Website Tip results in seizure of $1MM of JD

[cowdery]

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]

Randy was a wrestler, I believe.

Scott

[gblick]

Randy was a wrestler, I believe.

No, that was Roddy.

[doubleblank]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Are we supposed to know who Randy Piper is?

Surely it can´t be the guitarist (?) with godawful heavy metallers WASP? :grin:

[Pharaoh]

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]

... 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]

(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]

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]

(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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.