08/26/2016 1117 Notice as to Ammon Bundy Revised Notice Of Expert Testimony On Issues Of Firearms, Use of Force, and Brandishing (Mumford, Marcus) (Entered: 08/26/2016)
Título original
08-26-2016 ECF 1117 USA v A BUNDY et al - Notice as to Ammon Bundy Revised Notice of Expert Testimony
08/26/2016 1117 Notice as to Ammon Bundy Revised Notice Of Expert Testimony On Issues Of Firearms, Use of Force, and Brandishing (Mumford, Marcus) (Entered: 08/26/2016)
08/26/2016 1117 Notice as to Ammon Bundy Revised Notice Of Expert Testimony On Issues Of Firearms, Use of Force, and Brandishing (Mumford, Marcus) (Entered: 08/26/2016)
Marcus R. Mumford (admitted pro hac vice) 405 South Main, Suite 975 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 428-2000 morgan@jmphilpot.com mrm@mumfordpc.com Attorneys for Defendant Ammon Bundy IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. AMMON BUNDY, et al., Defendant.
Case No. 3:16-cr-00051-BR-05
REVISED NOTICE OF EXPERT TESTIMONY ON ISSUES OF FIREARMS, FORCE, AND BRANDISHING Judge: Hon. Anna J. Brown
Pursuant to Rule 16(b)(1)(C) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and as
indicated and authorized at the recent hearing held August 24, 2016, where the Court heard voir dire examination of Charles P. Stephenson as a potential defense expert, Defendant Ammon Bundy revises and supplements the prior notice regarding Mr. Stephensons anticipated opinion testimony as follows: I.
QUALIFICATIONS, TRAINING AND EXPERTISE
Mr. Bundy understands that the Court was satisfied that Mr. Stephenson possessed the requisite qualifications for his anticipated testimony.
II.
SUPPLEMENTAL SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED TESTIMONY
Mr. Bundy supplements the prior summary of Mr. Stephensons testimony to include his anticipated testimony explaining, based on the relevant background, training, knowledge, and experience, how carrying a firearm is distinguishable from using that firearm to threaten or intimidate others, and why it would be incorrect to assume that carrying a
Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR
Document 1117
Filed 08/26/16
Page 2 of 2
firearm or possessing a firearm is the same as using it to threaten or intimidate. In this
regard, it is anticipated that Mr. Stephensons testimony would cover the recognized law enforcement standards that would distinguish legal open carry of either a handgun, long rifle, or other sub-classification of weapon (for example, clarifying the confusion surrounding the use and possession of a so-called assault weapon, and distinguishing that from the common image of an automatic weapon) from the type of carry that would be classified as menacing, threatening, or brandishing. This includes what law enforcement and others are often trained to look for to indicate the training and skill of the individual carrying the firearm, and other standards regarding the placement of ones hands on the weapon, how it is being carried in a responsible or irresponsible manner, and other contextual factors that distinguish peaceful or benign actions with a firearm from threatening ones. Mr. Stephenson would also testify in order to educate the jury regarding use of force and certain terms of art or indicators used within the community of gun owners and law enforcement that help distinguish peaceful actions from threatening actions. Finally, Mr. Stephenson will testify regarding background in the field of force science generally force science being the field of study involving law enforcement and others to determine when force is being threatened as applied to the issues presented in this case, such as open carry, alleged threats or intimidation regarding the use of force, and what actions or facts indicate and distinguish brandishing from peaceful actions involving firearms. Respectfully submitted this 26th day of August, 2016. /s/ Marcus R. Mumford Marcus R. Mumford J. Morgan Philpot Attorneys for Ammon Bundy