ATF knocked on my door last night!

[Wagonman]

If you do not know it to be a lie then it isn't a lie.

I know that in every criminal complaint I have filled out the first words are knowingly and intentionally. whether that holds true for the feds I plead ignorance.

At the end of the day don't run off at the mouth and you should be fine if in doubt lawyer up

[troy_mclure]

Go to Staples and get yourself a $50 Dictaphone. Place it in your pocket and hit the record button...

this is horrible advise as it is illegal in many states to record a Leo without their knowledge. and some states its illegal to record anybody without permission.

[Shane Tuttle]

It was a joke, Troy....

[johnbt]

I can't believe the number of people who want to have an attorney with them. You guys trust attorneys more than you trust cops?

If you don't trust cops to treat you fairly, then what's keeping them from writing up a report and claiming you said this and you said that and they never even questioned you? Nothing.

Or maybe you answered a question with "Yes" and the officer decides to write down that you said "No." Okay, so you have a witness or two and the cop says you are all lying and now it's a conspiracy charge. Oh, you say they'll never do that? Remember, you don't trust them.

See, you can't win if they stack the deck, so go ahead and answer the questions.

Or maybe just stay inside and never open the door.

John

[Skans]

this is horrible advise as it is illegal in many states to record a Leo without their knowledge. and some states its illegal to record anybody without permission.

I am not aware of any state where it is illegal to record a person-to-person conversation or record an in person conversation with a LEO. It is illegal to record telephone conversations without obtaining the other person's permission.

I don't know all states laws, but if someone knows of a specific state where you can't record person-to-person conversations without permission, I'd be interested in knowing which states. That would essentially outlaw the use of all recording devices capable of recording conversations.

[Maromero]

In my jurisdiction you need express authorization from every person being recorded. It is a crime to record someone without their explicit or implicit concent.

[TailGator]

if someone knows of a specific state where you can't record person-to-person conversations without permission, I'd be interested in knowing which states.

Start with Florida.

"All parties must consent to the recording or the disclosure of the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication in Florida. Recording, disclosing, or endeavoring to disclose without the consent of all parties is a felony, unless the interception is a first offense committed without any illegal purpose, and not for commercial gain. Fla. Stat. ch. 934.03. These first offenses and the interception of cellular frequencies are misdemeanors. State v. News-Press Pub. Co., 338 So. 2d 1313 (1976)."

Source: http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/florida.html

I have seen charges brought under this provision.

[Maromero]

You guys trust attorneys more than you trust cops?

Every day of the week and twice on Sunday!

[pendennis]

johnbt - The attorney you have hired is bound by legal ethics to jealously represent the client. The attorney is your agent, or proxy. If the attorney says do not talk to the police, then keep your mouth shut.

Watch the videos cited earlier. They're the most compelling evidence to not discuss anything with the police, or make a statement in any other public medium.

Example - You are involved in a shooting in your home. You dial "911", and tell the operator that there's been a shooting, and you need medical assistance, and the police. The 911 operator asks you what happened. If you say that you shot someone, that tape can be used in court, if the police decided to prosecute your for wrongful death (manslaughter, murder). You did not confess to the police, but you made a public statement.

When you are the subject, whether main or ancillary, of an investigation, the police (ATF, FBI, local police, etc.) have started an adversarial relationship. They have prosecutors, and unlimited funds. Keep the field level - talk only to your attorney.

[CWPinSC]

It's just me, but I don't trust any Federal cop, under any circumstances, especially the ATF. No conversations without my attorney present.

+1 there. From my experience with LEOs of several types, I respect them, but I don't trust them - especially when they start asking probing questions. They may lie, omit, commit, mislead, misquote, threaten and cajole in the course of an "interview". You'll make a verbal statement - well, you'd better read what the agent transcribed before you sign it - it might not bear any resemblance to what you actually said.

[Skans]

Tail Gator, I believe if you check that out, you will find that law only pertains to "wire" communications, i.e. telephonic communications. It has nothing to do with secretly recording a face-to-face conversation.

[TailGator]

that law only pertains to "wire" communications

Sorry, Skans, but read it again - it specifically includes "oral" communications. A case was published in the local paper a year or two ago in which a fellow who had a recorder in his shirt pocket while meeting with, as I recall, zoning officials. The officials made a big deal out of it and the guy would up with probation, if my somewhat foggy memory serves correctly. But even if it is reduced to a misdemeanor and you get probation, who needs it?

[Double Naught Spy]

The guy took the gun he got from me and posted it on another forum the very next day for almost twice the price that he paid me (which kinda ****** me off. But hey, you live and learn. The gun wasn't really worth what he was asking for it, but I digress).

I found this amusing as it is a sentiment I have seen echoed many times. People don't seem to understand that when they sell an item, it is no longer theirs and so what the new owner does with it, such as selling it at a higher price, really should have no bearing on the original owner's sentiments. Once it is sold, the new owner has the right to do anything legal with the item.

[eastbank]

due to several run ins with leo,s and plain out lieing by them, i bought a small high quaity record and have used it,but i tell the leo,s the meeting is going to be recorded and given to my lawyer, it,s funny how the questions change when told that they will be recorded and given to my lawyer. if they don,t want the meeting to be recorded,the meeting ends right there. it will start up again when my lawyer is in attendence and not before. remember they can tell you any thing they want and it is legal for them to lie and try any thing to get you to talk, but if you lie,you can be arrested for it. just be polite and tell them that you have nothing to say but your name and where you live and ask when you can conntact your lawyer. if they are there asking you questions,you are already on there radar. eastbank.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

A few points:

The mens rea requirement for lying to a federal agent under 18 USC Chapter 47, Sec. 1001 is "knowingly or willfully". This means that the government must prove that you made a material misrepresentation and that you did so knowingly or willfully.

The problem there of course, is that if you tell the government something that is not true, it can create a pretty big question about whether you did it knowingly or willingly. The government might decide to let a jury decide that question, particularly if they want you to do something you don't want to do (become more active in an investigation, buy guns from an FFL while wearing a wire, etc.)

I'm not a big fan of the "Tell the cops nothing" response to any encounter with law enforcement. As others have noted, it rarely helps make your community safer and often ends up shielding the people who make your community less safe. Having said that, you have rights for a reason and you shouldn't be ashamed to use them.

My general guidelines for any encounter with law enforcement are:

1. Be polite
2. Be truthful
3. Use my best judgement on answering questions

Examples:

1. We're investigating a robbery of a local store. Were you in the area last night and did you see a red truck drive by around 2:30am?

"Yes, I was in the area. No, I didn't see anything; but you might ask my neighbors who like to keep later hours than I do."

2. We're investigating a firearm of yours that turned up in Mexico. Can you account for the following firearms that we show you owning?

"Absolutely. Let's set a time where I can meet you with my attorney and I will cooperate to the fullest extent with your investigation."

This "If you did nothing wrong, you have no need of a lawyer" attitude is BS, to put it mildly. Just this year, an acquaintance was contacted by ATF regarding a pistol he had sold several years ago that turned up in Mexico. He cooperated fully without lawyering up. The investigator thanked him and went on his way. A few days later, the investigator says he is emailing him a statement to sign and that it is just a formality, don't worry about it. The "statement" is a notice that he has been advised by ATF to cease and desist from his illegal business in dealing firearms and that he is aware of the penalties of failing to do so. At this point, the acquaintance wisely lawyered up. So far, no negative ramifications for him; but it certainly does highlight how friendly cooperation can turn into "Wait, I didn't say that..." pretty quick.

In this particular scenario, the ATF agent is investigating people who are dealing in firearms without an FFL. He is asking you about a firearm you sold to another person without an FFL. The problem is that you know you did nothing wrong, so you are looking at it from an entirely different angle from the ATF guy, who may not have yet reached the "you did nothing wrong" assumption and may even be predisposed to believe you did do something wrong until you can prove otherwise. Since you don't share the same frame of reference, the same set of facts can look very different to both parties.

Having an outside set of ears that is versed in the law to hear your story and parse it in the way you mean it instead of the way ATF hears it, strikes me as a good idea; but like a lot of good ideas, it may not have reached the point where the benefit of having an attorney exceeds the cost. Like my acquaintance above, the trick is to know when you have reached that point and to be willing to exercise your rights when you do.

[Skans]

The officials made a big deal out of it and the guy would up with probation, if my somewhat foggy memory serves correctly. But even if it is reduced to a misdemeanor and you get probation, who needs it?

Do you have a reference to that case - I'd like to read it.

[troy_mclure]

saw one not too long ago where a guy had a hidden security camera on his yard, it recorded him being insulted by cops. he turned the tape in to the police to file a report on the cop and was arrested.

[Mike Irwin]

In Pennsylvania, if you tape a person to person conversation without the other person knowing, it's a crime.

"It is a felony of the third degree to intentionally intercept, endeavor to intercept, or get any other person to intercept any wire, electronic, or oral communication without the consent of all the parties. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703(1)."

From this site:

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

The laws vary DRAMATICALLY state to state. Know what the laws are in your state before you do something like this without telling the other person in the conversation.

[Microgunner]

Take it from a guy who faced (4) federal firearms charges and whos wife faced (3) and we both stood trial in Federal Court for these (7) charges, the ATF lies. They will smile at you, pat you on the back, act like you're their newest best friend, offer you coffee and doughnuts, all to keep you from calling that lawyer. They will even make crap up on the stand. This I know as fact. My wife and I were eventually exonerated on all charges but not before it changed our lives forever. ATF agents don't squander they're time on useless leads, so if they're talking to you they may be playing you. Shut the hell up!

[Wagonman]

This "If you did nothing wrong, you have no need of a lawyer" attitude is BS, to put it mildly

Exactly, there are no hard and fast rules in life. To lawyer or not to lawyer that is the question. If I am involved in a 150% righteous shooting on or off duty I am going to the hospital and calling my lawyer because it is a potentially heading to a courtroom. If it is a Agent asking about an incident in which I followed all laws to the best of my ability and I don't feel hinky about the line of questioning I would speak guardedly until the hairs went up then I would end the interview and consult counsel. It is situational

[maestro pistolero]

Having read all the advise here, I have to concur that the best advise would be to agree to answer any question as soon as you can schedule with your lawyer.
It's hard to imagine anything bad coming from simply showing them the receipt proving that you sold it to a gun shop, and then decline to answer any questions without a lawyer.

[PhoenixConflagration]

I agree that at a certain volume, you really are 'dealing' in firearms. And I don't find it unreasonable for firearms dealers to be subject to a reasonable amount of regulations. If this guy's skirting the law...well you don't get to just do that do you?

[gotigers]

wow, the ATF trolling forums. I never would have thought. lol. I am not naive, but that just sounds wrong. Don't they have real criminals to go after. I am sure there is a legitimate reason and time to be cruisin forums and i am sure there are worse forums out there. Well, i forgot. We are the right wing extremists they are worried about these days.

I know, "if i have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about". not the point.

What constitutes an "Arms Dealer"?

I trust the individual LEO, but the system can screw you up sometimes. So, like others said. Don't talk to a LEO if you are part of the investigation without a lawyer. They don't have to tell you their exact intent. You may or may not be a peripheral target of the investigation. There is nothing wrong with showing receipts, saying thank you and here is my lawyers card. Not to be obstinate, but just because you could say the wrong thing during what you thought was a casual conversation.

I would contact my lawyer today, just in case.

[Glocksterr]

here what i dont understand. if they already had the dope on this guy, why where you being investigated as part of the investigation. why need to see verification CHL to complete the sale if they already have this guys ID?


infact it sounds as though you are the focus of the investigation @ this particular time.

[SpectreBlofeld]

Because they're making a case against the (actual) suspect. Yeah, they have the guy's ID, but they're digging up sales records from people who sold him guns in order to make a case that he's dealing without a dealer's license. It's just evidence-gathering.