AFFIDAVIT OF DANIEL FUTRELL

I, Daniel Futrell, being duly sworn, depose and state the

following:

1. I am employed as a Special Agent with the United States

Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and

Explosives (ATF), and have been so employed for approximately nine

(9) years. During that time, I successfully completed Criminal

Investigator School and New Agent Training at the Federal Law

Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia. Prior to that, I

was employed as a Diversion Investigator for the Drug Enforcement

Administration. During my career in law enforcement, I have

conducted many investigations including several investigations

into the unlawful possession of firearms and explosive devices.

2. During my work on this case, I have reviewed reports

prepared by other investigators regarding witness interviews,

surveillance and other investigative efforts. In addition, I have

discussed this investigation with other agents and officers

involved in the case. As a result of my personal participation in

this investigation, through my conversations with other agents and

my analysis of reports prepared by other agents, I am familiar

with all aspects of this investigation. I submit this affidavit

based upon my personal knowledge derived from my participation in

this investigation and upon information that I have received from

a variety of ether sources, including other law enforcement

officers and reports generated by law enforcement agencies. This

affidavi~ does not contain all of the information gathered during

this investigation; rather it contains information that I believe

is sufficient to support my request.

3. I submit this affidavit in support of the application of

a search warrant to obtain saliva using oral swab samples

(hereafter Buccal samples) from the following people: Robert

Wolffe, Daniel Riley, Jason Gerhard, and Cirino Gonzalez, more

fully described in Attachment A to this Affidavit, sufficient to

provide a quantity of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) that could be

submitted to a forensic laboratory and possibly matched by

forensic DNA testing, typing and analysis with one or more samples

of DNA evidence. As set forth below, such samples constitute

evidence of crimes.

4. On or about January 18, 2007, the last day of a trial

that started on January 9, a jury returned verdicts convicting

Edward Brown and Elaine Brown of conspiracy and a number of

federal tax crimes.

S. The jury returned its verdict against Edward Brown in his

absence. After the third day of evidence, January 11, 2007,

Edward Brown returned to his and Elaine Brown's joint residence in

Plainfield, N.H., and never came back to court. On January 12,

2007, a federal warrant was issued for Edward Brown's arrest based

upon his failure to appear for the completion of his trial.

6. Elaine Brown also failed to appear for what was to be the

2
fourth day of evidence but, after a brief continuance of the

proceedings, she returned for the remainder of the trial. Shortly

after her conviction, however, she was charged with violating

conditions of her release pending sentencing by removing an

electronic monitoring ankle bracelet and returning to her

residence where Edward Brown remained. A federal warrant was

issued for her arrest.

7. On April 24, 2007, Edward Brown and Elaine Brown were

each sentenced to sixty-three (63) months in prison. Neither

Edward Brown nor Elaine Brown appeared for the sentencing

proceeding and the sentences against them were imposed in their

absence.

8. While the Browns had been fugitives, officers of the

United States Marshals Service have made efforts to arrest them.

Ouring the same period of time, the Browns had remained inside the

boundaries of the property on which their horne is located, and

they have publicly stated their intention to forcibly resist any

effort to arrest them.

9. While the Browns had been fugitives, they have used a

number of public forums, including, but not limited to,

television, newspaper, magazine and radio interviews as well as

internet postings to publicly declare their intention to forcibly

resist any effort to arrest them. They have also permitted a

number of people who share their belief that there is no legal

3
authoritj f0r the federal government to collect taxes, including

Daniel Riley, Robert Wolffe, Jason Gerhard and Cirino Gonzalez, to

enter and remain in their home for varying periods of time.

10. The Browns were taken into custody on October 4, 2007

and a search of their property was thereafter conducted. During

the course of the search, multiple firearms and destructive

devices were seized and sent to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and

Firearms Laboratory for analysis.

11. All four of above named individuals are defendants in

the case, United States v. Riley, et al., Cr. No. 07-189-GZS.

12. Each of the above named four have been charged with

being accessories after the fact with respect to Edward and Elaine

Brown and have also been charged with two conspiracies, generally

to impede by force and violence the United States Marshals Service

from apprehending the Browns; one in violation of 18 U.S.C. 371

and 111(a) and the other in violation of 18 U.S.C. 372.

13. Additionally Riley, Gerhard and Gonzalez have been

charged with violations of 18 U.S.C. 924(c), possessing and using

a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence.

14. On October 10, 2007, pursuant to the execution of a

Federal Search Warrant law enforcement seized from the Brown's

residence a large quantity of explosive destructive devices that

included pipe bombs, booby trap devices that were pipes that fired

shot gun rounds, and cans of black powder with fuses, many wrapped

4
in nails. In addition, pistols, rifles and a large quantity of

ammunition were also seized as evidence, much of which was sent to

the ATF Laboratory for analysis, including DNA analysis.

IS. On January 2, 2007, this affiant was notified by ATF

Laboratory DNA Technical Leader Todd Bille that he had obtained

separate partial DNA profiles from 10 pieces of evidence taken

from Brown residence. Of the partial DNA profiles: one DNA

partial profile was obtained from a pipe bomb end cap, one from

the cap of a GoEX can of black powder with a fuse that was wrapped

in nails, one from a can of GoEx black powder, and partial DNA

profiles were found on six rifles and one shotgun. One full DNA

profile was obtained from a Weatherby, Model: Vanguard, .308

caliber rifle with serial number: VL13826. And one full DNA

profile was obtained from a Bushmaster Firearms, Model: Carbon-IS,

.223 caliber rifle with serial number: E14761. A Firearms Trace

Report of this Bushmaster Firearms rifle shows that Jason Gerhard

purchased it from Alstead Gun Shop, Alstead, NH on January 21,

2007.

16. Evidence in the case, including interviews given to law

enforcement by two of the defendants (Riley and Wolffe) tends to

prove that Daniel Riley, Jason Gerhard and Cirino Gonzalez each

brought rifles into the Browns residence during the pendency of

the Browns' fugitive status and that while on the premises

possessed, used and carried various firearms.

5
 17. Evidence in the case, including an interview of Robert

Wolf~e's wife, establishes that Robert Wolffe had been to the

Brown's r~sidence during the pendency of their fugitive status

numerous times and that whil~ there fired firearms with Edward

Brown.

18. Evidence in the case also establishes that Daniel Riley,

Jason Gerhard and Robert Wolffe were involved in the handling of

components (pipe and various pipe fittings) used in the

manufacture of destructive devices (including pipe bombs and booby

trap devices made from pipe fittings) found on the Brown property

after the Browns were taken into custody.

19. lour affiant knows from training and experience, and

from information provided in consultation with one or more

experienced agents and/or forensic serologists, that saliva

obtained from oral Buccal samples taken from a suspect would be of

evidentiary °Jalue, in that such samples could be analyzed and

tested, using forensic DNA testing techniques, against the DNA

obtained from human body fluid evidence, such as saliva, taken

from a crime scene or from an evidentiary item. Such forensic DNA

testing would make it possible to draw strong conclusions

regarding whether the body fluid evidence found at the crime scene

or found on the e'Jidentiary item is likely to have originated - or

not to have originated - from the suspect. Moreover, the results

and conclusions drawn from forensic DNA testing and comparison of

6
saliva have been deemed admissible in the courts of the Un~ted

States.

20. Based on the foregoing, there is probable cause to

believe that the DNA samples sought through this Search Warrant

are evidence of tne crimes referenced above as compa~isons of the

sought DNA against the DNA found on the firearms and destructive

devices is likely to establish one or more of the defendants as

the dono~s of the DNA found on one or more of the firearms or

destructive devices.

21. J\ccordingly, your Affiant requests the issuance of a

warrant to seize and obtain from Robert Wolffe, Daniel Riley,

Jason Gerhard, and Cirno Gonzalez samples of saliva collected

using oral Buccal swabs by this affiant or another Special Agent

of the ATF using generally accepted forensic evidence collection

methods.

<~
Daniel Futrell
Special Agent

Sworn to before me an~ subscribed In my presence a t Concord,

New Hampshi re, January ~ ,2008.

ble James Muirhead

States Magistrate Cudge