Home › News › Local News
Ojai felony weapons possession case goes to jurors
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from Local NewsLarry Gardner, a convicted felon, can't legally possess firearms, but the Ojai resident had a cache of weapons in a storage locker and inside a safe at his home, according to prosecutor Marc Leventhal.
During closing arguments Monday in Gardner's trial, Leventhal laid out the prosecution's case against the defendant, which included a "Grizzly Big Boar" .50-caliber rifle that was purchased for $3,000 in 2002.
"This has been an ongoing pattern of misconduct dating back to 2001," Leventhal told jurors in Ventura County Superior Court.
The jury received the case late Monday afternoon.
Gardner, a 67-year-old man with a small frame, eyeglasses and a flat-top haircut, sat quietly as the lawyers gave closing arguments.
He is charged with illegal possession of weapons and ammunition, and if convicted, he is facing more than eight years in prison, said Leventhal.
Gardner served a prison term in the late 1960s for burglary and property crimes, and another in the 1990s for illegal possession of an assault rifle, according to Leventhal.
In court, Leventhal went through the evidence seized by police while executing two search warrants June 24, 2004, and Aug. 30, 2005. He said the evidence included exploding bullets, flechette darts, sword canes, throwing metal stars, three rifles, three shotguns and four handguns, including a Smith & Wesson .50-caliber revolver.
He said 144 pounds of packaged ammunition was found in a tub, plus 350 rounds for the revolver. A copy of the "Anarchist Handbook" was found by detectives, Leventhal said.
"He's a weapons enthusiast — to say the least," Leventhal told jurors.
Gardner's lawyer, Rod Kodman, argued that the weapons and safe belonged to Gardner's stepdaughter, Sara McColloch, who, Kodman said, had the safe's combination card.
Kodman showed jurors a large photograph of McColloch holding a shotgun.
Kodman said there were no fingerprints taken from the weapons, ammunition, gun locks, trigger locks, storage unit or the safe's handle and tumbler.
Also, Kodman told jurors that detectives took six swabs off two weapons for potential DNA evidence, but the Ventura County Sheriff's Department Forensic Laboratory either didn't do a DNA analysis on any of the swabs or lost the results.
"Where is it? Where is the analysis?" Kodman asked.
Leventhal showed jurors the storage-locker lease agreement.
"The signature at the bottom is Larry's," Leventhal told jurors, adding that Gardner had the safe combination in a private ledger.
Kodman retorted that Gardner had written some of the numbers of the combination.
Gardner is facing other unrelated felony charges, including grand theft, arson, extortion and solicitation for murder.
Kodman declined to comment on those charges until after the jury reaches a verdict in this case.
Posted by surfmedic91 on May 13, 2008 at 6:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
mmmmmmshoot, there's no such thing as a .50 cal shotgun. Re-read the article. You must not be familiar with guns or ammo. 144 lbs of ammo for a gun enthusiast is not that much is you own a lot of weapons. There was a time when guns didn't have to be registered when you could walk into your local K-Mart and buy one without a background investigation.
We can only assume why your on here all hours of the day/night.
Posted by goldeneye on May 13, 2008 at 6:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Gardner sounds positively certifiable. It's a dumb law to make the .50 cal illegal but Gardner as a convicted felon shouldn't own anything more powerful than a Daisy BB gun. I think a lot of these "anarchist" anti-government types get a rush out of thinking that some guy in a black trench coat would take the time to spy on their meaningless existence. If convicted, he can go to prison and worry about real schemes to do harm to him. Oh what fun that will be!
Posted by shaver_one on May 13, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Even a Daisy BB Air Rifle woud be illegal.
But...
If the guns belong to his daughter, they have no case. So what, if he has the gun locker's combination written down. I have my wife's e-mail account password written down. But, it is her e-mail account. And, I don't acces it.
If the guns are his...well, that's another story.
They haven't proved who actually owns the guns.
Posted by shaver_one on May 13, 2008 at 8:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And, last I heard, California does NOT require that all guns be registered. Neither do the Feds.
Posted by CollectiveMediocrity on May 13, 2008 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
First, as a convicted felon he shouldn't have owned/possessed firearms/ammo to begin with.
Sounds like the "I don't own any guns but my wife [or stepdaughter] has a fine collection" dodge.
They should be able to find out who purchased the guns (the handguns for sure) as you have to fill out forms and a background check. Since it wasn't mentioned and he's charged with illegal possession, someone else likely bought them. If they bought guns for someone who cannot legally acquire them, it would be a straw purchase (illegal for buyer).
Although I hate to say it, if the storage-locker agreement is the only hard evidence they have on him and it does not specify knowledge of the weapons or ammo, he should be acquitted on the possession charge. It sounds like he's facing other felony charges anyway.... No fingerprints, no DNA (the missing tests sound fishy if that is what happened), no purchases...knowing the combination is coincidental at best if someone else paid for the storage locker. I don't think that is possession beyond a reasonable doubt.
A couple of points: the photo with the shotgun is meaningless unless it was taken after his felony conviction (i.e. when he could no longer legally possess a firearm).
Anarchist Cookbook...thoughtcrime is not illegal (last I checked). Mere possession of a book should not be held to reflect on a person's motives unless there is other evidence that he was trying to build bombs or commit other illegal acts based off information from the book. Sure you want to look at all of the evidence, but what type of evidence is a bomb-building book in a trial on firearm/bladed weapons possession charges?
I think possession of the throwing stars, exploding bullets, sword canes, firearms, and possibly ammo are all felonies (especially for a convicted felon). Trivia: possession of sword canes or throwing stars is actual a felony for anyone in CA, not just convicted felons.
.50 caliber rifles and revolvers are probably a point of interest to the Star's general audience because of all the political hype over weapons of these calibers, but the type of gun doesn't really matter at all...convicted felons cannot possess any firearms.
144lbs of ammo is not a lot for a gun enthusiast. Unsurprisingly, as cartridges are made of metal cases, metal primer caps, and metal bullets. Metal weighs a lot. Since metal/energy prices have been skyrocketing, many gun people have been buying in bulk for economic reasons. The issue is whether he possessed stuff, not whether he was an enthusiast.
Bottom line: The possession charge probably shouldn't stick based on info in the article if reasonable doubt is really meaningful. Straw purchases are illegal, but that doesn't really prove possession. It's not as if he's going to be a danger to society unless convicted here since the weapons were seized and he's facing numerous other charges.
Posted by CollectiveMediocrity on May 13, 2008 at 11:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
mmshoot -
While I agree that in today's society, it may not be in your best interests to "stockpile" weapons and ammunition, let's not lose sight of the fact that most of the time with legitimate gun enthusiasts, no laws are broken, no one is harmed, and no one is unduly endangered. Incidents like Ruby Ridge and Waco were caused by disproportionate government responses, paramilitary style, and a general distrust and suspicion of people with lots of weapons. The whole "no honest/normal/law-abiding person needs that many _____" or "People with lots of guns must be anarchists, criminals, or nutjobs" mindset is what is wrong and what needs to change. As the quote goes, "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."
Secured in a gun safe, guns are less accessible than other dangerous implements like kitchen knives. Properly stored ammunition is minimally dangerous if it say padlocked (deterring unauthorized access). Stored according to recommendations, ammunition is not any more dangerous than equivalent quantities of household chemicals (it will burn). It will not explode and send stuff flying with any appreciable force unless improperly stored and it will not send bullets flying like out of a gun period. (In a gun the barrel magnifies the force by channeling the bullet and explosion down a narrow path. A burning cartridge would just 'pop' and diffuse harmlessly in all directions likes a small firecracker.)
This problem is not confined to those with large weapon collections either. Aggressive police tactics like heavy-use of SWAT teams, "no-knock" raids where the police enter without first trying to identify themselves, and basing such endeavors on often unreliable information obtained from informants or anonymous sources is growing problem. These sort of situations are what have the potential to turn a mindset problem into a deadly situation. Many gun owners keep a firearm for protection. No-knock police raids, particularly when done at night, create the potential for a rudely-awakened and disoriented gun owner to point a gun at or shoot unidentified intruders in what appears to be self-defense. A year or so ago an elderly lady was shot and killed in Atlanta in a botched no-knock raid.
Some people with large weapons collections aren't well-adjusted (some, not all and probably not most). Take the Branch Davidians - when an apocalyptic cult sees heavily-armed government agents storming their complex, what do you really expect to happen? It was never established who fired first, but the point is that these mindsets and tactics place both "sides" in a dangerous situation.
The weapon collection in the first article isn't even very large by "gun enthusiast" standards. 6 longarms and 4 handguns plus ammo. I'd be very suprised if the total value exceeded $10-12,000. Think of people who collects cars, and then imagine a serious collector spending the same amount of money on guns....
Posted by keem_s on May 13, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As pointed out by others, convicted felony are not able to own/possess any firearm or any ammunition. It doesn't matter what kind or how many, it is illegal. Question is who’s firearms are they? The Star adds to the usual media hysteria about .50 caliber rifles and .50 caliber handguns by specifically mentioning them and not what types any of the other ones were. Everybody knows they are capable of shooting down satellites in orbit (ok I made that one up). Wow they found 144 lbs of ammo, big deal. People buy cases of ammo all the time because buying in bulk is cheaper (ever here of Costco?) It’s no different with ammo. Only the media would try to imply some sort of doomsday scenario just because someone has more than a 20 rd box of ammo. Sad thing is people like mmshoot and goldeneye believe every word of it.
Posted by Camdad101 on May 13, 2008 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
144 lbs of ammo is nothing. I'm a competitive shooter and that sounds like about two shooting events worth adding in practice between. Also the price of ammo has jumped like gasoline so many of us stocked up to beat the price increases.
The amount of ammo and the type of weapons is irrelevant. What matters here were these straw purchases by his daughter. If so, she needs to go on trial as well. I love VCSD, but not printing these weapons was a mistake.
Posted by anom1985 on May 13, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
haha what a joker. man at that age needs to fold em up
also gun enthusiasts and competitive shooting... could there be any more of a worthless hobby? its like stamp collectors or professional dart players
now hunting small to medium game, that's fun!
Posted by rebel123 on May 13, 2008 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Doesn't matter what/how much he had. He relinquished his right to own guns when he became a convicted felon. End of story.
Posted by mare523 on May 13, 2008 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dear surfmedic91,
Thanks for what you said about mmshoot. It's about time!
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.