A federal jury on Wednesday delivered a mixed message to Denver firefighter Stan Ford, acquitting him of three weapons charges but convicting on one count of illegally selling a fully automatic machine gun.
Ford’s attorneys said they were puzzled by the verdict, saying that if jurors were willing to accept Ford’s defense that he was entrapped by overzealous terrorism task force members, they didn’t understand why they’d convict on one count.
“The only defense is entrapment,” said Peter Bornstein, one of Ford’s attorneys. “Why they had a different verdict as to the third machine gun … right now I have no theory.”
After the verdict was read, one juror, Nancy Muniz, spoke briefly to reporters about the jury’s rationale, saying: “First time, second time: maybe. Third time: should have known better.”
Ford, 35, a seven-year veteran of the Fire Department, faces up to 10 years in federal prison. In a separate case still pending, he faces additional charges of dealing in firearms without a license.
Ford will remain free on bond until his Sept. 29 sentencing.
Ford will remain suspended without pay from the Fire Department, said Lt. Phil Champagne, until any appeals are exhausted. If Ford remains convicted of a felony, he will be fired for cause.
Ford, a self-described gun enthusiast, had argued that federal agents worked on him for more than a year before he illegally sold a fully automatic machine gun to an informant whom he had come to consider a friend.
In all, he was accused of illegally selling three machine guns. He also was charged with having a weapon with an obscured serial number – a charge on which he was acquitted.
Much of the prosecution’s case involved recorded conversations between Ford and the informant. Defense lawyers contended that the government devoted too much time and effort to get Ford to commit a crime.
After the verdict, Ford said he thought the verdict was a jury compromise.
“I was very shocked and very surprised,” he said. “They’re able to recognize the level of government overreaching and government entrapment, yet they still must have compromised to one guilty.”
William Taylor, chief of the major-crimes unit at the Colorado U.S. attorney’s office, said it was the government’s burden to disprove entrapment. While it is difficult to theorize what the jury meant, he said, it’s possible they didn’t find that the government offered enough evidence to negate the entrapment defense on two counts.
Will Hood, another lawyer representing Ford, said it was too soon to say whether they would appeal the verdict.
“It’s kind of a moment of mixed emotions right now,” he said.
Staff writer Alicia Caldwell can be reached at 303-820-1930 or acaldwell@denverpost.com.
