PDA

View Full Version : Sheriffs pilot get 30 for machinegun


woodey
09-11-2009, 8:31 AM
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20090910/ARTICLES/909109921/1350?Title=Former-sheriff-s-helicopter-pilot-sentenced-to-30-days

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:
Former sheriff's helicopter pilot sentenced to 30 days

By LORI A. CARTER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT


Published: Thursday, September 10, 2009 at 4:14 p.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, September 10, 2009 at 4:14 p.m.
A former Sonoma County Sheriff's Department helicopter pilot has been sentenced to 30 days in jail and three years' probation after admitting he possessed an illegal assault rifle.

Emanuele “Manny” Tsikoudakis, 39, entered a no contest plea to the one felony charge, prosecutor Bill Brockley said.

Judge Dean Beaupre ordered Tsikoudakis to serve 30 days in jail, but allowed him to seek jail alternatives like electronic home confinement.

Tsikoudakis also must serve three years on probation and complete 120 hours of community service. Fines and court fees totaled about $6,000, Brockley said.

Tsikoudakis was suspended early this year when sheriff's supervisors learned of the weapon, a Belgian-made Fabrique Nationale de Herstal PS90. The weapon is a compact submachine gun that can hold a 50-round magazine and fire single-shot or fully automatic, according to the manufacturer's Web site.

Tsikoudakis quit the department on May 19 after having been on paid suspension for several months. He was a civilian employee and was still in his probationary employment period after being hired in late 2008.

Members members of the helicopter unit handled the weapon and fired it on duty, sources said. A spokesman for the Sheriff's Department would not comment.

The criminal allegations sparked an internal sheriff's investigation into other members of the helicopter unit. Following Tsikoudakis' suspension and eventual resignation, two other members of the unit - a sergeant and a deputy - were transferred to other assignments. The Sheriff's Department said the moves were not disciplinary.

Tsikoudakis now resides and works as a pilot in Texas.

6172crew
09-11-2009, 8:49 AM
Jail for a Ps90? If he had it broken down he would have been good to go.

Ruined a guys life over a "submachine gun" Yea I know, that is what the press is calling it.

striker3
09-11-2009, 8:52 AM
So was it a PS90, or a P90?

Dr Rockso
09-11-2009, 9:04 AM
So was it a PS90, or a P90?
When this first broke I recall it being a PS90, which seems a lot more likely. Still, none of us would be getting 30 days for an AW (I'm assuming he didn't have it maglocked, as then it would have been ostensibly legal).

woodey
09-11-2009, 9:06 AM
Probably semi auto just FUD on the reporters info. The guy is already re-hired out of Texas

gregorylucas
09-11-2009, 9:48 AM
I know a few people in this department and it was a real full-auto. Where he got his apples busted is when he took it on duty.

Greg

cmonk518
09-11-2009, 10:10 AM
Wow, thats quite stupid! I would figure its quite a specialized unit to be in and doing so many raids on growers, he could easily have his bosses sign off on pretty cool weapons and toys with all the bells and whistles. Instead he went stupid and got a non-official and illegal weapon to play with.

He is pretty lucky though to get only 30 days for possession of a fully auto and illegal assault weapon. Don't normal people usually get years and tens of thousands of dollars in fines.

motorhead
09-11-2009, 10:36 AM
reporter is an idiot. unregistered nfa is 10 years, l.e. or not. he just thought he had to throw in the tidbit about f/a, (from mfr's website, so he can claim ignorance) for drama.

Glock22Fan
09-11-2009, 10:37 AM
Wow, thats quite stupid! I would figure its quite a specialized unit to be in and doing so many raids on growers, he could easily have his bosses sign off on pretty cool weapons and toys with all the bells and whistles. Instead he went stupid and got a non-official and illegal weapon to play with.

He is pretty lucky though to get only 30 days for possession of a fully auto and illegal assault weapon. Don't normal people usually get years and tens of thousands of dollars in fines.

I don't think he was a Peace Officer, was he? Just a civilian pilot. I imagine that would make what you suggest effectively impossible.

yellowfin
09-11-2009, 11:02 AM
It's ridiculously sad that we apparently have to care what kind of rifle a helicopter pilot has.

uzigalil
09-11-2009, 11:05 AM
Im more curious to know where he got the P90 from, Its not easy to obtain a real P90.

Glock22Fan
09-11-2009, 11:12 AM
It's ridiculously sad that we apparently have to care what kind of rifle any of us has.

Corrected it for you.

SteveH
09-11-2009, 11:30 AM
When this first broke I recall it being a PS90, which seems a lot more likely. Still, none of us would be getting 30 days for an AW (I'm assuming he didn't have it maglocked, as then it would have been ostensibly legal).

Oh come on.

Remember the school janotor in San Juan cap who threatened to shoot up the school. A search of his home and storage locker uncovered several unregistered AW's, SBR's, SBS's.

His sentance...90-days jail and three years probation. 30-days for a single illegal firearm is not unusually light.

B Strong
09-11-2009, 11:36 AM
reporter is an idiot. unregistered nfa is 10 years, l.e. or not. he just thought he had to throw in the tidbit about f/a, (from mfr's website, so he can claim ignorance) for drama.

For a federal charge, state law differs.

Roadrunner
09-11-2009, 11:39 AM
How many choppers are now grounded because of stupid laws like this? This is kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Some of the idiocy in this state is baffling to say the least.

cmonk518
09-11-2009, 12:33 PM
I don't think he was a Peace Officer, was he? Just a civilian pilot. I imagine that would make what you suggest effectively impossible.

Oops, got confused. Thought they were like most other elite county sheriff helicopter units were both the pilot and co-pilot are both sworn deputies.

I was watching the recent MSNBC documentary on CA pot growers in N. Ca and the deputies I believe in Shasta and Sonoma carry some pretty cool toys.

BigDogatPlay
09-11-2009, 12:53 PM
Sonoma County Sheriff's helicopter unit (http://www.henry1.com/), radio call Henry One, is generally a pretty savvy unit. They are the only long line rescue (aside from the Coast Guard) flying anywhere in NorCal. I've worked with them on a long line extrication and they are nails. The bird typically has a crew of three with a deputy sheriff as the observer (they call it Tactical Flight Officer), the civilian pilot and a civilian paramedic.

The department has used civilian contract pilots for many years. Three of the six SCSO personnel killed in the line of duty were lost in helicopter crashes in the 1970's and 1980's when deputies were the pilots so it made sense to the agency to recruit civilian pilots with (typically) military training and a thousand or more hours in type.

This case has been something of an issue here locally since it first broke. The department really took it's time to let the dust settle before terming and prosecuting the pilot, then reassigning the peace officers involved. The district attorney's office is gaining something of a reputation for running weakly with cases involving LEO personnel and agency associates in possession of full auto or otherwise verboten weapons.

dantodd
09-11-2009, 1:10 PM
This case has been something of an issue here locally since it first broke. The department really took it's time to let the dust settle before terming and prosecuting the pilot, then reassigning the peace officers involved. The district attorney's office is gaining something of a reputation for running weakly with cases involving LEO personnel and agency associates in possession of full auto or otherwise verboten weapons.

Well, you know, we don't want to ruin their careers just for committing a felony or anything. We'll leave the life ruining convictions for the non-sworn pilots but just move the sworn officers to new duties.

BigDogatPlay
09-11-2009, 1:12 PM
Yep.... pretty much how I took it.

dantodd
09-11-2009, 1:17 PM
Yep.... pretty much how I took it.

It is really unfortunate too because it is the behavior of these types of officers and the cover-up committed by their commanders that gives a black-eye to those who take their duty and oath seriously. Particularly troubling today, a day when I'm sure the sacrifices police officers and all public service personnel are on every American's mind.

tube_ee
09-11-2009, 2:07 PM
It is really unfortunate too because it is the behavior of these types of officers and the cover-up committed by their commanders that gives a black-eye to those who take their duty and oath seriously. Particularly troubling today, a day when I'm sure the sacrifices police officers and all public service personnel are on every American's mind.

That their job makes them special, most of that black eye would go away.

Police officers are entitled to one and only one thing for their being police officers...

a paycheck.

That's it.

It's just a job.

--Shannon

Flopper
09-11-2009, 2:47 PM
If what posters are saying is correct, how the hell did he get a real, select-fire P90??? Did the transferring FFL get dinged too?

woodey
09-11-2009, 3:34 PM
I wounder how many illegal mags he had to go with it?

Super Spy
09-11-2009, 3:39 PM
If your flying a police chopper you should be allowed to carry a weapon at least equivalent to what bad guys might shoot at you. The PS90 is perfect for pilot use as it's compact and has a high capacity magazine. What a BS state we live in.

leadchucker
09-11-2009, 3:50 PM
It is really unfortunate too because it is the behavior of these types of officers and the cover-up committed by their commanders that gives a black-eye to those who take their duty and oath seriously.

(Notwithstanding that the person involved was, apparently, not a sworn officer.....)

Oh, and what oath is that? The one where they swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America? Sounds like he WAS taking it seriously! (Think 2A, think 2A, think 2A of the Constitution of the United States of America:rolleyes:)

So, why is it that one one hand we say that these laws should not exist, then get all up in arms when someone (anyone) gets off lightly?:confused: It seems it is the green-eyed monster talking around here. I can hear the antis now, " See this thread? Even the pro-gunners believe there should be stiff penalties for AW violations. I guess they are all for the AW ban too!"

grammaton76
09-11-2009, 3:52 PM
I would be interested to know if he'd converted a PS90 to full auto, or if he'd obtained a real P90, as that would've involved theft, misappropriation, or illegal importation.

The conversion route is really plausible to me though. Heck, the things will malfunction in full auto if your brass catcher gets full... just needs a spent casing to go into the wrong place.

Ding126
09-11-2009, 4:00 PM
.somethings not right..either LE had to give him a letter to obtain a FA weapon or it was a semi auto version and the media exagerated...If it was a converted weapon then he would of had federal charges that would be a bunch more than 30 days...I don't think we have ALL the intel on this. IMO

BigDogatPlay
09-11-2009, 4:06 PM
Oh yeah, things are not right... however,

The last several cases involving full auto weapons in SoCo have all gone locally, no federal involvement.

Never assume because it's a federal offense that the feds will ride in and take the case over.

adamsreeftank
09-11-2009, 5:34 PM
Professional courtesy goes a long way.


Oh yeah, things are not right... however,

The last several cases involving full auto weapons in SoCo have all gone locally, no federal involvement.

Never assume because it's a federal offense that the feds will ride in and take the case over.

6172crew
09-11-2009, 5:57 PM
I would be interested to know if he'd converted a PS90 to full auto, or if he'd obtained a real P90, as that would've involved theft, misappropriation, or illegal importation.

The conversion route is really plausible to me though. Heck, the things will malfunction in full auto if your brass catcher gets full... just needs a spent casing to go into the wrong place.

I dont think its possible without the trigger pack, and that isnt an item you can find on the net. I looked at my trigger pack long and hard to see about a trigger job and its not something to play around with. The AUG pack might work but those need a stamp as well.

El Gato
09-11-2009, 6:00 PM
many times the local departments like to "do" the case themselves... call it pride...

In my dept. if we find a silencer - machine gun we call in the feds.... a few days in jail as opposed to 10 years in the slammer... Ummmmm call the feds...We find alot of sawed off shotguns that are not prosecuted federally but I am slowly training our guys to call BATFE...

ldivinag
09-11-2009, 6:14 PM
Im more curious to know where he got the P90 from, Its not easy to obtain a real P90.

usuaully it's a loaner from FN.

a family relative was the range officer for his department.

he got a P90. a real FA with a stubby 1" barrel sticking out. he wanted to try it out and see if his department would acquire as a permanent carbine.

so FN sent him an evaluation model... FN sent him a small amount of ammo so i never got a chance with it... ;)

i did get to fondle the heck out of though. :D

macadamizer
09-11-2009, 6:15 PM
(Notwithstanding that the person involved was, apparently, not a sworn officer.....)

Oh, and what oath is that? The one where they swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America? Sounds like he WAS taking it seriously! (Think 2A, think 2A, think 2A of the Constitution of the United States of America:rolleyes:)

So, why is it that one one hand we say that these laws should not exist, then get all up in arms when someone (anyone) gets off lightly?:confused: It seems it is the green-eyed monster talking around here. I can hear the antis now, " See this thread? Even the pro-gunners believe there should be stiff penalties for AW violations. I guess they are all for the AW ban too!"

I don't think it's jealousy. I think the feeling is that if the police -- who are already exempt from many of the prohibitions the rest of us labor under -- have to suffer the same penalties when they cross the line that we do, that maybe they will stand up against further regulation, instead of rolling over when the are exempted from certain laws.

leadchucker
09-11-2009, 7:03 PM
I don't think it's jealousy. I think the feeling is that if the police -- who are already exempt from many of the prohibitions the rest of us labor under -- have to suffer the same penalties when they cross the line that we do, that maybe they will stand up against further regulation, instead of rolling over when the are exempted from certain laws.

The problem is that when we ***** and moan that the cops aren't getting the same treatment as the rest, the implication is that we feel everyone should get stiff penalties for 2A violations, rather than that the rest of us should be dealt with leniently. I mean, which way would we rather have it? Stiffer penalties, or lenient, or none at all like the 2A demands? Pick one and stick to it. Gripe when the penalties are stiff, not when they are lenient (unless, of course, you are a feline traitor).

macadamizer
09-11-2009, 8:15 PM
The problem is that when we ***** and moan that the cops aren't getting the same treatment as the rest, the implication is that we feel everyone should get stiff penalties for 2A violations, rather than that the rest of us should be dealt with leniently.

That's not it at all. It doesn't matter whether the penalties are stiff or lenient -- just that they are the same for the same crime, and are not dependent on who committed the crime.

An argument could be made that since law enforcement should have a better understanding of the relevant laws than a layperson, and since law enforcement's job is to uphold the law, law enforcement should receive stiffer penalties than civilians for the same act -- but that's not what anyone is saying here.

The argument is that law enforcement should be held to the same standard -- be it harsh or lax. If law enforcement is let off the hook each time they violate a firearms-related law -- and they know it -- why wouldn't they support harsher gun control laws? If it doesn't affect them, but makes their jobs easier, so why wouldn't they support it, or at least not fight it?

I mean, which way would we rather have it? Stiffer penalties, or lenient, or none at all like the 2A demands? Pick one and stick to it. Gripe when the penalties are stiff, not when they are lenient (unless, of course, you are a feline traitor).

You have created an artifice which doesn't describe the situation here. The discussion isn't about stiffer or more lenient sentences in the abstract, it's discussing whether certain classes of people should get more lenient sentences than others for the same crime, based solely on their profession.

Of course, I think most here would agree that the punishment in the abstract is really irrelevant -- there should be no crime here at all. But since there currently is a crime on the books here, then the punishment -- again, whether harsh or lenient -- should be dealt out evenly, and one class of individuals should not be favored over another.

M. Sage
09-11-2009, 9:27 PM
When this first broke I recall it being a PS90, which seems a lot more likely. Still, none of us would be getting 30 days for an AW (I'm assuming he didn't have it maglocked, as then it would have been ostensibly legal).

No, a mag-locked PS-90 is still an AW unless you do something about the overall length. It's too short for CA.

KylaGWolf
09-11-2009, 9:43 PM
Well I know a friend of mine that is a federal LE and he can't bring some of his toys in to the state even though he is an LE. So those toys stay in Nevada for when he goes to Front Sight. Hes planning of moving out of this state when he retires which sucks he is a good friend of ours.

leadchucker
09-11-2009, 10:18 PM
That's not it at all. It doesn't matter whether the penalties are stiff or lenient -- just that they are the same for the same crime, and are not dependent on who committed the crime.

The discussion isn't about stiffer or more lenient sentences in the abstract, it's discussing whether certain classes of people should get more lenient sentences than others for the same crime, based solely on their profession.

You won't hear any argument from me that the punishments for LE and civilians should be the same. Other than that, you don't seem to understand my point at all.

Oh, wait...

Of course, I think most here would agree that the punishment in the abstract is really irrelevant -- there should be no crime here at all.

This is the ONLY discussion really worth pursuing:D

dgc357
09-12-2009, 6:05 PM
I read this entire thread without realizing this was in my neck of the woods.

tube_ee
09-12-2009, 8:19 PM
You won't hear any argument from me that the punishments for LE and civilians should be the same.

Actually, not so minor, and indicative of the kind of attitude that many object to...

Law enforcement officers are civilians.

It's just a job.

--Shannon

CalNRA
09-12-2009, 8:22 PM
Law enforcement officers are civilians.

It's just a job.


that point is missed by many people today.

M9Man
09-12-2009, 10:45 PM
If he wanted that kind of fire power in CA in a small package for his chopper he should of went with a bullpup Springfield M1A with bullet button. Ammo is more available, cheaper, and more powerful.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/AWCG2A.JPG/800px-AWCG2A.JPG

leadchucker
09-12-2009, 11:36 PM
Law enforcement officers are civilians.

It's just a job.

--Shannon

I knew someone would bring this up, so let me be clear- I am not opening this up for debate on this thread. However, I do not stand corrected. I think most who carry this view do so because they confuse the words "civilian" with "citizen". LEO are citizens, but not civilians while acting in their LE capacity.

From a good old Webster's, 1956 and long before the current "politically correct" editions came to be:
"ci-vil-ian, n. 2. one not on active duty in a military, police, or fire-fighting force."

So, there:p

Diabolus
09-13-2009, 8:17 AM
If he wanted that kind of fire power in CA in a small package for his chopper he should of went with a bullpup Springfield M1A with bullet button. Ammo is more available, cheaper, and more powerful.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/AWCG2A.JPG/800px-AWCG2A.JPG

I've never seen a bullpup M1A before, thats neat. Though, if it went kaboom, you might lose your face.

tyrist
09-13-2009, 10:35 AM
His sentence is on par with what anyone would get if they were caught with one illegal assault weapon and had an otherwise clean record.

The last AW case I remember the guy had 5 illegal AW weapons and they cave him probation only with no time served in custody.

MT1
09-13-2009, 1:38 PM
From what I remember, a big issue here was that the SO chopper was used to transport them to places where they were shooting the P90 while on duty.

BigDogatPlay
09-13-2009, 1:58 PM
From what I remember, a big issue here was that the SO chopper was used to transport them to places where they were shooting the P90 while on duty.

Bingo....

Flopper
09-13-2009, 2:12 PM
usuaully it's a loaner from FN.

a family relative was the range officer for his department.

he got a P90. a real FA with a stubby 1" barrel sticking out. he wanted to try it out and see if his department would acquire as a permanent carbine.

so FN sent him an evaluation model... FN sent him a small amount of ammo so i never got a chance with it... ;)


If it was a loaner from FN, that means he didn't actually own it, right?

So why did he get in trouble?

LesGrossman41510
09-13-2009, 3:21 PM
Wow that is ridiculous, he carries a p90 when fighting marijuana growers and the government punishes him. hahahahaha wow.

pmrtruck
09-13-2009, 4:03 PM
WOW!
I had some other idea but was busted to nothing when I saw chopper was used for shooting time...:58:

I had skill figured out, pilot ability...

Glad Texas has lots of spendn' money these days...

Oh right...The chopper pilots can simply fire from the back deck of the station...rit' on over der...fir whn rdy...wana cool one?:D

I seriously want to move to the Great State Of Texas where I can be protected overhead from helicopter pilots who carry full-auto. The BG's really have it tough:68:

LOLOLOLOL

woodey
09-14-2009, 8:27 AM
usuaully it's a loaner from FN.

a family relative was the range officer for his department.

he got a P90. a real FA with a stubby 1" barrel sticking out. he wanted to try it out and see if his department would acquire as a permanent carbine.

so FN sent him an evaluation model... FN sent him a small amount of ammo so i never got a chance with it... ;)

i did get to fondle the heck out of though. :D

I wounder what happenend to the relative/range officer for loaning the P90 out? You would think his A== would be in the ringer also?

JDay
09-14-2009, 1:50 PM
The PS90 is a semi-auto version of the P90, not a sub-machine gun.

M9Man
09-14-2009, 3:52 PM
Not to be confused with either of these P90 :rofl2:
http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Firearms/Auto-Pistols/Ruger_P90.jpg
http://p90xworkoutreviews.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/p90x.jpg

pmrtruck
09-15-2009, 3:23 PM
I've never seen a bullpup M1A before, thats neat. Though, if it went kaboom, you might lose your face.

Or your ear drum if it simply goes BANG!

Somehow, I am willing to overlook the obvious to take the chance of dying this way. OOPS, thinking outloud.....:Angel_anim:

:D No matter, I would like the chance just to own one! Very Cool!:79:

Both History and Today in a machine! A machine which represents the 2nd Amendment. Amendments sit at the CORE of the paper which represents us and our personal choices!!!!!!!!!!

VOTE THEM ALL OUT IN 2010!!!
ALL OF THEM AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL!!!
TAKE THE CON OUT OF CONGRESS!

Flopper
09-15-2009, 4:07 PM
The PS90 is a semi-auto version of the P90, not a sub-machine gun.

That's not exactly a point of contention here.

What we're wondering is:

Did he get a real select-fire P90, or did he alter a PS90 to fire FA?

Also, if it was a loaner, why did he get in trouble? Did he not return it to FN in a timely manner, and therefore it was determined that he came to possess stolen property? Why no embezzlement or conspiracy charges for the range officer?