PDA

View Full Version : Website Tip results in seizure of $1MM of JD



pepcycle
11-03-2007, 10:23
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,307608,00.html

How scare is this?

Let me see now. B-F says these are collector's who purchased the whiskey legally and then sell it and share it amongst themselves.

Sounds familiar.

Is the Gazebo to be raided next???

luv2hunt
11-03-2007, 13:55
But it says "illegal" untaxed whiskey, which leads me to believe that this is not whiskey purchased by someone and then kept as a collectors item....future investment. Come on....if you have a warehouse full of stuff, you've been stealing from somewhere! A distillary employee? A distributor? A liquor store owner? Somebody's in big trouble!! And can you believe they're going to DUMP it all? The least they could do is donate it to the Getz for auction!!

What gives them the right to destroy it anyway? I mean....it's not like they found cocaine....or something totally illegal to own?

Dawn

barturtle
11-03-2007, 13:58
The ABC would make more money auctioning it all off...that would be one way to help recoup the costs of running the office.

craigthom
11-03-2007, 14:37
It's unclear why it is illegal, other than being untaxed. How many of us have bottles from other countries for which US taxes weren't paid?

HighTower
11-03-2007, 16:16
This raid netted bottles that were there to be signed for collector's from all over the world. Randy Piper owns Cowboy Jacks, and this raid cost him about $2 million.

I know guys that were over there for the BBQ, and people over here that had bottles amongst that stash, that were there for a signing. These guys buy Barrels of Jack at a time, and they pick certain dates for them to be bottled, like 07-07-07 and get people like Jimmy Bedford and Frank Bobo to sign them.


They even took the personal collection from Sulley's Store, which I think is just :shithappens:

Is this going to be the future for collectors? They can't get together on a website and then go and meet up in the likes of Bardstown and swap bottles with their friends?

I feel for these guys, I really do. Lots of people have lost lots of money, here.
The collector's forum in question is a site not unlike this one, with some of the biggest JD collectors in the world on there.

Scott

TNbourbon
11-03-2007, 20:23
A couple of points regarding Tennessee (and, understand, I'm not an advocate here, just an interested resident -- these are 'like-it-or-not' facts):

it is a felony to import or export alcohol across the Tennessee state line unless one is a state-licensed distributor. Period. True, it's a law rarely enforced, but a law nonetheless;
Moore County is 'dry'. Period. If any money was changing hands for liquor in Moore County -- whether privately among collectors, or at 'retail', open-market or black-market (outside of exempted, on-site Jack Daniel's Distillery collectible bottles) -- it was an illegal transaction.


These facts/laws are long-standing, and a secret to no one. I certainly don't support what appears to be state heavy-handedness in raiding what seems clearly to be collectibles, not an active retail market. It's a cold slap to all of us who 'collect' whiskey, especially here in Tennessee, and I hope the whiskey is returned to legitimate owners. Still, when one skirts around plain law, it should be with an understanding of the possible consequences.

ILLfarmboy
11-03-2007, 20:42
A couple of points regarding Tennessee (and, understand, I'm not an advocate here, just an interested resident -- these are 'like-it-or-not' facts):

it is a felony to import or export alcohol across the Tennessee state line unless one is a state-licensed distributor. Period. True, it's a law rarely enforced, but a law nonetheless;
Moore County is 'dry'. Period. If any money was changing hands for liquor in Moore County -- whether privately among collectors, or at 'retail', open-market or black-market (outside of exempted, on-site Jack Daniel's Distillery collectible bottles) -- it was an illegal transaction.
These facts/laws are long-standing, and a secret to no one. I certainly don't support what appears to be state heavy-handedness in raiding what seems clearly to be collectibles, not an active retail market. It's a cold slap to all of us who 'collect' whiskey, especially here in Tennessee, and I hope the whiskey is returned to legitimate owners. Still, when one skirts around plain law, it should be with an understanding of the possible consequences.

All very true. I have often thought if laws like this were rigorously enforced it might ultimately lead to their repeal. Overall lax enforcement combined with prejudicial "targeted" enforcement leads to law enforcement abuse and public apathy and ultimately keeps bad laws on the books.

luv2hunt
11-03-2007, 21:34
Somebody explain to me how they were "untaxed"? I don't understand. A collector would have legally bought it from somewhere in the first place. I don't believe I have to collect or pay tax on a personal collectible when I sell it in the future?? Am I wrong? I'm not selling retail?? I'm selling a personal item??

barturtle
11-03-2007, 21:39
Well, I'm not sure. But if they were export and duty wasn't paid when brought back into the states...

gothbat
11-03-2007, 22:07
Details seem to be hard to come by but what I'm getting is that they just screwed a bunch of collectors on some frivolous, but certainly real:


it is a felony to import or export alcohol across the Tennessee state line unless one is a state-licensed distributor. Period.

technicality? That sucks and, as I usually comment about things like this, that's the government for ya!

TNbourbon
11-03-2007, 22:09
Somebody explain to me how they were "untaxed"? I don't understand. A collector would have legally bought it from somewhere in the first place. I don't believe I have to collect or pay tax on a personal collectible when I sell it in the future?? Am I wrong? I'm not selling retail?? I'm selling a personal item??

Dawn, Tennessee doesn't have a state income tax. Its property taxes are relatively low. What Tennessee DOES have is a very high, regressive sales tax, on everything from food to diapers and, of course, liquor. From a legal standpoint, if you visit me in Tennessee and I pass on to you a bottle of Stagg I just bought around the corner at Oasis Wine & Spirits, it doesn't matter that I've already paid sales tax on it -- I'm still expected to collect and pay to the state a tax on my sale to you. The sale took place in Tennessee. (Sure, no one cares about yard-sale items, etc., but something as highly-regulated as liquor gets cut no slack. Liquor, too, after all, is highly taxed in Tennessee.)
Additionally, Tennessee is one of many states with a 'use' tax, which essentially is a sales tax on out-of-state purchases. If I drive to Kentucky and buy VROHH 10yo BIB, I'm supposed to pay the difference between Tennessee's sales tax (9.25% in my county) and what I paid in Kentucky (0%). The fact that this use tax is collected only on the honor system doesn't make it any less a legal requirement.
So, if a collector sends/brings his JD bottle to Metropolitan Moore County/Lynchburg to be signed by Jimmy Bedford, then sells it to a fellow collector, it's the triple-whammy -- not only did he/she import it illegally, it can't be sold in 'dry' Moore County, and sales tax is due on the transaction!

ILLfarmboy
11-03-2007, 22:26
... if you visit me in Tennessee and I pass on to you a bottle of Stagg I just bought around the corner at Oasis Wine & Spirits, it doesn't matter that I've already paid sales tax on it -- I'm still expected to collect and pay to the state a tax on my sale to you. The sale took place in Tennessee. (Sure, no one cares about yard-sale items, etc., but something as highly-regulated as liquor gets cut no slack. Liquor, too, after all, is highly taxed in Tennessee.)........

.....................So, if a collector sends/brings his JD bottle to Metropolitan Moore County/Lynchburg to be signed by Jimmy Bedford, then sells it to a fellow collector, it's the triple-whammy -- not only did he/she import it illegally, it can't be sold in 'dry' Moore County, and sales tax is due on the transaction!

So all private sales of all things technically require the seller to collect a tax? That sucks! I thought ILL. was bad requiring you to pay a sales tax on used automobiles!

The part about a tax due on "an illegal transaction" sounds a lot like the federal marijuana tax/stamp. :bigeyes:

gblick
11-03-2007, 23:18
it is a felony to import or export alcohol across the Tennessee state line unless one is a state-licensed distributor. Period.So if I decide to move to Tennessee, I can't bring my bunker with me?

TNbourbon
11-04-2007, 05:40
So if I decide to move to Tennessee, I can't bring my bunker with me?

From a strictly legal standpoint, only if you pay the local distributor for each item what would be/have been his cut had it gone through the 3-tier system here. That ensures that the appropriate state 'sin' tax has been paid, because the distributor will make sure you pay it -- he's not going to. Obviously, they only enforce such inanities when the economics make it worthwhile. Apparently, two storage buildings of collectible whiskey is deemed 'worthwhile'.
As I've noted in this and various other threads here over the years, these are laws that are rarely enforced -- but laws nonetheless. And when they're enforced, it's ALWAYS about collecting taxes, because Tennessee -- much like the pre-Prohibition U.S. -- relies on excise (sales) taxes for its revenue.
Tennessee this year raised its tax, for example, on a pack of cigarettes 60 cents, a near-tripling of the previous tax. We are a long, skinny state bordered by 8 other states -- including a long border with Kentucky, which has a much lower tobacco tax. Tennessee revenue agents currently are sitting in Kentucky-border convenience store parking lots and signaling the state highway patrol when folks in cars with Tennessee plates head south with more than the legal limit of cigarette cartons (2) for personal use:
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007711030351. Note the next-to-last paragraph:
"...'People forget the Department of Revenue is a significantly sized department — there's 1,200 employees, almost a $100 million budget," he said. "It's nothing for us to pull 10 agents and focus on something. We do it all the time.'
Farr also said he expects lower-than-projected cigarette tax collections to rebound soon..."
So, things like the Jack Daniel's seizure is pretty much business as usual here.

craigthom
11-04-2007, 09:14
Liquor laws are weird ones. I'm driving to Georgia for Thanksgiving, and I'm carrying a bunch of bourbon for a fun little get-together with my brothers. I will be on my best behavior driving through Tennessee and Georgia.

Phischy
11-04-2007, 09:37
What's the make, model and license plates on your car?

I'm .... uh... just curious.

cowdery
11-04-2007, 12:28
Tim explained the situation very well. Some of the other confusing elements probably can be attributed to bad reporting.

In short, a sales tax, depending on how it's written, is a tax on all sales except those specifically exempted. Unlicensed means untaxed. Small private transactions are simply impossible to police, but when multi-million dollar enterprises are involved the taxman takes a big interest.

In Kentucky, the ABC has on a couple of occasions issued general warnings to people trying to re-sell their Maker's Mark commemorative bottles, just to let them know that the unlicensed sale of alcohol is illegal. The "sticky" notes on the subject here all contain that same caveat.

What I wonder about is Brown-Forman and whether or not anyone officially associated with the distillery will be implicated. Brown-Forman doesn't own everything in Lynchburg, just almost everything. The fact that it was happening doesn't surprise me but the fact that it was happening in Lynchburg does, to some extent.

I find it doubtful that anyone involved in these enterprises was unaware that what they were doing is illegal.

TNbourbon
11-06-2007, 17:34
Here are the relevant Tennessee statutes:
http://www.wineinstitute.org/programs/shipwine/reference/tennessee_felony_statutes.htm

luv2hunt
11-06-2007, 17:50
So, any further local news on this?

TNbourbon
11-06-2007, 18:37
So, any further local news on this?

Not a peep after the original story here Friday.

cowdery
11-06-2007, 20:48
Thanks for the link to the statutes, Tim. There are some things there I don't quite understand, but here is a pretty clear statement that would seem to apply to this case: "It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association to possess untaxed alcoholic beverages as defined in § 57-3-101 in this state in quantities in excess of three gallons (3 gals.) in either wet or dry counties. A violation of this subsection is a Class E felony."

I checked § 57-3-101 and while it defines "alcoholic beverages" it does not define "untaxed" or "taxed." Therefore, we have to assume that possession of more than 15 750ml bottles of Jack (i.e., more than three gallons) on which any state tax has not been paid is a Class E felony. Bottles purchased from a person who did not charge and pay any required state taxes, such as but not limited to the sales tax, including bottles purchased outside of Tennessee, would therefore be considered "untaxed."

Bottles known not to be sold in the United States would have to have arrived in those storage spaces without any Tennessee tax ever being paid on them except, of course, by the producer, unless the possessor was a licensed entity licensed to purchase them from the producer. Therefore, their presence is prima facie evidence of a violation, which permits their seizure.

Now they just have to determine who "possessed" them. Notice that no arrests were announced, just the seizure. The Fox story said "authorities ... received permission to search (the) two storage buildings." Who gave them permission? Probably some guy who is rolling over on his partners in exchange for a deal even as we speak. Waterboarding, anyone?

The ABC agent on the scene said just enough to establish that that the items found had to be contraband. I note that the state police were not present, so it's being treated as an ABC matter.

Where this could conceivably affect someone reading this who resides in Tennessee is that if you possess a lot of alcoholic beverages -- say, whiskey -- say, more than three gallons worth -- and you can't prove you paid all the required taxes on it by, for example, producing sales receipts from licensed Tennessee alcohol retailers, then all of your whiskey could be seized and you could be charged with a Class E Felony under TCA 57-3-401(a), at the very least. If more than 15 750ml bottles are items that were never sold legally in Tennessee, that will serve as prima facie evidence of the violation.

In other words, unless they make all of their transactions through licensed Tennessee retail channels, whiskey collectors are felons in Tennessee.

We've now established that a million dollar collection is worth busting. Is a $500,000 collection worth busting? How about $100,000?

Something to think about.

craigthom
11-07-2007, 02:56
If more than 15 750ml bottles are items that were never sold legally in Tennessee, that will serve as prima facie evidence of the violation.

In other words, unless they make all of their transactions through licensed Tennessee retail channels, whiskey collectors are felons in Tennessee.



Unless one pays the tax oneself, although I don't know if just paying the use (sales) tax would be enough for them. They may also require a liquor tax.

HighTower
11-07-2007, 14:16
So, any further local news on this?
Here's (http://www.wkrn.com/nashville/news/undercover-officials-make-liquor-bust-in-lynchburg/125891.htm#top) the first news story just after the raid, even has a video.

Scott

luv2hunt
11-07-2007, 14:25
UH....I'd say they made a business out of it! There wasn't any small fry enthusiast stuff going on there!! HA! I hope they get all the opportunistic e-bay businesses too!

Dawn

cowdery
11-07-2007, 14:43
It just gets interestinger and interestinger.

I observe that they've grabbed a lot of whiskey, but no people, i.e., there have been no arrests.

Are we supposed to know who Randy Piper is?

HighTower
11-07-2007, 15:17
Randy was a wrestler, I believe.

Scott

gblick
11-08-2007, 06:37
Randy was a wrestler, I believe.No, that was Roddy.

doubleblank
11-08-2007, 09:28
Rowdy Roddy Piper....wore a kilt in the ring. Now a part-time actor. Starred in a decent low budget scifi......."They Live", or something like that.

Randy

HighTower
11-08-2007, 13:55
Rowdy Roddy Piper....wore a kilt in the ring. Now a part-time actor. Starred in a decent low budget scifi......."They Live", or something like that.

Randy
Ahhh, yes, I stand corrected. Rowdy Roddy Piper, those were the good 'ol days of wrestling - Brett Hart, the Undertaker, The Birdman, the bushwhackers:lol:
Oh, the memories!

Scott

NickAtMartinis
11-08-2007, 14:11
Rowdy Roddy Piper....wore a kilt in the ring. Now a part-time actor. Starred in a decent low budget scifi......."They Live", or something like that.

Randy


Was that the movie where if you put on these special sunglasses you could distinguish the aliens from the humans?

If so, solid 90's scifi movie.

gothbat
11-08-2007, 14:22
Was that the movie where if you put on these special sunglasses you could distinguish the aliens from the humans?

If so, solid 90's scifi movie.

Yep, that's the one; it's actually from 1988 though. Good flick nonetheless.

NickAtMartinis
11-08-2007, 15:44
Yep, that's the one; it's actually from 1988 though. Good flick nonetheless.


Dang, why did I think 90's?!:grin: I did like the movie. I remember the ending not be too good but everything leading up to it was.

Hedmans Brorsa
11-09-2007, 01:33
Are we supposed to know who Randy Piper is?

Surely it canīt be the guitarist (?) with godawful heavy metallers WASP? :grin:

Pharaoh
11-09-2007, 13:37
Something that might prove quite interesting is:

"There are bottles here that are not even sold in this county,"... which I'm guessing the real quote was country as opposed to county... but if any of those collectible foreign bottles have authentic distillery personnel signatures - Brown Forman / JD might have some splainin' to do if their official position is we know absolutely nothing about it.

Makes sense to destroy it as quickly and quietly as possible.

TNbourbon
11-09-2007, 14:29
... but if any of those collectible foreign bottles have authentic distillery personnel signatures - Brown Forman / JD might have some splainin' to do if their official position is we know absolutely nothing about it...

And wouldn't it be even more interesting if some of them were signed and/or didn't have an approved seal/closure?:bigeyes:

cowdery
11-12-2007, 11:51
(Imaginary deposition)

Mr. Bedford: "It was my understanding that these bottles were legally obtained by the collectors and personally carried by them to Lynchburg to be signed."

Stu
11-12-2007, 14:20
The trials and tribulations of living in a dry county. I know them well. Maybe someday we'll move into the 20th century (now that the rest of the world is in the 21st). We have a petition drive on to get the issue on the 2008 ballot. It hasn't been voted on since the county went dry in the 1940s.

Stu

Pharaoh
11-13-2007, 08:07
(Imaginary deposition)

Mr. Bedford: "It was my understanding that these bottles were legally obtained by the collectors and personally carried by them to Lynchburg to be signed."Not that hard to imagine at all, lol.

I'm oblivious to the law so bear with me and forgive my ignorance... Is it not legal to bring liquor into a dry town so long as the liquor has not been purchased with-in the county's limits and was purchased legitimately in a county that isn't dry? Or is it totally out and you can't leave the county and return with your haul? I understand Tim meticulously posted TN regulations etc. but I'm not that well read. Can you break it down for us, Chuck?

It sounds like a technicality might be found from your imaginary deposition. If there is a limit (say 2 bottles) - then would the offenders need to come up with a collector for every two bottles? Does it change things any if there is no evidence monetary sales or the exchange / trade of anything other than gold ink being used judiciously is taking place inside TN state lines?

doubleblank
11-13-2007, 09:15
I can't speak to TN's laws, but they can be pretty arcane here in Texas. For example, you can lawfully bring liquor purchased in a "wet" county into a "dry" county, but only up to certain quantities. In some counties, possession of more than one liter of whiskey is Prima Facie evidence of "intent to distribute"......IOW, you're guilt by being in possession. I'm almost certain I am in violation of some laws when I drive through east Texas on my way to KY for the Gazebo activities.

Randy

cowdery
11-13-2007, 09:16
The imaginary deposition statement would just cover Jimmy's ass. It wouldn't keep the bottles from being confiscated or prevent their owner from being charged.

Possession of alcohol in a dry county is not illegal. There may be some jurisdictions where that is not true, but for the most part it is. As Randy pointed out, the laws can be written in such a way that possession of more than a certain amount creates a presumption of intent to distribute, but a man with one bottle will not be inconvenienced.

Tennessee law does seem to prohibit transportation into the state of alcohol purchased elsewhere, on the premise that Tennessee gets to tax it. Bottles never legally sold in Tennessee, such as bottles made exclusively for sale in Italy, would have no way of arriving in Tennessee legally, therefore the possession of bottles like that would create a presumption that the bottles are untaxed and, therefore, illegal.

The transportation and possession prohibitions don't kick in unless you have more than three gallons of untaxed alcohol, so it's mainly targeted at moonshiners and bootleggers, but would also affect many collectors. In this case, the target appears to be a group of people who were selling illegally (i.e., without a license and without paying taxes), but they hit them on possession because that allowed them to seize the merchandise and, in effect, close them down in anticipation of charges being brought.

LarryG
11-13-2007, 10:30
Expanding, sort of, on what Randy wrote about the situation in TX ... here in Alabama, and assuming the law has not been changed recently, a resident of a dry county or dry municipality can legally possess a maximum of three quarts of liquor and one case of beer, or three quarts of wine and one case of beer.

What this means, at least as I understand it, is that someone who lives in a dry county and drives to a wet municipality within that dry county, purchases a gallon jug of cheap wine, and takes it home ... is technically breaking the law. Not to suggest that I personally know anyone who would ever do such a thing, of course.

Anyway, I would guess that TN has some similar limitation on the books for its dry counties, although the quantities might be different.

Larry

Pharaoh
11-13-2007, 10:35
So in other words it's unlikely that offering to pay what ever Tennessee's presumed missing tax collections are, would resolve the matter?

cowdery
11-13-2007, 17:54
So in other words it's unlikely that offering to pay what ever Tennessee's presumed missing tax collections are, would resolve the matter?

No, because to do that you have to get a license and only buy through Tennessee licensed wholesalers, and do everything else the law requires.

polyamnesia
11-16-2007, 14:44
i wasn't looking for this, but it was there on AOL...

latest info i assume:

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/historic-whiskey-could-go-down-drain/20071116094709990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

cowdery
11-16-2007, 19:01
No new information in the AOL story, but what I found interesting is that the story, posted today, already had 298 comments on it. As they say in real estate, location, location, location. AOL news reaches a lot of eyes and lots of them, apparently, think they have something to say. The comments are pretty much universally inane, but there sure are a lot of them.

TNbourbon
11-16-2007, 20:53
I noticed this story today in the Nashville paper, noting that it originates with Associated Press, as did the other story about the seizure to appear. Seems odd that no one local has latched onto this story. The Tennessean DID run a story a week ago about ABC director Elks' seemingly cozy relationship with distributors, evidenced by slap-on-the-wrist fines levied against them for marketing violations that can be punished at the state level by much more extensive sanctions -- and which has prompted even a federal investigation, since some of the violations reported violate federal trade restrictions, too.
Anyway, today's story brings a couple of thoughts to mind: if the JD bottles ARE disposed of, I'd sure like to see it done publicly or with media witnesses, because otherwise I'd be pretty sure that they've come to reside in some liquor distributors' personal/private collection instead of really being poured out; and, I doubt this raid will ever result in any charges or court cases, because I'd be almost as sure that no one wants the likely source of that 'tip' -- someone with a direct connection to a Tennessee liquor distributor -- to become known publicly.
Look at this and go on down to the June 5, 2006 entry -- read it all the way through -- to get an idea of how big a tail the liquor distributors are that wag the state dog here:
http://www.bobkrumm.com/blog/index.php?s=tsu
and/or run a Google search of "Tom Hensley" and read awhile. The state's distributors like their legal monopoly, and they don't want to compete even with private collectors for their sales.

Stu
11-17-2007, 09:48
In the wee hours this morning, prior to paying homage to my deer stand, I heard on CNN HN that Jack Daniels distillery was closing because of illegal liquor sales. Unfortunately, I was sitting on my throne surveying my kingdom when it was broadcast, and Bernadette was in the back room, so neither of us heard it well. I'm back (unsuccessfully) and listened to CNN HN again for over an hour and there was no mention of it. I switched to FOX and again no mention. I'm sure it's related to the information on this thread. Does anyone have any further information on this? I'm not a JD fan, but we all may want to stock up if this is true.

Stu

Rughi
11-17-2007, 11:14
I heard on CNN HN that Jack Daniels distillery was closing because of illegal liquor sales.
Stu

Repeat the mantra:
"Jack Daniel's is the biggest selling whiskey in the world, Jack Daniel's..."

Maybe what you heard from the throne involved a whiskey re-selling business closing.

cowdery
11-17-2007, 14:00
Director Elkes seems to have been giving interviews.

The threat to destroy the whiskey may be a ploy to draw out some of the perpetrators. Or it's just a way to get the Director on television.

One interesting statement buried in the most recent WTVF article: "The state expects the case to go to court in Moore County sometime after the first of the year."

If they can establish at law that the whiskey is contraband they can confiscate it permanently and destroy it even if nobody is charged, but I don't think that has been reached yet. At this point it's being held as evidence. How can you destroy evidence? If they destroy it, they're admitting they don't have enough to charge anybody.

On the other hand, if nobody claims the property, takes responsibility for it, and attempts to prove legal ownership (for fear of prosecution), then it's abandoned. Either way, I find it hard to believe the law requires its destruction. I have no doubt the law permits the property to be destroyed if the law considers it to be abandoned, but I doubt the law requires it.

Obviously, I think this is an interesting story, but it gets more interesting if they indict somebody.

bluesbassdad
11-17-2007, 14:37
Chuck,

If recent history is any guide, one or more people will go to prison for perjury or obstruction, and the orginal "crime" will go unpunished.

Yours truly,
Dave Morefield

TNbourbon
12-09-2007, 17:10
A disclaimer -- this is as much gossip as information, but from sources I know to know the principles :

The owner of the $10,000 1914 bottle of Jack Daniel's is one Jamie Martin of Australia, reputedly a wealthy collector who probably spends more than that in a month on JD memorabila; Mr. Martin was negotiating with at least two potential buyers during the late-October JD barbeque in Lynchburg, and could have sold it had he been willing to give as little as $500 on price (the bottle apparently was left behind in anticipation of eventual sale -- an acquaintance of mine claims he advised him to sell for the price offered); the talk about the negotiations perhaps drew the notice of Tennessee ABC investigators, as Lynchburg exists in a 'dry' county;
among the confiscated bottles were some not properly sealed, but signed by Jimmy Bedford. This has led to speculation that Jimmy was somehow involved in illegal activity -- but anyone who knows Jimmy realizes he signs everything put in front of him. More likely is the rumored involvement of a Tennessee Squires Association official named Fanning -- known to accompany, for example, Mr. Martin at auction events, and who presumably has access to JD's bottling operation.
I can attest that some individuals (who are not named "ME"!) are attempting to procure the confiscated goods via connections to state legislators. As Tennessee is a notoriously upstanding and honest state, I doubt that anything will come of it. However, I will nonetheless be relieved to see the bottles disposed of publicly, whatever their final disposition.

squire
12-09-2007, 17:35
Publicly, certainly, of course, nothing here to see folks, just move on.

Squire

bigtoys
12-09-2007, 20:45
being a TN Squire for over 20 yrs, I'm curious as to how this plays out. maybe I'll have to go down and camp on my "plot" of land.

TNbourbon
01-30-2008, 04:46
An indictment handed to down to "Sully's" owner, Randy Piper. And officials (legislators, mostly, who see money) starting to have second thoughts about pouring the stuff out:
http://www.wsmv.com/news/15165387/detail.html

cowdery
01-30-2008, 14:30
This continues to be a fascinating story, with meaning for many here. Thank you, Tim, for keeping us up-to-date.

My favorite part is this line from Piper's lawyer: "He was not selling whiskey, he was selling collectibles," Fraley said. "There are people on (online auction site) eBay every day selling it."

TNbourbon
03-11-2008, 17:34
Well, the governor and legislature seem to be on board against pouring the confiscated Jack Daniel's out:
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008303110008

Though awkwardly stated, I think the second graf means that only Tennessee retailers will be able to buy it, though (since TN retailers aren't allowed to sell online currently), which will tamp down potential prices, unless some retailers recruit 'angels'. Maybe a good thing for me...:grin:

cowdery
03-14-2008, 00:09
This is what I love most about laws and government. There hasn't been a trial yet, which is necessary to establish definitively that the bottles are actually subject to forfeiture, and the state is already figuring out how it's going to cash in and they probably have already spent the money too.

TNbourbon
05-26-2008, 20:40
As I suspected, this will never come to trial, and the state's sole interest is monetary:
"...Crawford would not discuss details of the negotiations, but Fraley said the state wants (Piper) to relinquish some of the whiskey..."
They're looking for a way to cover prosecution costs, and then some.
See the whole story here:
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080526/NEWS03/80526008

cigarnv
05-27-2008, 04:32
I suspect any of the ebay sellers of spirits could fall victim to this same situation....

HighTower
05-27-2008, 05:15
My thoughts go out to Jamie.
It was recently discovered that he has mouth and throat cancer. He just started his second week of Chemo and radiation, and seems to be in good spirits.

I don't think he has heard anything about the 18yo JD from 1914, but at the moment, it would be the last thing on his mind.

If anyone's drinking Jack, have one for Jamie.:toast:

Scott

cowdery
05-27-2008, 06:05
As I suspected, this will never come to trial, and the state's sole interest is monetary:
"...Crawford would not discuss details of the negotiations, but Fraley said the state wants (Piper) to relinquish some of the whiskey..."
They're looking for a way to cover prosecution costs, and then some.
See the whole story here:
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080526/NEWS03/80526008

Thanks for keeping us up-to-date on this, you old digester, you.

barturtle
05-27-2008, 06:40
I wonder if there's anyway to apply First Sale Doctrine to this. Though it technically applies to books/video/software copyrights, it seems that it would make sense to apply it to tax collection of this type.