Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Calaveras County Safe Again (ATF at it Again!)
Source: The Firearms Coalition
URL Source: http://n/a
Published: Apr 29, 2005
Author: Jeff Knox
Post Date: 2005-04-29 09:20:59 by Refinersfire
Keywords: Calaveras, Again!), County
Views: 215
Comments: 7

Calaveras County Safe Again

By Jeff Knox

(Manassas, VA, April 27) The people of Calaveras County – the remote central California mining region made famous by the gold rush of 1849 and the jumping frogs of Mark Twain – can breath easier now that Richard Wilmshurst has been brought to justice. Wilmshurst was convicted last month of illegal possession of a machinegun and illegal possession of “Assault Weapons” in California. The judge sentenced Wilmshurst to three years probation and ordered that he dispose of his “arsenal”.

Wilmshurst, by the way, is a car dealer and land speculator with a law degree, a federal firearms import license, and a class 3 license.

This could be the Second Amendment case we’ve been waiting for or it could be another case of a white-hat taking a fall because white-hats are easier targets than black-hats.

Wilmshurst’s troubles began in January of 2003 when an ATF agent performing a routine inspection of his import inventory mentioned that a couple of the guns were not legal for Californians to own. Wilmshurst wasn’t worried; the guns were within the umbrella of his import business and were intended for distribution outside the state of California for sale to law enforcement.

In February, officers from the California Department of Justice Firearms Enforcement Division, using information obtained from ATF, staged raids on Wilmshurst’s home and Angel Camp car dealership. The raids were conducted in full “storm-trooper” fashion with black “ninja” suits, heavy body armor, and true assault weapons. This being “people friendly” California, the assault force included a medic to monitor 69-year old, stroke survivor, Wilmshurst’s blood pressure as they dumped the contents of his safe and confiscated every gun he or his businesses owned.

Even though it is a violation of federal law for information obtained from records generated in compliance with import license regulations to be used directly or indirectly as evidence against the licensee, the judge refused to hear arguments that the warrants were illegal and that all evidence seized was inadmissible. Instead, he barred any mention of federal law in the courtroom and instructed the jury that if the prosecutor proved that Wilmshurst was in possession of the firearms in question (something that Wilmshurst never denied), that the jury must return a guilty verdict.

The guilty verdict was summarily returned and last week, Wilmshurst was sentenced to three years probation and, as a convicted felon, ordered to dispose of all of his firearms.

The judge in the case – who happens to be the same judge that ruled against Wilmshurst in a property case currently on appeal – expressed dismay that Wilmshurst is showing no remorse for his crimes…

Wilmshurst is planning to appeal the conviction and has filed suit against the Attorney General of California for violating federal law in conducting the raid and for violating Wilmshurst’s civil rights under the Second Amendment.

The Firearms Coalition is bringing the Wilmshurst case to the attention of Second Amendment scholars and firearms civil rights organizations in hopes of generating “friend of the court” briefs and perhaps getting Mr. Wilmshurst the specialized legal assistance this case clearly deserves.

We will keep you posted as the case develops.

In the meantime, let this be a reminder: Your white hat is no defense against aggressive police, prosecutors, and judges. There are many things that Richard Wilmshurst would rather be doing with his time, money and midnight oil. Cross your T’s and dot your i’s…

Yours for the Second Amendment,

Jeff

Jeff Knox Director of Operations The Firearms Coalition

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Refinersfire (#0)

Instead, he barred any mention of federal law in the courtroom and instructed the jury that if the prosecutor proved that Wilmshurst was in possession of the firearms in question (something that Wilmshurst never denied), that the jury must return a guilty verdict.

Well, gee, why even have a prosecutor there!?! The judge instructed the jury to find the man guilty. In cases such as this, rational American juries must have the guts to say: no, sorry, Mr. Man, Not guilty.

Unfortunately, we seem to only see that jury attitude/fortitude in cases which let violent animals skate free.

wbales  posted on  2005-04-29   9:29:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Refinersfire, lodwick, 2nd Amendment ping (#0)

We will keep you posted as the case develops.

Please do.

robin  posted on  2005-04-29   10:03:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Refinersfire (#0)

The judge in the case – who happens to be the same judge that ruled against Wilmshurst in a property case currently on appeal...

Wilmshurst should own this "judge" shortly.

Lod  posted on  2005-04-29   10:13:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: robin (#2)

We will keep you posted as the case develops.

Oh come on! This case is to perfect, the guy will surely die before it is resolved and the ruling and precedent will survive...

Axenolith  posted on  2005-04-29   10:26:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Refinersfire, boonie rat, Henry Bowman, Ray Johnson (#0)

Even though it is a violation of federal law for information obtained from records generated in compliance with import license regulations to be used directly or indirectly as evidence against the licensee, the judge refused to hear arguments that the warrants were illegal and that all evidence seized was inadmissible. Instead, he barred any mention of federal law in the courtroom and instructed the jury that if the prosecutor proved that Wilmshurst was in possession of the firearms in question (something that Wilmshurst never denied), that the jury must return a guilty verdict.

TTFTH

christine  posted on  2005-04-29   12:09:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: wbales (#1)

Unfortunately, we seem to only see that jury attitude/fortitude in cases which let violent animals skate free.

To rape, rob and kill us innocent folk no doubt! :-(

Refinersfire  posted on  2005-04-29   22:17:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Refinersfire (#0)

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2005-04-29   22:46:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest