Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sat Aug 08 13:38:03 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / Armed couple backs down 500 rioters
Habebe
Member
Mon Jun 29 19:20:48
So has anyone else seen this?

I bet they get a 2nd rifle.The wife only had a pistol.

Should have fired warning shots.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jun 29 20:28:25
is that how Fox News describing it?
Habebe
Member
Mon Jun 29 20:52:08
Armed St. Louis protesters broke iron gate, threatened couple before they drew their own guns, attorney says

Thats the fox headline.

http://www...hreatened-couple-guns-attorney
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jun 29 21:10:29
the couple's lawyer is definitely a trustworthy source... especially since them pointing guns at people walking by their house could be illegal
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jun 29 21:25:35
my theory is the two people were hopped up on Fox & Trump twitter & that's why the reaction then the lawyer told them 'say -they- threatened you!'

Trump put this out a couple days ago
http://twi...ump/status/1276995624588709888
note the present tense on 'mobs rioting & looting across America'... Fox was caught red-handed trying to exaggerate Seattle, plus obaminated was in here claiming cities were burning nightly, so i highly doubt Seattle was their only misinfo
Habebe
Member
Mon Jun 29 21:28:10
Well , here is the gist that I get.

This lawyer couple lives in the same small gated community that the Mayor lives in. The rioters were pissed at the Mayor for publishing the names of ppl asking her to defund the police.

The rioters broke the gate down to enter the community to get to the mayor's house.

So its not like they were not on private property and broke the gate down to get into it.
Habebe
Member
Mon Jun 29 21:30:43
Tw, Keepnin mind the couple either owns a small legal firm or work for one according to what I read.
Habebe
Member
Mon Jun 29 21:34:46
I think its funny. They keep stressing they brought the gums out for.two " menacing looking whites"
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jun 29 21:58:22
yeah, the gated community might save them from breaking the law by pointing guns at people

i just find their story bullshit:

"
Mark McCloskey: We came back to the house. I don't know what time it is, I've been up ever since. I'm a little, I'm a little blurry, but we were preparing dinner. We went out to the east patio, open porch that faces Kingshighway on one side and Portland Place Drive on the south, and we're sitting down for dinner. We heard all this stuff going on down on Maryland Plaza. And then the mob started to move up Kingshighway, but it got parallel with the Kingshighway gate on Portland Place, somebody forced the gate, and I stood up and announced that this is private property. Go back.

I can't remember in detail anymore. I went inside, I got a rifle. And when they, because as soon as I said this is private property, those words enraged the crowd. Horde, absolute horde came through the now smashed down gates coming right at the house. My house, my east patio was 40 feet from Portland Place Drive. And these people were right up in my face, scared to death. And then, I stood out there. The only thing we said is ‘This is private property. Go back. Private property. Leave now.’

At that point, everybody got enraged. There were people wearing body armor. One person pulled out some loaded pistol magazine and clicked them together and said that you were next. We were threatened with our lives, threatened with a house being burned down, my office building being burned down, even our dog's life being threatened. It was, it was about as bad as it can get. I mean, those you know, I really thought it was Storming the Bastille that we would be dead and the house would be burned and there was nothing we could do about it. It was a huge and frightening crowd. And they were they broken the gate were coming at us.
"
http://www...07-4adc-4df0-a7d0-000d40a89e78

and
"
Mark McCloskey told KMOV, “A mob of at least 100 smashed through the historic wrought iron gates of Portland Place, destroying them, rushed towards my home where my family was having dinner outside and put us in fear for our lives. “This is all private property. There are no public sidewalks or public streets. I was terrified that we’d be murdered within seconds, our house would be burned down, our pets would be killed. We were all alone facing an angry mob.”
|

i haven't seen any reports of any burned homes or murdered occupants yet along the path of those protesters...

i'll guess they got their guns immediately, and any hostility toward them was because of them waving their guns around

if you felt in imminent fear of death why not take cover inside* & aim out the windows (*or take cover anywhere at all...)
Habebe
Member
Mon Jun 29 22:05:46
Tw, Oh the story is absolute BS.

What I think happened, was they seen a bunch of amgry black people piling into there neighborhood and a mix of panic and excitement they broke out the guns.

His story sounds like What I would tell the cops.

I'd also bet the threats they heard were closer to.

Guy " this is private property, the cops are on there way"

Random protestor " I'll beat you the fuck up pussy"
Habebe
Member
Mon Jun 29 22:21:42
Fuck, my good phone is cracked. Like its a hairline ceack but still.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Jun 30 00:10:23
this part is particularly unbelievable:

"One person pulled out some loaded pistol magazine and clicked them together and said that you were next."

...so i stood in the wide open w/ no obvious concern, plus none for my wife who was meandering around

one of the better vids:
http://twitter.com/averyrisch/status/1277398535973949440
sam adams
Member
Tue Jun 30 00:42:51
Obviously they are justified. Its private property, with forcible entry. And a mob with history of violence.
Habebe
Member
Tue Jun 30 00:56:19
Oh I agree they were justified. But the story is BS. Its what you tell the cops in case this goes to court.
sam adams
Member
Tue Jun 30 09:55:48
Possibly true.
Paramount
Member
Tue Jun 30 10:10:51
Has the Civil War 2 stated now?
Paramount
Member
Tue Jun 30 10:11:41
* started
Forwyn
Member
Tue Jun 30 13:40:48
Hopefully this is a wakeup call to the middle/upper class. Get some firearms training. Having money doesn't make you elite; and the elite won't be sharing their protection. Dear Lord, get something better for your wife than a Bryco .380, and teach her how to use it.

And if forced to defend yourself against the entitled mob, be fully prepared for the wave of media screeching, mocking, and derision. Expect to be doxxed. And faggots like tw will defend it.
chuck
Member
Tue Jun 30 14:26:02
> Hopefully this is a wakeup call to the middle/upper class. Get some firearms training. Having money doesn't make you elite; and the elite won't be sharing their protection.

"Time to gun up, liberals"

http://www...ion/coronavirus-democracy.html
Habebe
Member
Tue Jun 30 14:33:37
That reminds me, I seen Remington might be selling out to the Navajo Nation.

They're LITERALLY giving guns to the Indians.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jun 30 14:43:07
Give them Apache helicopters and let the strafe Washington DC, like Daenerys did with King's Landing.
jergul
large member
Tue Jun 30 15:46:57
I think the modern equivalent of the dragons are tectical nukes on inter theater (but not ICBMs) missiles.
Habebe
Member
Tue Jun 30 15:56:19
Apaches shoot hellfire missiles.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jun 30 16:11:11
Jergul
It doesn’t last for long enough of a scene though. Just imagine 12 Apache helicopters with war paint and an ominous actual Apache song about the end of the world as they fly low over the Potomac river. We are talking about a solid 15 minutes of monuments and Trump staff being HELL FIRED! Trump himself dies as the White House collapses on top of his bunker, but he is finally reunited with Ivanka, his true love in life.
Habebe
Member
Tue Jun 30 16:18:07
http://youtu.be/_6L8NFcMakk

Footage on how the raid on the
Trump whitehouse will end.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Jun 30 16:21:30
Trump is a candy-ass coward

would be more like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiXNUaSjXRY
... but him being more of a whiny child complainer in his protesting
Rugian
Member
Tue Jun 30 16:26:11
Tw

Kinda surprised you didnt use Sutler's death from V for Vendetta, seems more in line with your characterization of Trumps bravery.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2l54ZSMQhRs
Habebe
Member
Tue Jun 30 16:27:48
Yeah the Ivanka thing is a little wierd. But less spoken about is Biden and his grandaughter.... Just as wierd.

That does not excuse Trumps weirdness.

sam adams
Member
Tue Jun 30 16:46:54
White people brandish gun in their own property, no black people hurt in any way.

Blm: howls

Chop "security" in seattle accidently guns down 2 black children

Blm: silence
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Jun 30 17:25:33
my complaints are on the lady constantly aiming at people (not merely brandishing)

people who had no interest in them or their property

=====

& the V death scene was not as memorable to me
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jul 13 23:41:43
Update:

"Police seize gun at home of St. Louis couple who pointed weapons at protesters"
[CBS News; July 11th, 2020]
http://www...pointed-weapons-at-protesters/
"Police said they were executing a search warrant when they seized a semi-automatic .223 caliber rifle, which matches the description of the weapon Mark McCloskey was seen holding."

"Attorney Al Watkins, who previously represented the couple, told reporters outside the courthouse Saturday that he was also turning over the hand gun Patricia McCloskey pointed at protesters, CBS St. Louis affiliate KMOV-TV reported. He said he was in possession of the gun to make sure it wasn't tampered with. He also claimed the gun doesn't work and that Patricia McCloskey knew that at the time of the protest."

..
Looks like the McCloskeys also had a 100-person protest show up at their house on July 3rd "for around 15 minutes before moving on":
[DailyMail link; they reported first]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8491015/Black-Lives-Matter-protesters-return-St-Louis-mansion-lawyer-couple-drew-guns.html
Sounds like the protest was planned; in advance the McCloskeys hired private security to barricade the street and stand on their balcony.

..
Firearms can be seized during criminal investigations related to their use, so it seems that Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner has begun her previously stated plan of bringing charges. She seems to be an incompetent prosecutor with a history of losing legally flimsy cases for the sake of public perceptions, and she'll be going after competent career trial lawyers who have funding for long-term litigation.. so it may be fun to see Gardner's case go down in flames.
Habebe
Member
Tue Jul 14 06:00:15
I hope the trial is televised, especially after CCs description.
TJ
Member
Tue Jul 14 08:54:06
I had posted this in another thread so decided to re-post here.

Another DA gone off the rails.

The current lawyer who will be representing Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who are personal injury lawyers in St. Louis.

Missouri recognizes the "castle doctrine" and allows residents to use force against intruders, without the duty to retreat, based on the notion that your home is your "castle."

JOEL J. SCHWARTZ
Image of Super Lawyers selectee Joel J. Schwartz
314-862-4332
EMAIL
Attorney Profile

Top Rated Criminal Defense Attorney in St. Louis, MO
Rosenblum Schwartz & Fry, PC120 South Central Avenue, Suite 130
St. Louis, MO 63105Visit: https://www.rsflawfirm.comPhone: 314-862-4332Fax: 314-862-8050
Selected To Super Lawyers: 2013 - 2014, 2016 - 2020
Licensed Since: 1989
Education: The University of Texas School of Law

Below is a clip I've copied from another article.

"Former prosecutors who worked with her have done what former prosecutors almost never do: open up to the public and tell people what they think about how she’s handling cases. And here’s the real kicker: Almost half of all felony cases from 2018 have had to be delayed because the Circuit Attorney’s office has failed to share evidence with the court and the defense. To repeat: almost half of all St. Louis felony cases have been bungled by Kim Gardner."

"If they aren’t careful, prosecutors can get drunk on power. Elected to office, they can begin to believe they are above the law, that the pursuit of justice may even require them to commit injustice. That is what is happening at the St. Louis Circuit Attorney’s office, and those of us who have spent a lifetime in law enforcement need to bring these abuses to light. The Courts and the state of Missouri need to take swift action."
Rugian
Member
Tue Jul 14 09:45:12
Yeah this is another activist DA who thinks her position is a platform to enforce her progressive politics on the community.

This was the same person who got into a slap fight with the state AG last month because she released all arrested rioters from custody. But now two white people have defended their property and it's time to press charges.

To TJ's point, more than 75 prosecutors have left office since Gardner took over in 2017, resulting in a turnover rate in excess of 100%.

And earlier this year Gardner filed a federal civil lawsuit against the city and police union, claiming that a "coordinated and racist" conspiracy was being hatched to force her out of office. She clearly has a racial axe to grind here.

People need to pay more attention to show they're electing to local office.
sam adams
Member
Tue Jul 14 11:53:00
Prosecute white people for defending themselves, dont prosecute africans for their 100th felony.

Gee, i wonder why st louis is such a shithole.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Jul 14 15:38:06
Trump believes the couple would've been beat up at minimum & their home ransacked & probably burned down
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70Jzf0NhBv8
...as happened to no home owners, in any city (that i'm aware of)
Rugian
Member
Mon Jul 20 18:09:45
Well, it happened:

"St. Louis couple hit with criminal charges for waving guns at BLM protesters"

http://nyp...ple-hit-with-criminal-charges/

Governor is already promising a pardon if they're convicted.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 20 20:05:54
and so the trail of burned homes and murdered home owners continues
Renzo Marquez
Member
Wed Jul 22 16:28:16
Prosecutors do already be misconducting doe:

http://www...c2d?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot
Renzo Marquez
Member
Wed Jul 22 16:28:44
St. Louis prosecutor ordered crime lab to reassemble Patricia McCloskey's gun

Assistant Circuit Attorney Chris Hinckley stated in charging documents that the gun was "readily capable of lethal use"
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Jul 22 23:38:03
"
Patricia McCloskey and her husband, Mark McCloskey, have said the handgun Patricia McCloskey waved at protesters was inoperable because they had used it as a prop during a lawsuit they once filed against a gun manufacturer. In order to bring it into a courtroom, they made it inoperable.
"

so they thought the people were about to kill them so the wife strolls up to the crowd waving a disabled gun... hmm... doesn't quite add up

seems more likely they screwed w/ it after facing prosecution as they are lawyers & lawyers are scum... why would you take your own gun into a court case about a manufacturer & why would you not fix it after
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Jul 22 23:44:44
a more believable (& possibly true) explanation was the husband tampered w/ it as he feared her shooting him :p
Dukhat
Member
Thu Jul 23 02:18:57
By the time they are prosecuted, Parsons likely won't be governor.
Habebe
Member
Thu Jul 23 08:14:57
Tw, I would say your right, but there excuse is super verifiable.

You can tell they are lawyers though, from day one there story has been like if a Lawyer wrote a short novel.

The gun that was actually waived at people wasn't active.... There story isnjust too perfect.

Its not hard to remove a firing pin though.
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 23 13:23:11
Coulda, woulda, shoulda.

You can make accusations, but it is now 100% verifiable that the ADA falsified evidence and charging documents.

Give him the guillotine
Rugian
Member
Thu Jul 23 13:32:44
I mean, this whole thing couldnt be more blatant. Leftist rioters are given virually free reign to cause disorder and violence; meanwhile anyone who attempts to defend themselves against the anarchy has the book thrown at them.

The DA is clearly attempting to intimidate anyone into dissuading them from defending their property and lives against the mob. Utilize your 2nd Amendment or Castle Doctrine rights and be charged with a felony.

At this point, there is no "government" in St Louis, there is only an activist organization calling itself a government that abets and encourages the leftwing rioters.
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 13:44:19
"At this point, there is no "government" in St Louis"

It's actually not difficult to provoke the goosestepping, seditious traitor in rugian these days.
Rugian
Member
Thu Jul 23 14:23:22
Hood

The goosestepping is coming from the activist organization that is suppressing and Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens.
sam adams
Member
Thu Jul 23 14:58:34
Ahhh, here comes hood, with the tired old "you are a nazi" line of debate.
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 15:05:37
If it quacks like a duck and it goosesteps like a nazi...

Also lets not pretend that rugian's plethora of evidence over the years is nonexistent.
Rugian
Member
Thu Jul 23 15:18:59
Defending yourself against trespassing and rioting is considered nazism now? I'll admit, that's a new one to me.
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 15:23:48
Yep, because that's what I said, right? Those were my exact words. 100%.


In other news, rugian is still clinically retarded.
Rugian
Member
Thu Jul 23 16:00:41
Your exact words were something about my alleged goosestepping and sedition having been provoked.

And what prompted you to make that accusation was my assertion that the local government in St Louis was acting more like an activist organization than an actual government.

And that assertion was in turn based in part on the DA selectively using the law to target people defending their home against trespassers, during a period of national tumult in which riots have resulted in deaths, injuries, and substantial property damage and theft.

So yes, I interpreted your comment as saying that defending yourself against trespassing is a form of nazism. Because those were in fact your words.

I know that logic is not one of your strong suits, but at least try to keep up with the basic points being made.
Rugian
Member
Thu Jul 23 16:04:46
And I mean, come on. Given that you've seemingly gone full blown communist in recent months, why *would* I think you would have respect for the defense of property rights?

Or is it just the Jewish landlords who deserve to suffer in your mind?
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 16:19:31
Those weren't my words at all, illiterate tard. I even did your fucking work for you, quoting precisely the phrase I was responding to. You know, the part where you asserted that an American government is illegitimate.

Additionally, I didn't suggest your sedition or goose-stepping was provoked. Those were adjectives describing you, not what was provoked. YOU were provoked. 5th grade is calling, and it weeps for your crude understanding of the English language.

The calling you a Nazi part has nothing to do with defending property, but everything to do with your obsession with the (((Jews))) over the past [entirety of your life] years. People who support Nazis, talk like them, and share their beliefs, are indistinguishable from actual Nazis, and I definitely don't care about the difference between a card-carrying member and their in-the-closet twin.
Rugian
Member
Thu Jul 23 16:36:27
Oh okay, so you took my words out of context to derive something that wasn't said. I got you now fam.

You're not very good at this, you know.

Also, *I'm* not the one who's been effectively calling for expropriating the property of an investor class that heavily consists of members of the tribe. Maybe cool it with your own casual anti-Semitism before accusing others of such a heinous belief.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 23 16:52:34
see 0:10-0:13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoJebUvnSAI

if that weapon is disabled, i doubt she knows it (& doubt that it is, unless unbeknownst to her as i noted)

plus, not the behavior of people who expected these people to shoot them & burn their house as the guy claims

whether convicted or not, discouraging that behavior seems a good idea to me
Renzo Marquez
Member
Thu Jul 23 16:52:56
tw cunts nonstop about problems with the criminal justice system (usually when white people engage in self-defense against violent ferals) but has no problem with a prosecutor tampering with evidence.
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 16:54:05
Ah, the classic Trump defense. "I didn't say those words that you precisely quoted me saying. Fake news!"
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 16:59:09
Oh, and a quick add:

Your faux "I'm not an antisemite!" really takes a credibility dive when you talk about "the tribe." Or "your people." Or constantly bring up Jews despite being completely unrelated. It's like those politicians who clearly pay twinks for bjs in hotel rendezvous, but make statements about how sinful homosexuality is. We all know what's going on.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 23 17:08:55
"usually when white people engage in self-defense against violent ferals"

such as what other time?


i don't think it's clear there's any tampering of evidence, that printed list of what the crime lab did is probably part of the evidence that both sides have

the gun was confiscated like 2 weeks after event iirc, so they can make their 'we disabled it to take it into court' argument, go ahead (i doubt that's how you would disable a gun to get it into court though... plus you would re-enable it if your own personal defense weapon...)
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 23 17:13:13
...and what makes it even more unbelievable that it was disabled (knownst to her) is after the incident the bad press would've made them more concerned of retaliation & wanting working weapons for defense

(although i wouldn't blame him for secretly disabling it given how she wields it, if they want to change their story)
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 23 22:56:37
"i don't think it's clear there's any tampering of evidence"

ROFL. You missed where they corrected assembly errors, but the ADA reported it as a functional weapon in the charging documents anyway?

You're being a fucking retard
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 23 22:59:39
i have seen no charging documents, i see 5 words of an alleged sentence fragment in them

and i am reasonably certain both sides get copies of any crime lab reports
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 23 22:59:55
"goosestepping, seditious traitor"

Also, is this supposed to be an insult? We need to pledge allegiance to our city councils and prosecutors now?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Thu Jul 23 23:04:45
and incident was ~June 28th... gun confiscated ~July 10th

there is no proof of its condition on ~June 28th one way or the other... take your arguments to court

one thing is clear (to me) they've been lying* a ton since the start so i have no reason to trust a word they've said


*proof of lying (to me): as noted, her behavior in no way whatsoever matches their claim of being in fear of imminent death
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 23 23:06:11
So you've seen enough to know they fucking knowingly tampered with evidence

stop
being
retarded

Writing that the weapon was “readily capable of lethal use", a key component of the charges under Missouri law, while also secretly ordering the crime lab to reassemble the weapon to be "“readily capable of lethal use" (the document revealing this order was anonymously leaked), is TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE.

Like, whether or not she knew it was fucked up should really have no bearing on your personal opinion of the moral justification for waving weapons at the crowd, but it's not even up for debate that the evidence was clearly, intentionally tampered with.
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 23:07:07
"We need to pledge allegiance"

Who said anything about pledging allegiance?
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 23 23:07:30
Whether or not the McCloskeys tampered with the weapon after the incident, before the gun was seized, is a matter for the court.

IT'S IRRELEVANT TO THE FACT THAT THE ADA REPORTED THE GUN WAS READILY CAPABLE OF LETHAL USE AT THE TIME OF SEIZURE WHILE ILLICITLY MODIFYING THE WEAPON TO MAKE IT READILY CAPABLE OF LETHAL USE
Forwyn
Member
Thu Jul 23 23:08:26
"Who said anything about pledging allegiance?"

So who gives a shit that a guy who isn't even from St. Louis is remarking on the illegitimacy of a local government?
hood
Member
Thu Jul 23 23:27:50
When was giving a shit a requirement to insult someone? Rugian's irrelevance certainly isn't a restriction on his ability to spout nonsense; logically, it shouldn't be a restriction on criticizing his nonsense.

And let's not forget just how hot and bothered he got when he was accusing the left of delegitamizing the Trump administration. He clearly understands the concept for which I'm calling him out.
Habebe
Member
Fri Jul 24 00:53:04
"here comes hood, with the tired old "you are a nazi" line of debate."

He can't help himself, its his inner Jew that anyone against him is a Nazi.

I think we aremall losing track of what actually went down.

Yes the couple's story is BS. But we also can figure out roughly the true story.

Which is an upper class older white couple in a gated community looked outside and seen a hoarde of angry black rioters tearing down there gate and panicked.

so they excersize there God given right to defend themselves. They hurt no one and the the crowd left.

It should really be the end of the story , but a halfwit AG wanted to.get her name in the paper followed by the governor all vying for attention.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 02:09:18
"secretly ordering the crime lab to reassemble the weapon to be "“readily capable of lethal use" "


how did you establish "secretly"? you know what would be a LOT more secret? doing it actually secretly where there isn't reports generated showing what was done... prosecutors & defense get copies of all reports, i doubt a crime lab report would be easy to hide & there's no indication in that article there was an attempt to hide

and as noted, not sure there is any evidence at all to the state of the weapon at the time of the incident, & that sentence fragment doesn't indicate any secret tampering
Habebe
Member
Fri Jul 24 03:23:48
Tw , From what I gather it was put back together to demonstrate that it could be** quickly be made to fire if someone wanted to.
jergul
large member
Fri Jul 24 05:01:47
Habebe
So all the defence can really document is that the weapon was temporarily disabled at some point before the weapon was handed to the prosecution.

This seems an awfully lot like trying to protect yourself from a DOU conviction by storming home after an accident and have a couple shots of vodka.
jergul
large member
Fri Jul 24 05:02:22
DUI*
jergul
large member
Fri Jul 24 05:04:02
Does it even matter? Is there a material difference between robbing a bank at gunpoint with a functional weapon, and a non-functioning one?
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Jul 24 05:50:34
jergul
large member Fri Jul 24 05:01:47
"So all the defence can really document is that the weapon was temporarily disabled at some point before the weapon was handed to the prosecution."

The defense doesn't have to prove anything. The burden is on the prosecutor to prove every element of the offense. The prosecutor can attempt to prove that the gun was disabled at some point between the incident and when the evidence was collected. It's unethical for the prosecutor to lie about the state of the evidence when it was collected.

jergul
large member Fri Jul 24 05:04:02
"Does it even matter?"

Yes.

http://law...souri/2005/t38/5710000030.html

There are 10 subdivisions laying out different circumstances for which the law applies. Most of these are clearly not applicable because of either the location of the incident or the lack of discharge. The prosecutor needs her conduct to fit under subdivision (4).

"(4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner"
Rugian
Member
Fri Jul 24 07:27:36
The political left has literally taken to calling itself "the resistance" since 2016, yet Hood thinks we shouldn't be able to point that out. ROFL
jergul
large member
Fri Jul 24 07:34:50
Renzo
Thanks for the link. The husband was actually carrying an indisputably functional weapoon and the wife carrying a visually functional weapon that may or may not have been capable of firing.

Point 9 on aiding and abetting.

The combination of the two people have the required elements. A weapon capable of being fired and brandishing of a weapon in a threatening manner.

There is a case here.
Forwyn
Member
Fri Jul 24 07:58:19
"how did you establish "secretly"?"

Because this report was anonymously leaked by a whistleblower, not provided to the defense.

"that sentence fragment doesn't indicate any secret tampering"

That sentence fragment is the lie. The document establishes the tampering.

Stop
being
retarded

Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Jul 24 09:23:32
jergul, are you referring to this part of the statute?

"9. Any person knowingly aiding or abetting any other person in the violation of subdivision (9) of subsection 1 of this section shall be subject to the same penalty as that prescribed by this section for violations by other persons."

If so, it's definitely not applicable. It refers back to subdivision (9) which I'll reproduce below.

"(9) Discharges or shoots a firearm at or from a motor vehicle, as defined in section 301.010, RSMo, discharges or shoots a firearm at any person, or at any other motor vehicle, or at any building or habitable structure, unless the person was lawfully acting in self-defense; or"

There was no discharge/shot involved in this incident. Although it also covers some other circumstances, the aiding and abetting language looks like it was drafted to cover the driver in a drive by shooting. In any case, without a discharge/shot it can't apply.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 12:17:11
"It's unethical for the prosecutor to lie about the state of the evidence when it was collected"

which is not shown to have happened

========

"Because this report was anonymously leaked by a whistleblower, not provided to the defense. "

you either have some other source you are working with or are making stuff up... i see no mention of a whistleblower & it easily could've been leaked by the defense to taint the jury

if tampering w/ evidence charges are filed, you win

==========

after several minutes of thought: the most credible explanation is the husband disabled the gun -after- the incident as he saw how recklessly she wielded it & feared her shooting someone if more protesters came by & getting in more serious trouble (i'll give that 40% chance as many options)

the court case story is just weird... i'd need answers to many questions such as how long ago that was & why they didn't fix it after... & why rely on that gun to defend themselves when in fear of imminent death including walking up near the suspected murderous mob w/ only that weapon

maybe we can stir up some marital trouble if no conviction...
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 12:28:44
this appears to be the document they pulled that sentence fragment from

http://blo...2a94/5f160ac1193cd.preview.jpg

but i can't find the 'attached documents' which establish why they are making the claims -which is the important part-... it's probably standard practice to claim the suspect committed the crime as the crime is defined, as that's why you are charging them (makes total sense in fact)

so far, no evidence of tampering, no evidence of hiding anything

(there's no reason to take photos of the disassembly & reassembly & write a report if tampering, in fact it would really really dumb)
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 12:35:41
of note:

-if- they cite the crime lab report as how they determined the gun was 'readily capable', then that report is DEFINITELY going in the evidence (although i am confident it would be regardless)

the court isn't going to just take your word for it
Forwyn
Member
Fri Jul 24 12:53:47
"it easily could've been leaked by the defense to taint the jury"

That would be an even quicker route to disbarment than tampering with evidence, and your random theories are getting more wild.

Altering the weapon to restore functionality and then issuing charging documents claiming functionality is malfeasance, it doesn't matter what retardation you come up with

stop
being
retarded
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 13:02:47
the only thing that occurred is in charging documents they claim the person they charged committed the crime... is that surprising?

if proving the gun was operable is necessary, they will have to do so... if they are relying on the crime lab report they will have to show it... how about you stop being retarded

if it's a whistleblower why is no one saying it's a whistleblower? are there justice officials in shock at this alleged abuse? is the prosecutor's office on their heels in panic?
Forwyn
Member
Fri Jul 24 13:09:11
Under MO law, "readily capable" is a core requirement for prosecution. They asserted that is was, in a document issued well after the crime lab reassembled the weapon, under the orders of one of Gardner's direct lackeys.

"if it's a whistleblower"

"if" lol

There's not a single person in the justice system smarter than tw that can recognize an abuse, it's just the defense attorney trying to get disbarred
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Jul 24 13:26:05
Without seeing the actual charging document, it's hard to say. But the prosecutor is clearly a scumbag and has previously lied about the case (e.g., asserting that the protesters were peaceful when they clearly were not... they're on video breaking down a gate before trespassing). This is an attempted lynching like with the cops charged in the Rayshard Brooks case. Whether the McCloskeys could have actually used deadly force lawfully against the trespassers under MO's expansive castle doctrine law is an interesting question. Obviously, they didn't do that and their conduct is very clearly protected under MO law.
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Jul 24 13:27:59
Their affirmative defense is pretty much unquestionable regardless of whether her firearm was immediately operable.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 13:33:13
has the prosecutor's office been raided? & the crime lab? (before they shred the photos & report they wrote up about their criminal activity...)

there is no mention of the crime lab report in that document (at least the part they pulled the sentence fragment from)... it's only the news article making the link & insinuating they had crime lab reassemble it in order to write it in charging document

and IF the crime lab is one of or their only reason, it will be stated & will have to be shown, there is no hiding, there is no tampering...

what part of that don't you accept? do you think they can claim the crime lab found it operable without providing the report? (they can't)
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Jul 24 13:41:37
I don't accept prosecutors misleading the public to advance their own political careers (Nifong, Mosby, Paul Howard in ATL, Gardner in this case). Gardner has done that repeatedly by calling the protesters peaceful... they weren't. I don't support lynchings. These charges never should have been brought. An objective factfinder will never convict the McCloskeys.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 13:57:48
"peaceful" is subjective... a broken gate (not belonging to this couple afaik) is only action used to demonstrate otherwise

the guy claims they charged his house (which is unlikely, both as they had no reason to,& not something that has happened anywhere..., plus they would've reached his house far before he got armed, its the first house... yet they are never seen closer than sidewalk) plus he claims they threatened to kill him which maybe is possible, but only after they were pointing guns at the people... and again makes walking up to them with an inoperable gun really odd...
Renzo Marquez
Member
Fri Jul 24 14:05:57
McCloskeys called 911 on the violent protesters before the guns came out. You're seeing what the "protesters" want you to see. She used her handgun for deterrence.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 14:41:29
if they called 911 before the guns then even more proof their home was never rushed (not that that has ever been any protester behavior anywhere that i know of)

they are the first house on the block, how long could it take to rush it
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 14:49:09
...and if claiming they rushed the house then were scared back to the sidewalk by the guns (which i don't think the couple ever said occurred) are there any broken windows, any graffiti on their walls? did they rush the house then start smoking cigs while waiting?

& why would you ever leave the house if they were right outside allegedly threatening to kill you...
Habebe
Member
Fri Jul 24 15:33:34
Jergul, I'm not 100% understanding of your position. Are you saying this may be a legally viable case? Or are you saying you think these people were morally out of hand?

Because legally even the left knows this is not a legally viable case. TW has for example mentioned the fact that it was a private road likely serailed the case. Couple that with the Castle Doctrine.

http://cri.../castle-doctrine-overview.html

How Does the Castle Doctrine Work?

The castle doctrine allows you to establish a self-defense justification for using lethal force against an intruder in your home. For example, the doctrine may shield you from criminal prosecution -- and sometimes also from civil liability -- for shooting an unarmed prowler or your inebriated neighbor who was breaking into your garage to retrieve some tools he had lent you.

Each state has its own version of the doctrine, and some offer greater legal protection when confronting intruders than others do. In places that have adopted a broad version of the castle doctrine, you have the right to use deadly force against almost any person who has broken into your home. Other states take a narrower approach by, for instance, requiring evidence that the intruder was attempting to commit a felony. In some states, your workplace and occupied vehicle are deemed part your "castle." That is, you can use deadly force against intruders in those places as if they'd broken into your home.


Thats just one section, I didnt want to post a wall of text.
Habebe
Member
Fri Jul 24 15:50:43
Tw, I get what tour saying morally, a private road and gate morally is not the same as your house, it is similar to a fenced in backyard though.

Legally, the mob of people broke down a private gate to enter a private road.

Even on a moral basis, the mob doesn't come off in the best light either.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 16:47:55
i wouldn't say it's as bad as entering a fenced yard

i assume neighbors walk back & forth on that sidewalk, but you wouldn't expect neighbors walking in your fenced yard (or unfenced yard for that matter)

but yes, trespassing is occurring since a private community... i don't know if the case is viable or not... not a law expert :p
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Jul 24 16:49:56
(& the gate is communal use at the end of that sidewalk, not specifically to get on their property)
show deleted posts
Bookmark and Share