Handloader sold ammo to LV murderer

[Frank Ettin]

First, let me remind everyone that the link in the OP is to an LA Times article. News articles almost never get the legal details correct.

Second, federal law requires that anyone engaged in the business of manufacturing ammunition have a license. And there is an additional license necessary to be engaged in the manufacturing of armor piercing ammunition. (See 18 USC 923(a)(1))

It does appear that Haig had a side business manufacturing and selling ammunition, and that some of the ammunition he made and sold might have been armor piercing ammunition. We don't seem to know what, if any licenses he held. The charge does, however, suggest that he didn't have whatever license he needed for what he did.

..."these cartridges were marked with toolmarks consistent with markings made during reloading operations; "

why say it that way? IF the markings on the cartridges indicated they had been reloaded, why not say that? Why say "markings consistent with"??...

That's how forensic scientists always frame their conclusions. Unlike what they do on TV, a Firearms and Toolmark examiner can't really say, "Those pry marks were made with this screwdriver." He can't say that basically because he hasn't compared the pry marks with every screwdriver in the world. So his testimony would be, "The pry marks on the door jam are consistent with having been made by the screwdriver entered into evidence as 'Prosecution Exhibit 5."

..."I'm sorry folks, but I just don't think the government proved its case. I'll be glad to discuss and deliberate the facts with y'all for the next six weeks if you want, but I don't anticipate changing my 'not guilty" vote any time soon."

Resulting in a mistrial and a new trial with a different jury.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

..."I'm sorry folks, but I just don't think the government proved its case. I'll be glad to discuss and deliberate the facts with y'all for the next six weeks if you want, but I don't anticipate changing my 'not guilty" vote any time soon."

Resulting in a mistrial and a new trial with a different jury.

Or not.

If enough members of the jury favor acquittal, and if the prosecutor isn't on a witch hunt, the prosecution may decide that a retrial isn't worth the time, effort, and expense because the outcome is likely to be the same.

That said, even if I were the only hold-out, the fact that my vote for "Not Guilty" would probably only result in another trial is not a valid reason to abandon my conscience and vote with the herd.

 

[rwilson452]

Or not.

If enough members of the jury favor acquittal, and if the prosecutor isn't on a witch hunt, the prosecution may decide that a retrial isn't worth the time, effort, and expense because the outcome is likely to be the same.

That said, even if I were the only hold-out, the fact that my vote for "Not Guilty" would probably only result in another trial is not a valid reason to abandon my conscience and vote with the herd.

I'm betting you wouldn't make it on to the jury. Your the kind of guy the persecuter doesn't want.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I'm betting you wouldn't make it on to the jury. Your the kind of guy the persecuter doesn't want.

No bet. Been there, done that.

A number of years ago I was on jury duty. Unlike previous times, when voir dire was conducted individually, this time they started out with a mass voir dire. The entire jury pool was sworn in. First question was, 'Would anyone have a problem following the judge's instructions on the law?"

Normally, I would have STFU, but ... I was under oath, so I had to raise my hand. Then the attorneys from BOTH sides piled on. My position was consistent: How could I say I would follow the judge's instructions on the law without knowing what the law under discussion is, and what the judge might say it means? They didn't like that.

Finally, they sequestered me in a small room off the courtroom, hunted down a judge, then brought me back in. By this time the other prospective jurors had been taken somewhere else. The judge proceeded to ask me the same questions, and I gave her the same answers. I explained that the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court had stated that the jury is the trier of the facts and of the law, and that this had never been changed since he said it. The judge told me my understanding of history was incorrect and to go home and do my homework, then she dismissed me from jury duty.

So I went home, looked up the case (which I knew, since I am descended from that Chief Justice), and wrote the judge a letter to advise her that I had done as she instructed, done my homework, and that I felt I was correct and she was incorrect.

She never acknowledged my letter. That was probably ten years ago, and I haven't been called for jury duty since. I'm probably on a blacklist.

 

[44 AMP]

My position was consistent: How could I say I would follow the judge's instructions on the law without knowing what the law under discussion is, and what the judge might say it means? They didn't like that.

I imagine they didn't! Neither side wants a juror who actually thinks.

It seems commonplace today, to ask that we agree (and under penalty of law in some cases) to something, without being informed exactly (or sometimes even generally) just WHAT that something is.

One of my personal peeves is how almost no one seem to understand what the word verify means. When I get asked to verify some information (usually personal), I just say, "sure". and then wait...

After some moments of them giving me that deer in the headlight look, they often say, "well??" and I reply, "give me the information, and I'll tell you if it's correct" That's what "verify" means.

More blank stare, then "I can't do that..."
"Well, then I can't verify your information. I can give you the information you want, but I can't verify what you have, unless you tell me what it is."

Once in a while, rarely, but once in a while, they get it.

I wouldn't agree to obey rules or instructions, "sight unseen" any more than I would sign a blank check.

I did that once..I enlisted!
Once.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I did that once..I enlisted!
Once.

So did I -- once.

The reenlistment NCO was trying hard to get me to re-up when I was in Vietnam. I was an E5 at the time. I told him I'd re-up if he'd make me a full bird colonel. If he'd counter-offered with lieutenant colonel or major, maybe even captain (but probably not -- I really wanted field grade) I would have signed, but he just said, "I don't think I can do that."

So I said, "Then I don't think I can reenlist."

 

[thallub]

i'm betting Haig's case will never make it to trial. After the feds tack on another charge or two Haig will seek relief in a plea bargain.

 

[5whiskey]

"these cartridges were marked with toolmarks consistent with markings made during reloading operations; "

why say it that way? IF the markings on the cartridges indicated they had been reloaded, why not say that? Why say "markings consistent with"??

The cartridge cases had tool marks from reloading dies.

Not just tool marks from reloading dies... tool marks consistent with Haig's reloading dies. From paragraph 15 of the criminal complaint:

“forensic analysis determined that the two unfired armor piercing cartridges from Paddock’s Mandalay Bay hotel room (bearing Douglass Haig’s fingerprints) had toolmarks consistent with the reloading equipment recovered in Haig’s backyard workshop during the October 19, 2017 search.”

This honestly should not be too hard for forensics. Yeah, there is a good chance that you could not say with absolute certainty that those rounds were definitely reloading with those dies without the other corroborating evidence (one reason for the seemingly squirrely language, but it is common)... but those dies produce a similar tool mark as to those found on the loaded un-fired rounds. And about 5 witnesses are saying that he sold them AP, API, APIT, etc. ammo, and he advertised it on his website.

The toolmarks on the dies and ammo are significant... but really they won't make or break the case. It's just icing on top of the cake compared to the sales records, witness statements, fingerprints on AP rounds, etc.

I don't necessarily agree with the law, but everyone here knows you can't manufacture ammo (especially AP ammo) without a manufacturers license. This guy did, unfortunately some of that ammo was found with a mass-murderer, and he got caught. We may not like the law, but we don't condone breaking it either (at least that's my general take from TFL). IMO he earns what he gets.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I don't necessarily agree with the law, but everyone here knows you can't manufacture ammo (especially AP ammo) without a manufacturers license. This guy did, unfortunately some of that ammo was found with a mass-murderer, and he got caught. We may not like the law, but we don't condone breaking it either (at least that's my general take from TFL). IMO he earns what he gets.

I agree on the breaking the law part. As I posted earlier, I was raised that if you don't agree with a law, you set out to get it changed or repealed. Until then, you abide by it. To do otherwise is to espouse anarchy. I don't like the law about needing a license to manufacture ammunition for sale, so I ignore that law. Someone else doesn't like the law against robbing banks, so he ignores that law. And yet another person doesn't agree with the law against having sex with other people's wives, so he has sex with your wife while you're at work. I'm not ready to live in that world.

As to Haig earning what he gets ... if all he gets is a punishment commensurate with what anyone else would get for making ammo without a license, yes. If they try to hang him out to dry in any way for the shooter's actions, then I'm not in agreement. He should not be made into a scapegoat for Paddock.

 

[44 AMP]

but those dies produce a similar tool mark as to those found on the loaded un-fired rounds.

My problem with this is that ALL reloading dies will produce similar marks. The rounds found in the hotel room could have been reloaded by anyone, including a factory or licensed ammo remanufacturer. Forensics alone doesn't prove Haig reloaded the ammo. Essentially, the reported forensic data is meaningless background chatter, which I feel was included to try and predetermine conclusions.

And about 5 witnesses are saying that he sold them AP, API, APIT, etc. ammo, and he advertised it on his website.

This is what is going to convict Haig, unless his defense team can discredit all witnesses. AND convince the jury that the rounds he advertised were ones he bought already loaded, and just resold.

If that were the case, I don't see the crime, but going by witness statements, that wasn't the case, and he did load AP bullets into cases, and sold them, without the correct Federal license to do that.

Am still wondering what, if any, difference there is between "metalugically classified" and the legal definition of AP bullets.....

 

[Frank Ettin]

My problem with this is that ALL reloading dies will produce similar marks. The rounds found in the hotel room could have been reloaded by anyone, including a factory or licensed ammo remanufacturer.....

Not really. The marks might be similar in the broadest, qualitative terms, i. e., they'd all be roughly longitudinal striations. But there will be variation at a detail, micro level.

So a firearms and toolmark examiner might take a case collected in evidence and a exemplar case processed in a certain die and compare striations under moderate magnification. In order to be compliant with the standards set by the appropriate professional society, the examiner will need to be able find an orientation for the specimen and the exemplar in which X striations perfectly match for him to opine that the marks on the specimen case are consistent with having been loaded using that die.

But all this is also why someone is almost never convicted solely on forensic evidence. Forensic evidence can provide powerful corroboration, however.

 

[5whiskey]

Frank beat me to it, but yeah tool marks are not all the same. I have a reloading die that produces a trademark line on the long axis of .223 brass that is the exact same length on every round resized by that die. I think its my fault, I'm pretty sure a piece of cleaning media got in the die and caused a burr. Nonetheless, I can tell a round run through that die with no magnification in bright sunlight. Is there no other .223 sizing die onmearth that makes that mark? I cant say that for certain, but i can say that i havemt come across one yet. Take this concept, and then multiply it by 100x magnification to capture much finer detail. It is the same concept as patterning the rifling on a fired slug to determine what firearm it was fired from. Its not to say that there is no other firearm in the same caliber in existence that could produce very similar rifling patterns... But the chances are slim, and the gun found on the defendant identified by 3 witnesses just so happens to match the rifling pattern found on the slug pulled from the victims body. That's how that works.

In this particular case, not only did the reloaded rounds have tool marks that matched the ones on the sizing dies used by the defendant, they also had the defendants fingerprints on them. That is very powerful evidence.

As to Haig earning what he gets ... if all he gets is a punishment commensurate with what anyone else would get for making ammo without a license, yes. If they try to hang him out to dry in any way for the shooter's actions, then I'm not in agreement. He should not be made into a scapegoat for Paddock.

AB, I agree completely. Honestly were it not for the LV shooting, no one would have ever had the time of day for this guy. So in a way, he's already probably being selectively prosecuted.

 

[5whiskey]

Am still wondering what, if any, difference there is between "metalugically classified" and the legal definition of AP bullets.....

I prepare a pretty fair number of legal documents. I understand the language that judges want to see. Honestly I could have found a much plainer, or at least less goofy sounding, way to say this as well.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

AB, I agree completely. Honestly were it not for the LV shooting, no one would have ever had the time of day for this guy. So in a way, he's already probably being selectively prosecuted.

That gets us into an entirely different discussion, the one about why do we constantly need more new anti-gun laws when the .gov doesn't enforce the ones we already have. Like how many people fail the background check for buying a firearm every year, compared to how many of those who fail are actually investigated by the feds or prosecuted for lying on the 4473?

 

[5whiskey]

That gets us into an entirely different discussion, the one about why do we constantly need more new anti-gun laws when the .gov doesn't enforce the ones we already have. Like how many people fail the background check for buying a firearm every year, compared to how many of those who fail are actually investigated by the feds or prosecuted for lying on the 4473?

Completely agree. We do not need any new laws, we need fewer. And there are some laws that I think most here agree with (firearm by convicted felon, though I'd almost rather see it firearm by convicted VIOLENT felon) that I would like to see strictly enforced. For what its worth, although I don't necessarily agree with the GCA of 68, the need for an FFL, and form 4473. But, that is our reality. If we are stuck with form 4473, I would like to see prosecutions for lying on it. The fact is... That simply just doesn't happen but once in a blue moon. I had one recently where a known straw purchaser lied (she was under indictment for a felony) on 4473, and 2 of her firearms had just been recovered from gang members fresh out of prison. Communications on phones indicated that she agreed to sell them the pistols, knowing that they were fresh out of prison. A jail call made to her by the defendang revealed that she threatened him to leave her name out of it. When I spoke with ATF about it they acted like they didn't want to mess with it. They finally took the case, but it wasn't "sexy" to them.

Most folks don't realize it, but in general ATF field agents could care less about guys like us and whether we have a forward grip on a pistol, or a homemade suppressor, or not as long as otherwise law abiding. But... We abide by the law because if something bad happens and we're in the magnifying glass, we will have it stuck to us.

 

[johnwilliamson062]

I think its my fault, I'm pretty sure a piece of cleaning media got in the die and caused a burr.

And for this reason the marks not matching also doesn't mean much. The tool will wear with use changing the marks AND it is quite easy to change the tool marks.

 

[44 AMP]

And for this reason the marks not matching also doesn't mean much.

RIGHT!!!

they can't say it is,. and they won't say it isn't, so why include it at all?
perhaps simply for the purpose of theater..

Again, I am reminded of the theater in MY COUSIN VINNY...

FBI Expert: The tire marks were made by Michelin XGV R75-14 tires
Prosecutor: The same size and type found on the defendant's car?
Expert: yes
Prosecutor: What else?
Expert: we took samples from the tire marks and compared them with samples from the defendant's tires...
Prosecutor: and what did you find?
Expert: That they were identical.
Prosecutor (facing jury and slapping hands together for emphasis): IDENTICAL!!!

(now everything here IS true, but see how presenting just some information can shape opinion? Based on this testimony alone, its easy to conclude that the tire marks were made by the defendants car. HOWEVER, this follows...)

Defense: What is the most popular make, model and size tire sold in the US?

Expert (in a soft voice...): The Michelin XGV R75-14.....

I realize I'm no expert, don't have all the details, and am looking at it from the outside, but it seems to me that "tool marks consistent with reloading equipment", and the defendant having reloading equipment is a lot like that scene from that movie. It's not just about what was said, but also about what was NOT said.

 

[thallub]

Haig was also charged with conspiracy. Conspiracy with whom?

The feds have Haig's sales records: Feds say Haig sold armor piercing ammunition in over 100 transactrions. See page 9 of the warrant.

 

[Salmoneye]

Page 8, #15, (lines 5-10)

Clearly indicates that the two rounds of AP with Haig's prints found in Paddock's hotel room, have tool marks that directly correspond to the reloading equipment confiscated from Haig's shed...

 

[xandi]

What kind of AP was it anyway?