Trigger mods: U.S. v. Slatten

[Spats McGee]

I've been spending some time examining the ins and outs of gun mods. This is from the criminal case against Nicholas Slatten.

In addition, the government introduced circumstantial evidence suggesting Slatten modified—or allowed someone else to modify—his gun before the shooting, changing it from a two-stage trigger (more accurate, but takes longer to fire) to a hair trigger (allowing for quicker and easier firing).60 Because the modification had to occur before the incident,61 it supports the conclusion Slatten acted with premeditation.

United States v. Slatten, No. CR 14-107, 2019 WL 3431438, at *11 (D.D.C. July 30, 2019)

 

[Aguila Blanca]

In addition, the government introduced circumstantial evidence suggesting Slatten modified—or allowed someone else to modify—his gun before the shooting, changing it from a two-stage trigger (more accurate, but takes longer to fire) to a hair trigger (allowing for quicker and easier firing).60 Because the modification had to occur before the incident,61 it supports the conclusion Slatten acted with premeditation.

WOW!

Now THAT's a stretch.

That goes right along with the prosecutor in a murder case a few years ago who argued that "Premeditation can occur in an instant" (or something very close to that).

 

[zukiphile]

Third, the Court affirms its prior rulings that Slatten’s use of a hair-triggered SR-25 suggests he “desire[d] to fire quickly” and bears on his intent and motive. See Order 1-2, ECF No. 1036. To the extent the government’s inability to prove Slatten personally modified the trigger mechanism diminishes this evidence’s probative value, it does not extinguish it, since even willingly using a hair-triggered rifle bears on intent and motive. That’s all the more true because Slatten could—and did—point out this evidentiary gap while questioning the government’s witness who testified about the modification.

Emphasis added. The larger issue of the defendant's guilt aside, Bill Geissele sells a 3-gun trigger that is essentially his two stage trigger without the second stage wall at the disconnector. I would think that using one would bear on an intent and motive to put shots on a target in quick succession with less precision than an ordinary two stage trigger since that is what the Geissele ad copy suggests. I don't see the probative value as it pertains to a premeditated murder of someone posing no threat, since this would have been equally easy or easier with a two stage trigger.