No, I don't. I've written on this at length and may be the only FReeper who has read all of the legal documents since the first raid. What caught attention here was the second raid.
Gibson got in trouble the first time by buying Madagascar ebony from Roger Thunam, a convicted lumber trafficker, through Theodor Nagel Gmbh. Gibson employee Gene Nix toured Madagascar and visited Thunam's lumberyard. He reported by email to Gibson executives that Thunam's wood was all under government seizure, and there was no legal source of Madagascar rosewood. Gibson bought seized Madagascar rosewood from Thunam, who shipped the wood without the appropriate Malagasy government authorizations and using Harmonized Tariff codes for assembled roof joists. The government was notified of Thuman's shipment by a source within Madagascar.
Gibson never technically got in trouble the second time; Luthier's Mercantile did. Luthier's Mercantile imported East Indian Rosewood and East Indian Ebony using one Harmonized Tariff code for export. Once exported, LM changed the coding to a second Harmonized Tariff code. When the wood arrived in Dallas, the Harmonized Tariff code had been changed to a third code, the ultimate consignee was shown on the import papers as Theodor Nagel, GmbH, there was no Lacy Act paperwork, and the import paperwork said to ship the wood to a warehouse in Nashville, with a contact phone number that belonged to Gibson.
When the shipping containers were opened in Dallas, the product identified on the shipping containers and paperwork was not the product in the shipping containers.
At this point, government agents tracked the shipment to a private warehouse in Nashville, where they were told the wood belonged to Gibson as ultimate consignee, despite what the import paperwork said. At this point, Gibson had never paid a dime for the wood and it legally belonged to Luthier's Mercantile. The wood was seized.
Both Luthier's Mercantile and Gibson brought actions to block the forfeiture of wood shipped in violation of the Lacey Act (which is too broad), in violation of import laws regarding correct identification of the ultimate consignee and the imported product. The product was contraband under U.S. import laws.
The values of the seized wood declared in Gibson's legal filings did not match the values claimed in Gibson's press releases and interviews.
I appreciate the detailed information you have provided, and will look at further details. I would appreciate any sources you can share.
But did they really need to hold the employees at gunpoint during this raid?
Ping