ATF IS CONSISTENTLY ONE OF THE WORST FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, WHICH IS NO SMALL ACCOMPLISHMENT: The ATF’s Prosecution of Larry Vickers Was About Headlines and a High Profile Scalp.

The ATF wants to imprison a decorated American soldier for a series of victimless crimes, even though the federal regulations he’s accused of violating may not be constitutional, and questions about ATF’s potential involvement in the case remain unanswered.

The same federal agency that ran guns across the border into Mexico – which were used by drug cartels to murder Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and scores of Mexican nationals – believes that retired special operations veteran, Larry Vickers, needs to be locked up, even though none of his weapons ended up in cartel hands. . . .

Much has been made of Vickers’ guilty plea, but all it likely means is that he lacked the millions of dollars needed to mount a proper legal defense. Unlike most defendants, federal prosecutors have unlimited resources. Vickers’ case was investigated by the ATF, FBI, IRS Criminal Investigations and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General, after all. Most likely, he simply didn’t want to bankrupt his family.

The U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland publicly thanked two prosecutors specifically for “their work on the Vickers guilty plea.” This was a big win for the government, because by pleading guilty, Vickers saved prosecutors from having to answer some uncomfortable questions.

This is why I think that any charge made that does not result in a conviction should require the government to pay the costs of defense. It should be pro-rata, so if they charge you with 100 things and only convict on two, they should pay 98% of your defense costs. This would discourage overcharging.