AR-15 and Soviet-type assault rifles and silencers"

There's no indication he did anything for third parties nor any allegation of evidence to that effect. They're presuming such is the case.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:39:02 AM EDT
Isn't this guy a member here ?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:40:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By yobo:
Isn't this guy a member here ?




Yep. ShootnScoot. Thread got locked apparently.

Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:42:11 AM EDT
Typical ATF BS. There was a time in this nation when you were pressumed INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. Not when it comes to the ATF
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:42:32 AM EDT
Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:44:18 AM EDT

"Intent" is a slippery slope.


And he just slid down it.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:46:17 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:46:53 AM EDT

Plowell told Guyton that Olivent's ex-wife would be a witness against him at trial.


Wonder who's going to be lying under oath...
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:48:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
As mentioned, everything else is just fluff to sound bad for the press.




Yeah, it totally won't sound bad when they use it as precendent to nail the next guy who isn't a felon, but some agent just needs a case.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:49:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Spade:

Originally Posted By yobo:
Isn't this guy a member here ?




Yep. ShootnScoot. Thread got locked apparently.





Locked, unlocked , locked, unlocked and locked again i think
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:49:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Spade:
Yep. ShootnScoot. Thread got locked apparently.



Hit 40 pages.

Cheers,

kk7sm
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:50:12 AM EDT


Olivent was convicted in Blount County in 1997 of three felonies, one of which involved the aggravated assault of a law enforcement officer.


Too bad...so sad. Fuck him for making us look bad.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:50:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GonzoAR15-1:
There's no indication he did anything for third parties nor any allegation of evidence to that effect. They're presuming such is the case.



The article says his ex will testify against him in the case. Right there you have first hand "information". She can lie and say he was talking to people about buying the receivers he was making. Who will the court or jury believe the abused poor weak female that escaped or the abusive felon who likes to beat up cops? I'm not saying he did any of these things but the prosecutors are going to portray it as such during the trial.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:51:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheCynic:


Olivent was convicted in Blount County in 1997 of three felonies, one of which involved the aggravated assault of a law enforcement officer.


Too bad...so sad. Fuck him for making us look bad.



+1

He knew he was playing with fire and he got burned.

Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:58:37 AM EDT
The manufacturing and distribution charges are crap.

ShootNScoot was a dumbass anyhow.

"Olivent was convicted in Blount County in 1997 of three felonies, one of which involved the aggravated assault of a law enforcement officer."

He made ATFs job really fucking easy for them. He was a big, fat, juicy target and broadcast the fact all over this board. And you bet the DA is going to ram it up his ass as much as he can. Last thing a DA is going to do is appear "soft" when a violent felon is making "evil guns" in his basement.

If he does get convicted for M&D, then thanks a lot ShootNScoot. You've helped the people who call shoelaces "machine guns" and .gov establish precedent that having a drill press, mill and sheet metal at your house makes you a pirate gun maker and distrubutor, no matter what is really going on.

Asshat.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:02:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 8:04:33 AM EDT by tc556guy]

Originally Posted By GonzoAR15-1:
Regardless of what you think of his felony (appears to have been an assault on a copy, BTW),


Assault on a copy?
I see further down assault on LEO. Bad for him. Was he a participant in the LEO bashing threads? I don't recall. Just goes to show why some here have such a dislike of LEOs and complain about felonies being disqualifiers.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:03:33 AM EDT
The article also said he was found with 4 weapons, 2 that he had made himself. Even if you take away the BS manufacturing with intent to sell charges the felon in possession of a firearm charges will still stick and that will put him in federal jail for a minimum of a couple years.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:03:55 AM EDT
Looks like felony stacking, it should get knocked down.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:09:14 AM EDT
I hope the intent charges are thrown out as ludicrous. I'm sure the possession charges will stick though. Even if he is convicted of intent I would hope it is only because he was a felon where the distribution to himself was teh actionable offense.

On a related note, I seem to recall a legal rule that says a spouse cannot usually testify against the other spouse. If her knowledge of his gun building activities only came about during the time they were married, wouldn't it make her testimony, and the justification for their search warrant, inadmissible?

I would think a good defense attorney would be able to do something with this case... He's probably fooked on the possession charges though...
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:09:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GonzoAR15-1:
From the Shoot n Scoot case:

www.knoxnews.com/kns/local_news/article/0,1406,KNS_347_4578187,00.html

Regardless of what you think of his felony (appears to have been an assault on a copy, BTW), or the post conviction firearms disability there's some serious bad mojo going on here.

He's apparently being accused of manufacturing for distribution based on posession of "a drill press, a precision mill drill, blocks of aluminum used to create receivers, metal flats and ... schematic drawings on how to build AR-15 and Soviet-type assault rifles and silencers"

There's no indication he did anything for third parties nor any allegation of evidence to that effect. They're presuming such is the case.



Have you reviewed the state's entire case, or are you making an assumption based solely on that short article?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:09:51 AM EDT
He was a felon, he had guns.

Everything else is just added time and setting precidents.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:11:07 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:21:45 AM EDT
i thought something was fishy when his buddy started that thread about how a great guy is getting shafted. i notice there was no mention of the 3 felonies when his buddy was trying to rally sympathy for this asshole.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:33:41 AM EDT
You guys crack me up.

This guy is a FELON. One more time, FELON. Who was in possesion and manfacturing firearms.

Booo Fucking Hooo.

This is not an evil wicked ATF case. This one is real simple. So simple many here do not have the ability to grasp reality.

MO: I bet he has "helped" others build firearms thus putting him in the distribution league.

One more time for those who missed it: FELONS cannot own or manufacture firearms.

Simple enough for you?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:34:36 AM EDT
.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:39:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 8:40:19 AM EDT by FortyFiveAutomatic]

Originally Posted By qualityhardware:
If he does get convicted for M&D, then thanks a lot ShootNScoot. You've helped the people who call shoelaces "machine guns" and .gov establish precedent that having a drill press, mill and sheet metal at your house makes you a pirate gun maker and distrubutor, no matter what is really going on.



I guess I don't understand much about case law, but how does his arrest make it okay for ATF to bust down the door of anyone who has a milling machine and blocks of aluminum?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:49:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 8:52:02 AM EDT by gordon_freeman]
In our bizarre legal system, if this douche gets the hammer brought down on him because of the government's reasoning, then this establishes a precedent in which this reasoning... (drill press + schematics = intent to manufacture and distribute) can be used in any other case... hence why there are some legal cases that EVERYONE knows about

Brown vs. Board of Education
Roe vs. Wade
Matsunaga vs. Matsunaga (not that big... but great divorce case concerning assets and children after the fact)

This reasoning, seperated from this specific case however, is clearly faulty and illogical. Hopefully, the ATF will either cook up better reasoning, or adjust their charges to better suit this guy.... but it seems likely they will try to gain legal ground on this case in order to screw over as many people as possible!
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:55:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
You guys crack me up.

This guy is a FELON. One more time, FELON. Who was in possesion and manfacturing firearms.

Booo Fucking Hooo.

This is not an evil wicked ATF case. This one is real simple. So simple many here do not have the ability to grasp reality.

MO: I bet he has "helped" others build firearms thus putting him in the distribution league.

One more time for those who missed it: FELONS cannot own or manufacture firearms.

Simple enough for you?



He's a felon in possession, so it's ok to trump up a BS charge of manufacturing wo/a license? I mean, why not tack on rape?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:00:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bnorman:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
You guys crack me up.

This guy is a FELON. One more time, FELON. Who was in possesion and manfacturing firearms.

Booo Fucking Hooo.

This is not an evil wicked ATF case. This one is real simple. So simple many here do not have the ability to grasp reality.

MO: I bet he has "helped" others build firearms thus putting him in the distribution league.

One more time for those who missed it: FELONS cannot own or manufacture firearms.

Simple enough for you?



He's a felon in possession, so it's ok to trump up a BS charge of manufacturing wo/a license? I mean, why not tack on rape?



I see no list of charges in the article. Where is the list of charges?

And again I willing to bet he "helped" others make weapons.


Again just like the first thread, you guys are jumping to WAY to many conclusions without facts of the case.



Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:04:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
And again I willing to bet he "helped" others make weapons.



So?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:05:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 9:06:06 AM EDT by u-baddog]
I was reading and went from oh poor guy to what a dumb fuck at about this point.


he Olivent was convicted in Blount County in 1997 of three felonies, one of which involved the aggravated assault of a law enforcement officer.


He knew what he was doing and now with the exwife turning on his ass EVERYBODY will know what he was doing. Hell has no fury as a womens scorn.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:10:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jetlag:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
And again I willing to bet he "helped" others make weapons.



So?



So. I would be willing to bet if there is a manufacturing charge this is how it comes into play. If he helped someone make AR receivers with his equipment then he is manfacturing.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:10:22 AM EDT



i could care less about what happened to *him* being that he was already a felon, but rest assured this will be used to convict others in the future who have broken no laws except the new on that doesn't allow you to manufacture your own guns.


Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:15:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 9:20:47 AM EDT by Mike_Mills]
Are you kidding me, or what?

Did you even read the article? He is a violent, felon in possession of TWO firearms and everything he needed to make more. Yes, in a court of law, he is innocent until proven guilty. Until then, use your God-given common sense.

Violent felon,
Aggravated assault against a police officer,
Illegal possession of two firearms,
Ex-wife will testify against him,



Originally Posted By TheCynic:

Fuck him for making us look bad.



I agree with this sentiment.



Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:15:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By the_great_snag:
I
On a related note, I seem to recall a legal rule that says a spouse cannot usually testify against the other spouse. If her knowledge of his gun building activities only came about during the time they were married, wouldn't it make her testimony, and the justification for their search warrant, inadmissible?
...


A spouse cannot be forced to testify against you, but that damn sure doesnt meant that they cant choose to. And in this case as an exspouse, there is alot more leeway.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:21:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By yobo:
Isn't this guy a member here ?



Yes, but he's having trouble posting lately.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:23:11 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:24:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 9:26:34 AM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By Mike_Mills:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
Typical ATF BS. There was a time in this nation when you were pressumed INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. Not when it comes to the ATF



Are you kidding me, or what?

Did you even read the article? He is a violent, felon in possession of TWO firearms and everything he needed to make more. Yes, in a court of law, he is innocent until proven guilty. Until then, use your God-given common sense.





If he was in possession of only TWO firearms, then I can probably tell you where the "distribution" charge is coming from.

Check the archive.

In october of 2005 - he posted PHOTOS of 5 AR lowers he was finishing (including one that was completely finished), and 3 AK receivers. He also mentioned his 10/22 and his 1911, and I believe mentioned ordering more 80% receivers.

That's a lot more than two firearms. If they only found two, it's a good bet that he might have been selling some of them. Even if not, he was at least in the process of manufacturing eight semi-auto rifles, possibly more.

Despite there being people on ar15.com who would easily own five ARs and three AKs (it's probably not too widespread a practice), it might not be too hard to convince a jury of regular folks that he may have had "intent" to distribute some of those lowers when he finished machining them.

Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:27:37 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:28:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By bnorman:
He's a felon in possession, so it's ok to trump up a BS charge of manufacturing wo/a license? I mean, why not tack on rape?



Well he does have a penis and probably a libedo too, so there could be grounds for intent to commit sexual assault.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:29:00 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:30:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:32:16 AM EDT
It's amazing how many of you can draw the conclusions you have from so little information.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:34:38 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:34:58 AM EDT
Well, a little sanity is sinking in around here.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:42:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Mike_Mills:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
Typical ATF BS. There was a time in this nation when you were pressumed INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. Not when it comes to the ATF



Are you kidding me, or what?

Did you even read the article? He is a violent, felon in possession of TWO firearms and everything he needed to make more. Yes, in a court of law, he is innocent until proven guilty. Until then, use your God-given common sense.





If he was in possession of only TWO firearms, then I can probably tell you where the "distribution" charge is coming from.

Check the archive.

In october of 2005 - he posted PHOTOS of 5 AR lowers he was finishing (including one that was completely finished), and 3 AK receivers. He also mentioned his 10/22 and his 1911, and I believe mentioned ordering more 80% receivers.

That's a lot more than two firearms. If they only found two, it's a good bet that he might have been selling some of them. Even if not, he was at least in the process of manufacturing eight semi-auto rifles, possibly more.

Despite there being people on ar15.com who would easily own five ARs and three AKs (it's probably not too widespread a practice), it might not be too hard to convince a jury of regular folks that he may have had "intent" to distribute some of those lowers when he finished machining them.




Wow....he knew he was a felon and that possessing firearms was illegal, yet he makes his own and posts them on the Internet for everyone to see.

This guy is some kind of goddamn genius, I tell ya.

His buddy who tried to rally support for him is just as bad.

They can both go rot.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:56:56 AM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:11:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By roboman:

His buddy who tried to rally support for him is just as bad.

They can both go rot.



Yeah, especially because his buddy didn't have a clue either. FUCK HIM!
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:15:39 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:22:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Paul:
"Its official: .GOV presumes manufacture for distribution when you make homebuilts."

I'm sorry, I missed the verdict in his trial ... or did we overturn the 6th Admendment too?



They are working on it I assure you. This conviction will be a bad precedent.


Anyone thought of writing thier politicians about this?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:28:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Paul:
"Its official: .GOV presumes manufacture for distribution when you make homebuilts."

I'm sorry, I missed the verdict in his trial ... or did we overturn the 6th Admendment too?



The title says the government presumes homebuilts are for distribution. That is their official charge against the guy. There doesn't need to be a verdict for that view to be the official stance of the government.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top