Posts Tagged ‘felony’

BATFE To Issue “Demand Letter” To Dealers This Week

July 26, 2011

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

BATFE To Issue “Demand Letter” To Dealers This Week

Multiple Rifle Sales Reports to Begin on August 14

Prior Belief That Executive Order Would “Enact” This Was In Error

FBI May Be Implicated in BATFE Gun Smuggling Program

NICS System Allowed Prohibited Sales

PHOENIX — July 25, 2011
by Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman
Full contact info at end

According to four BATFE agents familiar with the planned Fast and Furious gun-smuggling “fix,” the bureau plans to release a “demand letter” by the end of this week, insisting that gun dealers in the four Mexico-border states begin reporting multiple rifle sales to the bureau.

All multiple rifle sales made to the same buyer within a five-day period will have to be reported beginning on August 14, on a form to be announced, according to the agents. The order will exclude rifles in .22 caliber, and rifles without detachable magazines. The agents acknowledged that congressional action, lawsuits, an injunction or other court orders might forestall the implementation of the hastily concocted scheme. Such preventive measures are already underway.

The rumored executive order to require gun dealers in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas to begin reporting multiple rifle sales to BATFE will not be issued. A previous Page Nine report that referred to the expected EO now appears incorrect. It is possible that the uproar over the program caused the administration to change its approach, and put all the heat on BATFE to “enact” law without Congress. The EO was widely reported and anticipated.

An exhaustive examination of statutory authority under which BATFE is required to operate revealed no legitimate power to demand these records, though the agents claimed they do have authority (two younger ones said they have no control over the process, and were simply following along). When questioned if they would consider resigning if asked to implement an illegally introduced rule, the agents all either declined to answer or said no, they would not resign.

Because a buyer will have to be identified to show that the sales reflect purchase by one person, the record collections will be a gun registry tied to gun ownership, which is strictly forbidden under federal law. No requirement to destroy these records exists, since no authority to collect the records exists. The BATFE agents said they would not be keeping the records, because they “lack authority,” but could not identify a time frame in which the registry information would be destroyed, or any audit trail.

When pressed, the senior official identified a statute that supposedly conveyed authority for the daring plan. The citation is to 18 USC §923(g)(5)(A) which states:

“Each licensee shall, when required by letter issued by the Attorney General, and until notified to the contrary in writing by the Attorney General, submit on a form specified by the Attorney General, for periods and at the times specified in such letter, all record information required to be kept by this chapter or such lesser record information as the Attorney General in such letter may specify.”

This does not confer the needed authority, because “all record information required to be kept by this chapter” does not include multiple sales of long guns to the same person in a five-day period. The agent disagreed. In fact, Congress specifically excluded such information when it enacted, by due process, a statute requiring similar information for handguns in the same law, in 18 USC §923(g)(3)(A):

“Each licensee shall prepare a report of multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of, at one time or during any five consecutive business days, two or more pistols, or revolvers, or any combination of pistols and revolvers totaling two or more, to an unlicensed person.”

In addition to the creation of this illegal reporting requirement, illegal gun-owner registry, with unknown details and no public control over the rule-making process, it amounts to record keeping specifically banned under the Firearm Owners Protection Act, 18 USC §926(a)(2):

“No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act [5/19/86] may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established.”

Like so many laws the federal government writes, this one declares that these acts cannot legally be done, but provides no specific punishment for perpetrators, such as those running this scheme inside BATFE. Laws could be written with teeth, to control bureaucrats. Instead of saying, “No one may collect this information,” the law could say, “Anyone who collects this information shall go to prison and pay a fine.” Given the common abuses now prevalent in government, such laws have been needed for a long time, on a state and local level as well as federally, some legislators say. Any legislator unwilling to draft laws that way, allowing “officials” to do whatever they please without consequence, deserves to be removed from office, according to leading experts.

FBI Implicated in Gun-Smuggling Operation

In other news, an insider source investigating BATFE’s gun smuggling to vicious Mexican drug cartels, reveals that several of the so-called “straw purchasers” were prohibited possessors, or had suspended drivers’ licenses and other problems that should have prevented them from passing the NICS background check.

Three of the straw purchasers, now indicted, had criminal histories, including a pending class 3 felony charge for burglary, an order of protection, a domestic-violence conviction, and a felony for resisting
arrest, later reduced (and criminal damage charge dropped). Any of these should have prevented, or at least delayed purchases when they hit the FBI NICS computer. One defendant even had a CCW permit, under circumstances that seem suspicious but remain unclear.

Whistleblower BATFE agent John Dodson apparently indicated that the NICS system had these buyers flagged for special treatment, and that when a sale request came through, it was routed to a special FBI office that approved the purchases, according to William La Jeunesse at FOX News. Dodson’s prior statements are absolutely incriminating, and riveting: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/03/eveningnews/main20039031.shtml

This implies that the FBI may have been complicit in the scheme, allowing BATFE’s mules to get possession of guns when they should have been blocked. How people with disqualifying criminal records or a suspended driver’s license could have repeatedly gotten through the tightly run NICS system is difficult to otherwise explain.

Some of the buyers were young adults living at home with parents, and with no visible means of support. How they got the tens of thousands of dollars in cash they repeatedly spent has not yet been investigated, but is sure to come out. The tax and IRS angles are also missing from all reports, so far.

IRS is often vigorous on tracking down unreported income and huge cash transactions, but is not involved as far as published reports go. BATFE installed video cameras at some of the gun shops and have the straw-purchase smugglers’ transactions recorded.

No information is available on how the data BATFE hopes to collect will be used to prevent gun smuggling. Since the information will be gathered by the very bureau responsible for smuggling guns into Mexico, confidence in the scheme is very low. BATFE claims the scheme will generate 18,000 records per year, but how they could possibly know that is unclear, since this is illegal and has never been done before.

Congressional hearings on the BATFE gun-smuggling program continue tomorrow, Tuesday, July 26, 2011, 10 a.m. East coast time, 7 a.m. here in Arizona. The effect on the gun reporting and registration scheme, if any, is impossible to determine ahead of time.

Tangential but important —

According to Wikipedia, BATFE has digitized out-of-business records from gun dealers, with several hundred million records in its hands:

4. Out of Business Records. Data is manually collected from paper Out-of-Business records (or input from computer records) and entered into the trace system by ATF. These are registration records which include name and address, make, model, serial and caliber of the firearm(s), as well as data from the 4473 form — in digital or image format. In March, 2010, ATF reported receiving several hundred million records since 1968. [9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act

::::

One final note —

BATFE began circulating a flier at the Crossroads of the West gun show in Phoenix this past weekend, the state’s biggest gun show, threatening gun owners with arrest if they bear arms within 1,000 feet of a school.

Virtually all populated areas are within 1,000 feet of a school.

The gun-free-school-zones act, a feel-good do-nothing law passed by President Clinton, has languished basically unused for two decades, but essentially criminalizes almost all gun owners, creating tens of millions of unenforceable felonies daily. If Mr. Obama wants an under-the-radar gun ban, here it is on a platter, already on the books. This law MUST be dealt with by our legislators, and right quick.

The Crossroads gun show takes place within 1,000 feet of a school zone.

See the maps, and the simple amendment that would correct this travesty. http://www.gunlaws.com/Gun_Free_School_Zones.htm

This is a special report from The Uninvited Ombudsman, Alan Korwin, author of the Page Nine news media watchblog. http://www.gunlaws.com/PageNineIndex.htm

Sign up for direct email reports yourself http://www.gunlaws.com

Permission to circulate this report granted.

Alan Korwin
Bloomfield Press
“We publish the gun laws.”
4848 E. Cactus, #505-440
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
602-996-4020 Phone
602-494-0679 Fax
1-800-707-4020 Orders
http://www.gunlaws.com
alan@gunlaws.com
Call, write, fax or click for free full-color catalog
(This is our address and info as of Jan. 1, 2007)

“Don’t be a spectator in the struggle to preserve freedom.”

“No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing
because he could do only a little.”
–Edmund Burke

Public sentiment is everything.
With public sentiment, nothing can fail.
Without it, nothing can succeed. –Abraham Lincoln

Arizona Enacts “Constitutional Carry” for Firearms

April 17, 2010



PAGE NINE — No. 84 — SPECIAL

Arizona Enacts “Constitutional Carry” for Firearms

by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America

Get yours:

http://www.gunlaws.com/books.htm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Full contact info at end
April 16, 2010

Arizona Enacts “Constitutional Carry” For Firearms

“Freedom To Carry” may replace so-called “Right To Carry” nationally

by Alan Korwin, Publisher
Bloomfield Press
http://www.bloomfieldpress.com

PHOENIX With governor Jan Brewer’s signature on the new “Constitutional Carry” firearm law today, Arizona becomes a beacon state for the nation on the gun-rights issue.

Arizonans, who have been free to carry firearms openly since statehood in 1912, will now be free to carry discreetly as well, without permits or red tape. Low-crime Vermont has had this freedom intact since Colonial days. The permit system remains in place but will no longer be required for discreet carry.

Alaska enacted a Constitutional Carry law in 2003, and Texas passed a limited version for traveling in 2007. Montana has enjoyed this freedom since 1991 on 99.4% of its land (outside city limits). These states experienced no increase in crime or accidents from the expanded freedom to discreetly bear arms in public. However, numerous dire warnings of “blood in the streets” preceded those new laws, but proved false. A list of circulating myths about the law, also known as “Freedom To Carry,” appears at the end of this article.

Arizona’s extremely strict laws on criminal misuse of firearms are unaffected by the new public freedoms, although a penalty for criminals got tougher. New language now makes concealed carry in the commission of a serious crime a felony. This led to support of the bill from police around the state. Formerly, that offense was a misdemeanor.

The intrusive government “permit” system in Arizona, introduced in 1994 with paperwork, approvals, fingerprinting, criminal-database listings, required classes, two mandatory tests, taxation and expiration dates to exercise “rights” is still available, but is now optional. Enormous police resources that could be going directly toward reducing crime have instead been diverted by the program into registering, regulating and tracking the innocent. About 3% of the public have signed up for the plastic-coated permission slips, though an estimated 50% of the state’s population keeps and bears arms. Official sources acknowledge they get millions of dollars per year from the permit taxes called “fees.”

“This new law brings rights restoration for the public, and an increase in freedom for law-abiding people,” said Dave Kopp, a lobbyist for the Arizona Citizens Defense League that requested and promoted the new law. “The people have the same right to bear arms discreetly that they have to bear arms openly, we are simply correcting statute to reflect that. If your jacket accidentally covers your sidearm, that no longer exposes you to criminal penalties.” A woman will be able to put a handgun in her handbag, go about her business, and not be subject to arrest.

The key changes in the law were made by repealing the infringing language in A.R.S. §13-3102, not by enacting new rules. A number of other changes were made in SB 1108, the bill that carried the Constitutional Carry law, and these will be described in plain English and posted by gunlaws.com next week. The new law will become effective 90 days after the legislature closes, or approximately in July.

“Opportunities for firearms training and gun safety can increase tremendously with this new law”, said Alan Korwin, author of The Arizona Gun Owner’s Guide, the book that describes the state’s gun laws in plain English. “Instead of focusing on a tiny percentage of the market willing to submit to the permit system, smart trainers can now offer Freedom To Carry classes to the general public. We’re anticipating Family Days At The Range and Constitutional Carry classes to spring up statewide,” he said. Removal of the $60 tax for the permit represents a significant discount, he notes.

“We sold The Arizona Gun Owner’s Guide by the truckload for five years before there was any CCW law, and expect to do the same now, though permit holders did become and will remain a segment of our business,” Korwin said. The Guide is now in its 24th edition, and a free update will be released shortly. The book’s publisher, Scottsdale-based Bloomfield Press, is the largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books in the country. http://www.gunlaws.com

The permission-slip system is unaffected and offers some advantages to citizens. Other states recognize the Arizona permit under “reciprocity,” which allows permit holders to carry firearms when in those states (currently 23 according to the Dept. of Public Safety).

In addition, since permittees are constantly monitored through the criminal databases DPS registers them in, they can shop at retail for firearms without undergoing separate FBI background checks each time they make a purchase. Also, some people just get a sense of security by having a plastic government “authorization” card in their wallets, and they enjoy showing it to friends.

Another CCW-permit benefit is the ability to carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, as long as the restaurant itself doesn’t ban possession and the person doesn’t drink while there. Whether those various denials of rights will be eliminated in future legislation, making the general public equal to permission-slip holders, was unknown at press time.

Previously only people with government-permission cards in their possession could bear arms in certain parks. That ban was eliminated by a separate bill this year, which now makes permit holders and the general public equal.

According to MSNBC, some six million Americans have permits and carry discreetly. The fears of shootouts at stop lights, bullets for slow waiters and Wild West-style belligerence have been repeatedly proven false and dispelled as hoplophobic fantasies. Statistics have shown that crime uniformly drops when states reduce infringements on the right of law-abiding people to keep and bear arms. “Society is safer when criminals don’t know who’s armed,” according to the California-based civil rights group, crpa.org.

Sales of small easily carried sidearms and accessories are expected to increase with passage of the new law.

COMMON MYTHS ABOUT CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY

Q: Why is the CCW permit being eliminated?

A: The CCW permit is not being eliminated — that appears to have been misinformation designed to scuttle the bill. The permit system remains completely unaffected by Freedom To Carry. The permit, its advantages, the training, reciprocity schemes, the classes, fees and taxes are unchanged. That all remains voluntary as it always has been. Anyone who meets that law’s requirements can apply. Shame on the “news” media that has repeatedly said otherwise.

Q: What’s the difference between Constitutional Carry and Freedom To Carry?

A: There’s no difference, they’re just two names for the same thing. Constitutional Carry, the more formal term, comes from following the Arizona Constitution’s provision that “The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired…”. Freedom To Carry (no government interference with the right to arms) refers to the next step after so-called Right To Carry (massive government interference with the right to arms).

Q: If people can just carry guns, won’t crime and gun problems skyrocket?

A: Half of Arizonans keep and bear arms now, without any of the CCW red tape and government supervision, and without any “skyrocketing” problems. Removing the requirement to only carry openly doesn’t change who people are or how they act, it just restores their rights. Restoration of rights and becoming mentally unhinged are not related — but the same arguments have been made everywhere CCW programs passed.

It’s commonly recognized that some folks, especially people who lean left politically, do seem to equate discreetly bearing arms and becoming unglued. Decades of experience however provide no evidence of any such behavior. Those concerns have been repeatedly proven false and often turn out to be irrational fear mongering. Government permission slips for the exercise of rights have not turned people into homicidal maniacs. Restoring the right to discreetly bear arms will not change people into something they are not, and brings the state into proper compliance with its Constitution.

Q: Can anyone carry a gun?

A: Anyone who could legally carry a gun previously can legally carry under this law, no more, no less. “Prohibited possessors” — criminals, illegal aliens and others forbidden to carry arms remain banned as always. The main change is that now a woman can put a handgun in her handbag without being subject to arrest for carrying discreetly without a government permission slip (and a man has equal right to carry a gun in any discreet manner — under a sport coat or shirt, in a pocket or pants holster, fanny pack, attaché case, etc.)

Q: Training is a good thing, why was it eliminated?

A: Training is indeed a good thing and it is not eliminated. Anyone can and should take as much training as they want, which is voluntary. What has changed is that you are no longer forced to take government-mandated classes, registration and taxes before you can exercise your right to carry discreetly. This is the same formula working in Arizona since statehood for open carry (which includes concealed carry in your home, business, land, vehicle (with some minor conditions), and in a visible scabbard or case designed for carrying weapons, or in luggage. Now that the half of the public that bears arms can do so discreetly, many experts expect statewide gun training to flourish.

Q: Won’t people shoot each other if they’re not required to take the training?

A: Twelve states currently issue CCW permits without a training requirement and they’re doing just fine. Half of Arizonans exercise their right to arms without government-demanded training and they’re doing just fine. The idea that you’re only safe if government requires training is statist, foolish and incorrect. That said, responsible people should get education and training for firearms—and swimming, machine tools, medical care, raising children, being married, owning a home, preparing food, writing articles, etc., without government mandates.

If government could require training for everything that has risk, your freedom would be evaporated and your government would be out of line. Government has no legitimate delegated authority in this country to be your nanny like that, or to require anything beyond the specific, limited delegated powers given to it in the Constitution and subsequent valid legislation. The fact that government has in many cases abandoned those constraints is part of why the Tea Party movement has gained such ground and, in some cases, driven the public out into the streets with pitchforks (figuratively).

Currently, 11 states issue carry permits without training and they’re fine (AL, DE, GA, ID, IN, MD, MS, NH, PA, SD, WA). Because Arizona recognizes all other permits, many of our snowbirds have been carrying under those permits, without problems.

Q: Why are children of any age going to be allowed to carry guns to school?

A: That is total nonsense. No such thing occurs. The bill has no effect on children. That appears to be part of a misinformation campaign designed to scuttle the bill. There is no change as to who has the right to keep and bear arms. School grounds are unaffected by the law. That question is typical of similar lies and disinformation used to defeat and mislead the public about many good bills that seek to restore our civil rights. It’s almost as bad as the lies told about blacks during the civil rights era of the 1960s. Almost.

Q: Will other states imitate Arizona and enact Constitutional Carry?

A: Many people hope so, and it has the backing of the gun-rights groups.

AFTERWORD: INSIDER INFORMATION:

There is one reason and one reason only why this got done —
The Arizona Citizens Defense League.

That small handful of guys running this group, the two full-time volunteer lobbyists Dave Kopp and John Wentling, and the thousands of members who supported the effort with their tiny membership dues are exactly and precisely why our rights have expanded.

It was a deliberate, conscientious, focused and tireless effort from what must be a candidate for the best pro-rights organization in the nation. Get your friends to join, send a donation or buy a t-shirt or hat, attend the meetings, and in your little way, make a difference and preserve our rights. http://www.azcdl.org

One other tidbit — the NRA was rightfully nervous about this whole Freedom To Carry, permitless, no training, no red tape expansion of our rights. They dragged their feet at first, that’s putting it mildly, and I can’t say I blame them. An awful lot was on the line.

They wanted to be prudent. Limit exposure and risk. They have all their trainers to think about and that revenue stream. The chance of falling flat on your face in total embarrassment is a serious concern. The ease with which the antis might cast us as dangerous gun-toting (their media’s favorite slur) nuts is a real issue.

I personally debated hard with some of the top brass, and to their credit, they finally agreed not to fight the effort in Arizona, and eventually saw the light and got on board. Some gun owners like to pick on the NRA, but the NRA is going to be at the forefront of this battle. The Constitutional Carry issue does make sense, for them and for us. It will be a winner in some states, maybe yours, and does advance everything for which NRA members stand.

Yes, some of those members, steeped in darkness, or hooked on the government-permit feed trough, believe that red-tapeless carry is a bad idea. They crave government supervision. They want that permission slip in their wallet. They’ll learn, and come around. And continue to get fine training from NRA certified and other trainers because it’s the right thing to do, not because the government commands it. Appleseed is doing a phenomenal job in the training arena too, check them out while you’re at it. http://www.appleseedinfo.org

P.S. ORAL ARGUMENT ANALYZED

I have finally completed the long-awaited analysis of the oral arguments in the McDonald v. Chicago gun-ban case. Both attorneys took a whupping, but I think our rights came out on top. Justices showed their true colors (like Breyer comparing free speech to death by gun). It’s fascinating if you’re into this sort of thing, and way easier than plodding through the transcripts. Sorry it took so long.
http://www.gunlaws.com/McDonald_v_Chicago_Orals.htm

NOTE: On my website at last — The Woman’s Page
http://www.gunlaws.com/books15Women.htm

All our books, DVDs and other goods are listed here by category and alphabetically
http://www.gunlaws.com/books.htm

Contact Felicity Bower or
Alan Korwin
Bloomfield Press
“We publish the gun laws.”
4848 E. Cactus, #505-440
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
602-996-4020 Phone
602-494-0679 Fax
1-800-707-4020 Orders
http://www.gunlaws.com
alan@gunlaws.com
Call, write, fax or click for free full-color catalog
(This is our address and info as of Jan. 1, 2007)

If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you’re reading this in English, thank a veteran.

“No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing
because he could do only a little.”
–Edmund Burke

Note to my regular readers:

It’s pretty typical to frame news like this by saying: “Arizonans are now allowed to carry firearms discreetly without a permit” but that’s just not right. That implies someone or something has legitimate authority to “allow” you to exercise your rights. You should start watching that deceptive word “allow” very carefully.

This press release is carefully framed to say: “Arizonans are now free to carry firearms discreetly without a permit,” because this is the American truth of the matter. Also note the use of “discreetly,” which is a civilized norm, instead of the media’s preferred “concealed,” which implies you’re doing something wrong and have something to hide. For more on good word usage in the protection of freedom, see my Politically Corrected Glossary, http://www.gunlaws.com/politicallycorrect.htm.]

Arizonans have posted valuable observations on the bill; unfortunately I didn’t preserve attribution in all cases:

And, on that note, I will chime in.  12 states have no training requirements for CCW permits [he includes NY, which is true in some counties].  Two of those are Indiana and Pennsylvania which have issued about 1,000,000 permits, compared to Arizona’s miniscule 150,000.  A few years back, NRA supplied me with their permit holder misuse statistics and they were lower (yes, lower) than Arizona’s.  Imagine that.  Since Arizona recognizes all permits from all states, that means that many of our yearly snowbirds are legally carrying concealed weapons from states that don’t require training.

Very well said. If anyone thinks the minimum training received during a CCW class sends the student out prepared to deal with the responsibility associated with carrying or for that matter owning a firearm. They are sadly mistaken. There are some CCW holders who have never fired their firearm since the class. Yet there are non-permittees that shoot weekly. You can’t legislate common sense or morals. It’s all about the freedom to choose to do the right thing. Don’t get me wrong — all gun owners should train and practice regularly. But not because the state says they have to. -Michael B Wixom Sent from my Blackberry

You ask why we would not make training mandatory? My answer is that it is a choice between liberty and some (mis)perceived concept of ‘safety’ — and we all know Benjamin Franklin’s opinion on that.

‘Training’ — to whatever level or extent — should be a matter of individual accountability, not government coercion. If an individual fails to ‘understand’ his firearm, or the conditions and situations in which to deploy it, and winds up a statistic, I consider it another splash of chlorine in the shallow end of the gene pool — no matter how noble the act might have been, the lack of personal responsibility is separate from the context.

On a more ‘practical’ note, what the state giveth, the state may easily taketh away — with interest. Once ‘government’ is satisfied it can mandate ‘training requirements’, what may they mandate next? Caliber? Number? Days on which one may carry? Arbitrary and capricious ‘conditions’ that must be met?

Note that I strongly advocate the individual do all in his power to obtain the best instruction and ‘training’ possible, and practice to whatever extent practical — ‘the heaviest thing about carrying a firearm is the responsibility’ — not because there is any government ‘mandate’ beyond the barely adequate 8 hours, but because I have accepted the responsibility that comes with the choice to go armed. Tangentially, the willingness of more citizens to accept the philosophy of ‘personal accountability’ is the key to restoring the republic, another of my ‘personal interests’. -Duke Schecter

Alan Korwin
Bloomfield Press
“We publish the gun laws.”
4848 E. Cactus, #505-440
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
602-996-4020 Phone
602-494-0679 Fax
1-800-707-4020 Orders
http://www.gunlaws.com
alan@gunlaws.com
Call, write, fax or click for our  f r e e full-color catalog

If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you’re reading this in English, thank a veteran.

“No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.” –Edmund Burke

Guns Save Lives
Guns Stop Crime
Guns Are Why America Is Still F r e e

What if there was no justice in Arizona?

November 7, 2009

What if there was no justice in Arizona?

By John Donnelly

What would you do if you were a successful dentist and had been falsely arrested and held for several months under charges that were made up by your scheming wife (long-term drug addict and alcoholic) who was trying to get a divorce, obtain a strategic position for custody of your two children, gain control of all your money and property by lying to police in order to have you kept in jail so she could loot your bank accounts (corporate and joint accounts), steal drugs (DEA controlled narcotics), patient dental records, personal firearms collection (99 guns, ammo & accessories)?

What if your wife and her lawyer, accompanied by the lawyer’s paralegal, the paralegal’s husband (a Phoenix firefighter) 2 Sheriff’s detectives and another un-named person came into your house at midnight while you were in the hospital, opened your gun safes and removed your ninety-nine (99) guns and accessories, supposedly under a court order, for placement at a gun shop for consignment? What if there has NEVER been any court order produced to show the need to remove your firearms? What if the detectives were supposedly there for a civil standby, but have no official documents requesting their presence? What if they never made an accurate accounting (make, model and serial number) of the items removed? (Chain of custody) What if between the house and the gun shop, thirty-three (33) of the firearms disappeared? What if the lawyer denied the existence of these firearms for several months, and in several certified letters requesting information, the truth finally came out that he and the detectives had bought some of these guns and ammo? (Grand Theft) What if the gun shop where the other guns were taken refused to give you a list of firearms that they received and subsequently sold? (ATF form 4473 – Federal requirement for firearms transfer) What if, under a court-ordered subpoena, they still refused to provide this information? (Contempt of court) What if the gun shop owners sent a letter to the judge on your divorce trial telling him that they sold a large number of your guns for about $3,000? (Way under market value)

What if your wife had been seeing at least 18 different doctors (doctor shopping) in order to get prescriptions for narcotics? What if she had been taking these drugs behind your back for several years? What if she was writing prescriptions in other peoples’ names, and calling them in to pharmacies for herself (using your DEA license) and getting more drugs in that manner? What if, in addition to the illegal narcotics that she was taking, she also was taking prescription drugs for depression and schizophrenia? What if you found out that your wife had been stealing drugs from your office as early as one year after you had been married? What if she met an attorney at the gun range whom she kept in contact with for several years, and used this attorney later when your guns were stolen? What if she obtained a confidential list of judges (and their home addresses) from this attorney, and this list was found in your vehicle when you were arrested? What if it is not illegal or unlawful to have a copy of this list?

What would you do if the attorney that represented your wife, had you allegedly sign papers (with her attorney acting as the Notary) while you are in the hospital due to a head injury and under heavy medication (vulnerable adult), giving her access to your corporate bank account, and then she promptly cleaned out the account of about $22,000? (NOTARY FRAUD by the Attorney, and conflict of interest, assisting another in commission of a Felony)

What if she (the wife) stole vehicles and property that belonged to the corporate trust and concealed their whereabouts? What if she stole your computers, over 2,000 patient records [HIPAA violation (Federal) Identity theft] gold, DEA controlled narcotics (drugs), DEA controlled substance logs, and prescription pads from your office.

What if your wife filed a restraining order against you in order to keep you away from your house in order to conceal the fact that she had cleaned out the house, safes and office, of all your money, property ($663,000) and possessions? What if she sold some of that property (that was not hers) in order to buy drugs, go on uncontrolled spending sprees, and take trips to Mexico and California?

What if the local police department assisted her in removing your property from your house, locked safes and office, and when you tried to report the theft of property, the police failed and refused to respond or act on the report or any other reports that you attempted to make and treated you in a hostile manner?

What if the wife was found passed out in the gravel in front of Walgreens, with an open bottle of rum? (PUBLIC DRUNKENESS) What if her employer drove her home from work, (the school where she teaches) because she was drunk on the job? What if she was drunk and running through her apartment complex late at night, banging on doors and screaming that she was sexually assaulted, and when the police came, denied it? What if the wife was charged with 3 DUI’s within 2 years, one involving an accident where she INJURED a young man, who was required to be in the hospital for several weeks for treatment and recovery, destroying his semester at ASU? What if she didn’t get any REAL punishment or jail time for these 3 DUI’s, and what she did get, amounted to a slap on the wrist?

What if during one of the DUI’s she was involved in an accident, WHILE your child was in the vehicle? (FELONY CHILD ENDANGERMENT) What if the detectives and county prosecutor were covering up all these crimes by the wife (a known drug addict and alcoholic), because she was the only witness that they had against you? What if the wife had tried to commit suicide on at least 2 occasions, while your children were in her care (drugs and/or alcohol) and CPS refused to remove your children from her home? What if her own daughter expressed to police deep concern for her mother’s behavior? What if the police came and made a report, called CPS and they did NOTHING about removing the children from this home? What if you weren’t allowed to see, or have any contact with, your own children for over 3 years?

What if her attorney, and the detectives who were present when her lawyer cleaned out your gun safes, (99 guns, ammo, and accessories) purchased some of these guns for much less than fair market value, and lied about it to you and the State Bar, for several months before being caught in a lie? What if this attorney “gave” one of the guns to his brother out of state? (Federal firearms violation – interstate transportation of a stolen firearm)

What if the Arizona State Bar ADMITTED that this attorney was guilty of lying and theft, but failed to file sanctions against him (censure) or recommend disbarment for his crimes?

What if the attorney that you hired to defend you, pretended to act in your interests and failed to provide a reasonable defense, (ineffective counsel) failed to file objections and motions needed in a timely manner, and all the while charging you exorbitant amounts and when you ask for an itemized billing, made excuse after excuse and never provided the requested information? What if this attorney also had possession of 12 of your firearms, (that were given to him by the wife’s attorney) and sold those firearms for his personal gain? (Grand Theft) What if this attorney knew of the firearms theft by the wife’s attorney and (by state law) FAILED to report him to the state bar for punishment?

What if the Sheriff made inflammatory public statements (SLANDER) to the media about you regarding the false charges? What if the Sheriff also put you in jail among the general population, endangering your life?

What would you do, if, while you are being held in jail illegally, the detectives who were working on your case, lied to the grand jury (PERJURY) about evidence that they had in their possession, that POSITIVELY cleared you of the charges that you were being held for?  What if they held you in jail for several more weeks, AFTER they KNEW of the evidence EXCLUDING you from the alleged crime? What if they made you pay a ridiculously high bond, ($360,000.00) that didn’t fit the crime, in order for you to get out of jail?

What if the county prosecutor called herself the “ANGEL OF DEATH” (and was so proud of this name she used it for her email name) and had previously worked with these lying detectives and was now trying to put you away for several felony counts? (CONSPIRACY) What if her motives were to keep you quiet, so the REAL TRUTH about the trumped-up charges, and her involvement with the lying, thieving detectives were never known?

What if the judges assigned to your case kept making delay after delay (usually 30-60 days) WITHOUT making any rulings, and then recusing themselves when things started getting hot, and judge after judge refused to hear the case, because it was a political hot potato? What if the judge kept making delays that pushed your trial date PAST the legally allowed time (over 3 years since your initial arrest) to deny your constitutional right to a speedy trial? What if the judge failed to follow both Arizona Constitution and the U.S. Constitution laws guaranteeing your rights? What if the judge got sick and never recused himself?  The Supreme Court acted to intervene, without obtaining his recusal! (More delays)

What if they finally got a judge from an adjoining county, (who continued making 60-day delays) that held a hearing in the next county, that you were unable to attend, (and judge refused to allow you to appear telephonically) because it would violate your bond release agreement?

What if the wife’s lawyers pushed this judge to revoke your bond to restrict your movements and hamper your efforts to get the truth, work on your defense and in order for your wife to try and claim your house to get money? What if you were put back in jail because of this supposed bond revocation?

What if a good friend worked all night to file a Writ of Habeas Corpus with the Supreme Court and they refused to order your release? What if the judge failed to follow both Arizona Constitution and the U.S. Constitution laws guaranteeing your rights? What if all the law enforcement officers, attorneys, prosecutors, and judges involved in your case were totally ignored the rule of law, violating both STATE and FEDERAL statutes and DENYING YOUR CIVIL and HUMAN RIGHTS?

What if, because of these problems, you were not able to practice in your profession, and have lost out on over $300,000.00 in income? What if your mother (retired) had been paying your bills and helping in your legal defense for the past three years, expending all of her retirement savings?

What if your attorney at your divorce trial was inexperienced and didn’t get any help in defending you after being asked to? (Ineffective counsel) What if he failed to file motions in a timely manner or even to object to the nonsense that the wife’s attorneys were pulling and just kept billing you $300 an hour for doing nothing? What if the police pulled your mother over on the freeway, removed her from the car at gunpoint, and took away the car she was driving, even though she had a legal right to possess the car? What if your attorney didn’t even check on the status of the car for several days, to try and recover it for your mother, until after the wife had picked up the car from impound?

What if, during your criminal trial, you were taken from your cell at about 5:30 AM to be transported to the courthouse, without having anything to eat? What if you were put in a holding room until court started at 9:00 AM, sat in court until they recessed for lunch, were put back in the holding room (without getting any lunch) until court resumed at about 1:30 PM, and were taken back to your cell after court adjourned at 5:00 PM and didn’t get any dinner? What if this went on for 4 days a week for the entire time of your 3-week trial?

What if, during your trial, the prosecutor submitted circumstantial evidence that was never positively linked to you by DNA or fingerprints? What if the judge denied every motion from your defense attorneys to present evidence that disproved the prosecutions allegations? What if the judge had been talking to other judges and had a preconceived notion of your guilt, even before the trial commenced?

What if this judge denied your defense, in violation of your Constitutional rights guaranteed by the Arizona and U.S. Constitutions? What if, the judge prohibited the defense attorneys from giving the sentencing guidelines to the jury. What if the jury, after listening to the lies fabricated by your wife and the prosecutors, failed to understand the true legal definitions of the charges against you because of the interpretation given to them by the prosecutor, and found you guilty on all charges?

What if the judge sentenced you to 17-year (123.5 years total) consecutive terms on each charge? What if the sentence was excessive for a non-violent charge and this was your first offense? What if your defense attorneys ask the court to grant them an executive clemency hearing and were flat out denied? What if they explained to the judge that his sentence was extremely excessive for a non-violent charge, and that if you had committed something like a rape or murder, you would have received less time, and would be eligible for parole and the judge denied them again?

What if, 2 days after your sentencing, while you were in county jail, supposedly in protective custody, you were put in a cell with a convicted murderer, (ex-Mexican Mafia) who knew several of the judges, attorneys, etc. involved in your case? What if he came up behind you at 4:00 AM and severely beat you and knocked your 8 front teeth loose? What if, when you were taken to county hospital for treatment, and when you were taken back to jail, you were denied ANY pain medication? What if you were taken a few days later to a state facility for classification, while you were supposed to be in protective custody, where 2 inmates beat you again while the detention officers turned their heads? What if you heard that there was a contract out on you, because the (guilty) people involved in your case didn’t want you to talk about the case or ever see the light of day again?

What if, a month after your trial, a copy of the sheriff’s detective’s report turned up, showing that they were at your house the night that your guns were stolen?  [and the report was concealed from evidence]

What would you do if all these things were TRUE? And you were not guilty of anything.

Would you finally believe there is no justice in Arizona?

IF you still have doubts, ask me – I have PROOF!

www.justicefordrkennedy.info


%d bloggers like this: