Posted on 12/27/2005 2:14:32 PM PST by CedarDave
Thieves who stole 400 pounds of explosives from a location west of Albuquerque also apparently took a Wells Cargo trailer used to store them and a truck to haul them, according to a papers unsealed in federal court this morning.
The advertised $50,000 reward led a confidential informant to a lawyer's office in Durango on Friday with information about the stolen items and the men who took them, an affidavit reveals.
But the documents failed to shed any light on how the thieves knew about the explosives or what they planned to do with them.
Information from a confidential source led to the arrests. The source, called CS-1, gave information to authorities via speaker phone after his attorney, Amos Soignier of Durango, contacted an emergency tip line, according to a criminal complaint.
ATF Agent Gary Ainsworth took a call from an attorney on Friday regarding the stolen explosives. The attorney told agents his client wanted anonymity out of fear for his safety, but said he had been at the home of Les Brown in Ignacio, Colo., on Thursday. The informant said he'd known Brown for about 3 months, and had seen Les, a former mechanic, doing work on his brother David's truck.
"(Les) Brown wanted work done on his brother David's vehicle because David was currently driving a stolen truck that was stolen at the same time and place as the explosives," the affidavit says.
Ainsworth determined from the informant's description that certain rare linear-shaped charges that hadn't been described to the press were among explosives he had seen.
The informant said Les Brown told him that he, his brother and two other persons had gone to New Mexico and had taken the explosives "from a fenced area out in the middle of nowhere."
(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...
Once these facts were released by the court, there was little to be lost by the news editors publishing it. If it's been unsealed by the court, then the defendants and their attorneys will have it, and that where the danger of retaliation arises.
Per my post #21, the newspaper wasn't the problem here, at least as far as the safety of the informant is concerned. The newspaper coverage does, however, compound the problem by sending a warning to many potential anonymous informants that they should keep their mouths shut because the authorities won't do squat to protect their identities from the informees.
Ping (new and more info.)
Yikes, remind me never to be a "confidential" witness!
No pics of the perps yet???
None that I've seen. Maybe after the formal arraignment.
The way this case is being handled, I'm surprised we haven't seen a picture of the informant yet!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.