voldemort at it again

[c.a.willard]

Well when it comes to NFA stuff until he proves that he was the legal possessor of the item its a criminal charge.   Whether that's morally right or wrong or should be that way is an entirely different conversation.  But with the way it is set up now with NFA stuff the burden of proof is pretty much on the person possessing the item to prove that they are legal. 

 

For Tennessee the way i understand it is that the law starts with the premise that possession of a suppressor is illegal.  It is an affirmative defense if the item is properly registered under the NFA .  In cases of affirmative defense the defendant has the burden to prove that he legally possessed the item based upon a preponderant of evidence.  In the case of a trust.  I don't think the tax stamp alone would in fact be a preponderant of evidence he would additionally have to prove that he is a trustee on the trust the suppressor is registered to.

[Guest nra37922]

Any news on when the case is set for court?

[mikegideon]

Any news on when the case is set for court?

 

The criminal case? May not be much of one if he comes forward with proof that he was legal, if it goes to court at all.

[DaveTN]

Huh?  Do not understand as he had the paperwork...

When asked about it; he refused to answer. I doubt they found or read that paperwork until after he was arrested and they got to HQ to fully examine the weapon and the case.

 

It isn’t their responsibility to go on a hunt for the paperwork; it’s his responsibility to display it upon request. Of course he is arguing that unless they are ATF or IRS agents they don’t have the authority to even ask to see it. Because Tennessee state law outlaws suppressors unless a person has Federal paperwork I think he will find out he is wrong, but we will have to wait and see.

Edited August 3, 2013 by DaveTN

[DaveS]

Nobody is saying they couldn't perform a terry stop and have a conversation with him....  You have to separate the stop to ask him some questions and see what is going on, and the search of the rifle case.

 

I haven't seen anybody argue that legally they couldn't walk up to the guy and ask him what is going on...  so stop bringing that fact up, we all agree stopping him was perfectly within current case law (I'm happy to have a separate discussion on how terry v ohio is horrible case law and should be overturned, but that topic is for another time and place).

 

The issue some of us have is with the search of a locked case that was no longer within arms reach of Leonard, and the arrest because Leonard claimed they had the paperwork in their possession before he was arrested.

 

Just because something is not normal doesn't give police the ability to even stop you, let alone probable cause to search you, let alone search a locked case that is no longer in your possession without a warrant.

 

And, you also overlook that there were 2 different police encounters within a 10 to 15 minute span...  In the first encounter 10+ officers let Leonard go, he was wearing the exact same kevlar vest, and carrying the exact same gun case...  And then the second encounter that we've all seen the video tape of...  between those two encounters he did an interview with a TV reporter...

 

So I agree the context of the situation matters.  So lets talk about the context of this situation...  maybe a man wearing body armor and a gun case isn't normal, but once you stop that person have a conversation and LET THEM GO... and you see the exact same person 15 minutes later doing walking in the same general area how do you suddenly get probable cause that he is now committing a crime?

 

So which is it, the first group of 10-15 officers all got it wrong, and should be disciplined for letting a possible madman walk around downtown Nashville?  Or the second group (which included a number of the first group) got it wrong for seeing the exact same person released 10 minutes ago (who you've just watched have an interview with a local TV reporter) is suddenly a person about the go on a shooting spree?

 

One group of officers got it completely wrong...  which one is it?

I'm still looking for this locked rifle case you keep talking about.

 

Dave

[DaveTN]

I'm still looking for this locked rifle case you keep talking about.

 

Dave

It’s made up. Lenny wrapped some plastic (Kydex) around an AR to make its shape obvious. He and some others think that constitutes a case. I don’t know if it does or not, that’s a question the court will have to answer.

[DaveS]

It’s made up. Lenny wrapped some plastic (Kydex) around an AR to make its shape obvious. He and some others think that constitutes a case. I don’t know if it does or not, that’s a question the court will have to answer.

Exactly how I felt, but some folks say LE violated his rights by opening a locked case. I thought I missed something, because I've yet to see it.

 

DaveS

Edited August 4, 2013 by DaveS

[KahrMan]

I'm still looking for this locked rifle case you keep talking about.

 

Dave

 

 

It’s made up. Lenny wrapped some plastic (Kydex) around an AR to make its shape obvious. He and some others think that constitutes a case. I don’t know if it does or not, that’s a question the court will have to answer.

 

This is from Lennys website.  Whether it is true or not I do not know.  Although I doubt he would claim this if he could not back it up.  He is definitely looking for a lawsuit so I bet he had his ducks all in a row.

 

The case was made from kydex. The kydex covered every part of the firearm and no part of the firearm was visible. A cable lock was placed on the kydex case so that the firearm could not be used. The sling was strapped in two places over the kydex case, preventing the case from being opened. As a final touch I placed tape around the case at six points to ensure cops did not attempt to open it. The keys for the lock were not on my person.

[mikegideon]

He hasn't had his ducks in a row yet. Has he won one penny in any of his escapades? I thought he was sitting at zero winnings, and a buttload of legal fees.

[Guest nra37922]

While I think that he is an ass and baited the police, would he had been searched if his AR were in a guitar shaped case?

[mikegideon]

While I think that he is an ass and baited the police, would he had been searched if his AR were in a guitar shaped case?

 

Nobody would have even called the police

[DaveTN]

While I think that he is an ass and baited the police, would he had been searched if his AR were in a guitar shaped case?

Nope.

[nightrunner]

Nobody would have given him a second look, especially considering it was in Downtown Nashville.

[Dustbuster]

Lennys affidavit :
Possession of prohibited weapon
Read it here:



http://ccc.nashville.gov/portal/page/portal/ccc/caseSearch/caseSearchPublic/caseSearchPublicResults/?a1=1600758|3796372|CJIS Edited August 4, 2013 by Dustbuster

[TripleDigitRide]

The webpage cannot be found.

[tnhawk]

I dont think he is getting legal advice. You may recall that he acted as his own attorney on previous cases.

It is obvious that he has a fool for a client.

[TripleDigitRide]

Lennys affidavit :
Possession of prohibited weapon
Read it here:
http://ccc.nashville.gov/jis-web-affidavit/work/Affidavit-AJPRequestHandler-ApplicationServerThread-51287218426.pdf

http://ccc.nashville.gov/portal/page/portal/ccc/caseSearch/caseSearchPublic/caseSearchPublicResults/?a1=1600758|3796372|CJIS - Click at bottom to view affidavit.

 

http://ccc.nashville.gov/portal/pls/portal/PORTAL.ORCDYNAMICPAGEDETAILS.show?p_arg_names=a1&p_arg_values=EMBODY|LEONARD|04271972

Edited August 4, 2013 by TripleDigitRide

[Dustbuster]

I fixed the link thanks
By the way nothing in there about handing out flyers to anyone. Edited August 4, 2013 by Dustbuster

[mikegideon]

Felony weapons charge. Way to go, Lenny. 

[TMF]

Felony weapons charge. Way to go, Lenny.

Gonna have to answer that block differently from now on, won't he?

[mikegideon]

Not until he's convicted, right? It would be some karma if it go stuck on his record so he couldn't pass a background check

Edited August 4, 2013 by mikegideon

[TMF]

Not until he's convicted, right? It would be some karma if it go stuck on his record so he couldn't pass a background check

 

11.b. on a 4473 asks if you are under indictment for a felony, so I don't know how that works in his world as someone who holds an actual FFL, but I figure that appropriate officials at the ATF have been notified.  If they haven't already pulled it I would assume that they've taken some action to nullify it so he isn't doing transfers any more. 

 

On another note, over the years I've filled out a whole lotta paperwork for various things and one question I've seen many times is whether or not I've ever been charged with a felony.  Maybe that is specific to someone who works in a job with access to dangerous things or sensitive information, but I would think many employers would ask that question, especially in a mostly free state like Tennessee where you can be fired without cause. 

 

Since he works in the medical field I would think that would be a relavant question since he would be around controlled narcotics.  Perhaps some of the nurses here could chime in and give insight to that one, since I'm working on an assumption.  At any rate, he'll have to answer "yes" to that question whenever it comes up for the rest of his career, and then have to articulate how/why he was orginially charged.  Since Lenny is such an over-the-top moonbat, I figure his explanation for why he was taken into custody by Marxists-Nazi gunhating liberal jackbooted gestapo stazi spetznatz operatives for the People's Republic of Davidson County, will get him shown the door.  Whether he gets convicted or not, it doesn't matter at this point for him.  He has stepped on his crank so hard he'll be feeling the pain until he's 90 years old.... assuming that he doesn't get shot between now and then pulling a stupid stunt.

[DaveS]

This is from Lennys website.  Whether it is true or not I do not know.  Although I doubt he would claim this if he could not back it up.  He is definitely looking for a lawsuit so I bet he had his ducks all in a row.

 

The case was made from kydex. The kydex covered every part of the firearm and no part of the firearm was visible. A cable lock was placed on the kydex case so that the firearm could not be used. The sling was strapped in two places over the kydex case, preventing the case from being opened. As a final touch I placed tape around the case at six points to ensure cops did not attempt to open it. The keys for the lock were not on my person.

OK thanks

[DaveS]

While I think that he is an ass and baited the police, would he had been searched if his AR were in a guitar shaped case?

 I guess when we talk "locked cases", I'm picturing the type of rifle cases that open and close like a briefcase and has a pad lock on it. I don't think he would have been stopped if he was using some common sense and carrying in a "guitar case". I don't guess anyone would have called 911 much huh? All he was doing was "cop fishing". Well, he got what he wanted.

 

DaveS

[QuietDan]

Lennys affidavit :
Possession of prohibited weapon
Read it here:



http://ccc.nashville.gov/portal/page/portal/ccc/caseSearch/caseSearchPublic/caseSearchPublicResults/?a1=1600758|3796372|CJIS

Well,

 

That's that. Now he gets the pleasure of working through the system. It's quite possible that he will get chewed up and spit out. This is going to cost him time and money. I wonder if he's foolish enough to serve as his own lawyer. I foresee some opportunities for him to collect contempt of court charges. I imagine most judges will not be terribly entertained by his antics.