Well, one of the missing FFL’s has turned up and it appears he may be a Dumba$$.
Tantalizing Excerpt From Temporary Insanity:
US v. Podhorn, No. 06-2139 (8 Dec 2008)
Conviction of a licensed firearms dealer for making false statements, selling stolen firearms, and recordkeeping violations is affirmed, and sentence vacated, and remanded where:
Folks, if you are a gunowner and especially are graced with an FFL you BETTER KNOW HOW TO TALK TO INVESTIGATORS.
You have exactly one question: “Am I free to leave?” and exactly one comment: “I prefer to have this discussion or answer any questions only in the presence of counsel”. Basically that is all. Period. End of Story. Check with your attorney for language appropriate to your region if necessary.
From the findings:
Podhorn and the Government gave rather different
accounts of the facts relating to the motion to suppress—
indeed, the district court described the two versions
as “diametrically oppose[d] . . . in many ways.” In the end,
however, the court decided that the Government’s witnesses
were more credible. It specifically stated that
“Defendant Podhorn at times was vague, nonresponsive,
argumentative, inconsistent in his answers, had selective
recollection, and was coy.” For the record, the court also
presented Podhorn’s version of the facts, based on what it
could “glean as best as possible” from his contentions. We
review the district court’s findings of historical fact under
the deferential clear error standard. United States v. Tyler,
512 F.3d 405, 409 (7th Cir. 2008); United States v. Groves, 470
F.3d 311, 317-18 (7th Cir. 2006). Because Podhorn has
offered no persuasive reason why we should reject the
district court’s findings, we accept that court’s findings for
purposes of this appeal.
Link to the PDF File Posted at Temporary Insanity: