I have seen - personally - the BATF do EXACTLY that, manufacture evidence.
The case involved a built-from-parts AR-15. It had all AR-15 parts, including receiver, with the exception of the bolt carrier. There was no full-auto position. In fact, there was a manufactured bump out on the receiver that would prevent the selector from ever being put over to the rock’n’roll position. The defendant built four of these rifles.
Once in a while, when rapid firing on semi-auto, the thing would kick off two or three rounds and then jam. BATF got hold of one and took it to their lab. They used soft primer ammo, and ‘tuned’ it to get it to rip through a mag. In short, THEY made it into a machine gun and then prosecuted the guy they bought it from. He even had a letter from the BATF ahead of time saying that what he was doing was legal so long as the thing didn’t have the auto sear or modifications to the receiver.
So, don’t tell me that the BATF is above doing this. I spent time in Federal Court testifying and watched the entire trial. The only reason that the defendant won was that he had none other than Col. William C. Davis himself come in a testify for the defense that it was BATF’s abuse of the weapon that made it full-auto.
Yet the article posted says he was convicted. Are people discussing two different cases here?
Looks like the guns were junk and would behave exactly like a machine gun unexpectedly.
"BATF got hold of one and took it to their lab."
Looks like the guy never corrected the problem that resulted from his own work.
"They used soft primer ammo, and ‘tuned’ it to get it to rip through a mag."
Tuned it my ass. They used commercially available ammo and it behaved identically to a machne gun.
"In short, THEY made it into a machine gun"
BS.
"He even had a letter from the BATF ahead of time saying that what he was doing was legal so long as the thing didn’t have the auto sear or modifications to the receiver."
The ATF can't control for sloppy workmanship.
"I spent time in Federal Court testifying and watched the entire trial."
Wonderful.
"The only reason that the defendant won was that he had none other than Col. William C. Davis himself come in a testify for the defense that it was BATF’s abuse of the weapon that made it full-auto."
Davis of course provided no evidence that ATF did any modificaitons to the guns that were inherently of such poor quality that they would behave identically to a full auto weapon on a random, or consistent basis. I'm sure if Davis purchased one of those gems, expecting semi and got auto at some unexpected point, he'd have been less than amused at the poor quality. I'm sure the jury was simply sympathetic to the defense's storytelling.
In no way does any of what you said amount to ATF fabricating evidence.