Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Gibson Guitar Case not moving


fortyearspickn

Recommended Posts

Thanks for picking that out from the rest of the 'news distractions' that have been proliferating the air waves.

This is sad, horrific and predictable from Government lately! Total BS and unnacountability by a Government Beuracracy. [thumbdn]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A sad bit of reporting. Consider this from the article: "Yet after all this time, the Department of Justice has shown no sign that it will file criminal charges against Gibson.  What’s more – it has been almost 3 years since federal agents first raided Gibson (November 2009), seizing a quantity of wood from Madagascar.  No decision on criminal charges in that case either. Meantime, the DOJ has blocked a civil court case in which Gibson was appealing to get its wood back while the criminal investigation proceeds.  Or doesn’t."

 

The reason that case hasn't moved for 3 years is that Gibson has refused to answer interrogatories, including the simple question, "did you get the wood from Madagascar." The documents are public records. The news report's failure to consult a single document is curious. I find this especially curious because I personally walked that reporter, John Roberts, through all the applicable law and documents.

 

For a simple synopsis of the most recent cae, I immodestly recommend my article in the December 2011 issue of the journal of the American Bar Association.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with the former AG - somewhere along this process there was a failure to engage the brain. That failure, depending on your position, was either at the export dock, the import doc, the company, or the Federal Government, or a combination there-of. I am a bit curious as to how and why the Gibson operation was chosen / targeted, and no other musical instrument manufacturer seemed to receive the same treatment. John - nice article, gave me a bit of education. I didn't agree with much of the former administration's actions, but the veto in this case, especially seeing the consequence and the negative impact it had / has on Gibson, would've had my support.

GibsonBozemanDoorsmallsize.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A sad bit of reporting. Consider this from the article: "Yet after all this time, the Department of Justice has shown no sign that it will file criminal charges against Gibson.  What’s more – it has been almost 3 years since federal agents first raided Gibson (November 2009), seizing a quantity of wood from Madagascar.  No decision on criminal charges in that case either. Meantime, the DOJ has blocked a civil court case in which Gibson was appealing to get its wood back while the criminal investigation proceeds.  Or doesn’t."

 

The reason that case hasn't moved for 3 years is that Gibson has refused to answer interrogatories, including the simple question, "did you get the wood from Madagascar." The documents are public records. The news report's failure to consult a single document is curious. I find this especially curious because I personally walked that reporter, John Roberts, through all the applicable law and documents.

 

For a simple synopsis of the most recent cae, I immodestly recommend my article in the December 2011 issue of the journal of the American Bar Association.

 

 

Well I can't say I blame them for not answering questions. The burden is on the govt to make a case, why should Gibson help them along? The only reason any law enforcement ask questions is to build a case against you. Why not keep your mouth shut and give them a hard time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I can't say I blame them for not answering questions. The burden is on the govt to make a case, why should Gibson help them along? The only reason any law enforcement ask questions is to build a case against you. Why not keep your mouth shut and give them a hard time

 

Because that's the way that this law works: once a discovery request is made, unless the opposing party complies or moves the court to deem the request unreasonable, the proceedings stop. Gibson simply has done nothing. So, the case sits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The reason that case hasn't moved for 3 years is that Gibson has refused to answer interrogatories, including the simple question, "did you get the wood from Madagascar." The documents are public records. The news report's failure to consult a single document is curious. I find this especially curious because I personally walked that reporter, John Roberts, through all the applicable law and documents.

 

For a simple synopsis of the most recent cae, I immodestly recommend my article in the December 2011 issue of the journal of the American Bar Association.

 

 

For those who think of our forum friend JT only as an expert on Gibson banner era history--as well as a guitar picker--you should be aware that in "real life" he is a professor at Quinnipiac University School of Law, and holds a Master of Laws degree from Yale (as well as a bunch of other degrees).

 

In other words, he is an expert who understands the applicable law a little better than the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Nick.

 

I sort of fell into expertise with this one. This new York times piece summarizes a fair amount if my work in this area. When Gibson was raided last summer, the Wall St. Journal interviewed me and that led to a couple of dozen interviews.

 

To be honest, I'm pretty burned out on attempting to explain the law' and the cases. Next month, I give a talk on the subject at the Acoustic Guitar Festival in Sarzana, Italy and that will probably be the last time I address the topic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because that's the way that this law works: once a discovery request is made, unless the opposing party complies or moves the court to deem the request unreasonable, the proceedings stop. Gibson simply has done nothing. So, the case sits.

 

 

Ok a discovery request is where the parties request to veiw each others evidence torward one another. So the govt has requested to view Gibsons evidence and they are not complying..Seems this would be the case after a charge is filed and there's going to be a court day. I didn't know you had to participate in a discovery request when there's not even a formal charge. It's still just a investigation.

 

Sorry please don't view this as argumentive or anything. And do correct me if I'm wrong about what discovery is. I'm just trying to break it down where dumb hillbillies like me can understand the situation [thumbup]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legal mumbo jumbo aside - a "Reasonable Man" would conclude that Gibson would want this ended and their inventory back and reputation salvaged and, therefore, would do anything they could to move this along unless it would hurt their case in the face of an unlevel playing field. So, it is, imho, the Feds who are threatening the livlihood of Gibson and their employees by hiding behind some loophole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...