Skip to comments.REESE TRIAL – Testimony of S/A Valles wraps up
Posted on 07/31/2012 7:07:46 AM PDT by marktwain
ATF S/A Valles was questioned again by the prosecutor. He was shows a booklet of the Federal Firearms Reference Guide for FFLs, and called it the Bible for FFLs, since it includes al the laws and regulations on firearms. A series of questions followed which were objected to and sustained. It was a bit confusing, but it seemed the line of questions that could be answered resulted in learning from Valles that the FFRG lists specific requirements for FFLs to follow, the compliance time, and ramnifications of non-compliance, including filling out and voiding a 4473.
Under cross, Defense Attorney Hall stated that Valles had testified that there were no guns were found at Romans place when he was arrested. S/A Valles stated he participated in the search warrant and when asked if he knew Roman had two guns, he replied he had two guns, one fully automatic (a machine gun).
The prosecution objected, but the Judge stated there was testimony about this, and allowed the questioning to continue.
S/A Valles testified he was aware there were two guns, and wasnt sure if one was fully automatic.
When asked if he knew that Penny Torres was asked to hold firearms for Roman at her house, he stated yes.
Attorney Gorence questioned S/A Valles further, started out with confirming that ATF doesnt give advance notice of compliance inspection, however, asked if Valles knew the normal practice, to which he replied he did. He agreed that compliance officers IOI take all 4473 and A&D into custody.
When asked if there was any reason ATF never called (the compliance officers) to determine if they (not heard), the agent replied that at that point they already had leads to investigate New Deal and wanted to corroborate the information received. At this point ATF Agent Valles started to stutter and finished up stating to corroborate if true.
He agreed investigators are taught to be neutral, non-participatory, and to include all evidence (exculpatory or incriminating), and to gather was evidence they could.
Attorney Gore pressed on, stating the date they were charged was August 30, 2011. You have had 11 months since that. In that 11 months, why didnt you call these two inspectors. S/A Valles answer either no reason or I dont know (heard differently in the peanut gallery
Don’t you think one or two posts would be enough - you have 50% of the site on this one topic.
Reporting on this trial has been quite sparse. I found this site that had excellent citizen reporting, and posted there stories to bring the reporting up to date.
I routinely post about 40% of the stories on the banglist. I gladly accept help from anyone who will do so.
Now that I have more guidance from the admin moderator, I will work to consolidate stories if a similar situation occurs in the future. I like to be careful about titles and dates because it is important to Free Republic.
Do you recognize the connection to the Fast and Furious investigation, the Reese trial and protection of your 2nd Amendment rights?
Do you value having unbiased reporting or would you prefer that Reuters or the AP to give you their censored version of what they believe you need to know?
banglist is reserved for 2nd Amendment articles. mt located lunatpp.org on his own time. He’s not a paid shill from LA, NY or Chicago. If his selection of articles is too hard core for you, I suggest that you wander over to.trueblueliberty.com where they enjoy criticizing the selection that FR offers.
BTW since we both have been members since 2000 - what right have you to tell me that a comment requires me -a long time member and one that provides money to the cause - should leave - who made you the judge of others???
I view the Reese threads as chapters in a story. The individual Reese threads each apply to different witness in a very serious trial. One that will determine just how much authority the ATF has over individual FFL's.
Do you see the "More ... down in the left corner of the banglist. Click on it and probably for the first time in your life you'll see that the thread doesn't get erased. It simply changes locations and format. So stop sweating that "just that this one topic had 50% of all the morning posts".
If you are a Moderator then you have a say about what gets posted and what doesn't. Right now you are wearing the clothes of an anti 2nd Amendment FReeper. If that's what you want to wear, then I will continue to be a very critical judge of your posts.
Sir you are a man with no sense of right or wrong. I served my country with honor and distiction for you to suggest that you know who I am or why I can make a comment is below the standards of gentleman. You don’t know if I am in the NRA or served in battle - you sir are a joke to this site. A pompus joke.
I do have a strong sense of right and wrong which is why I still believe it was wrong for a man who is a war hero to complain about someone posting threads that pertain to our 2nd Amendment.
We can talk about our life in the military and our combat experiences at another time. Let’s stay on the subject.
What mt did by posting the numerous threads was to follow the rules that have been established for FR. mt posted each each thread with its own URL. You are not permitted to combine articles and only use one URL. The Mods get upset when you do that.