(WI) Judge fines gun-toting Milwaukee merchant $1

O

Oatka

New member
Too bad the jury didn't nullify. The guy still has a misdemeanor on his record.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jul00/gun18071700.asp

Judge fines gun-toting Milwaukee merchant $1
By David Doege of the Journal Sentinel staff

One week after a jury reluctantly found a convenience store owner guilty of carrying a concealed pistol to work in his high crime neighborhood, a judge Monday fined the oft-robbed merchant $1 and questioned prosecutors' decision to file the case in the first place.

The district attorney's office recommended that Munir A. Hamdan, who killed a robber during a gun battle in the store three years ago, receive a 30-day jail term for carrying a pistol in his pocket.

But after declaring that Hamdan's case
"illustrates the problem" with some gun laws and noting that one juror wept in the courtroom after the guilty verdict was announced, Circuit Judge Robert Crawford concluded that the shopkeeper deserved a break.

"This was a difficult case which tore at the jurors," Crawford remarked. "I think that Mr. Hamdan deserves a slap on the wrist for this offense."

The jury found Hamdan, 54, guilty of the misdemeanor last week and even though he walked out of the courtroom Monday with just a $1 fine, he and his lawyer said they still might appeal the case on constitutional grounds.

"He had no criminal conviction before this," explained Jorge A. Gomez. "That's something we'll have to give a lot of thought." Hamdan's store, Capitol Foods, at 2483 W. Capitol Drive, is located in a census tract with some of the city's highest crime totals. Between 1997 and 1999, the neighborhood experienced six homicides, 98 robberies, 94 aggravated batteries and 16 rapes, according to Police Department statistics.

© Copyright 2000, Journal Sentinel Inc.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>One week after a jury reluctantly found a convenience store owner guilty of carrying a concealed pistol to work in his high crime neighborhood, a judge Monday fined the oft-robbed merchant $1 and questioned prosecutors' decision to file the case in the first place.[/quote]

TOO COOL!

Finally a judge that has some gumption to see what was right and go the way it should have been done instead of upholding the "gun owners are monsters" schtick!

------------------
Try to take away my gun...and you will see my 2nd Amendment Right in ACTION!!! -Me
 
I would never, never find anyone guilty of a unconstitutional infraction regardless of whether or not they were technically in violation of a illegal law. I don't see how he was found guilty, on the plus side at least it won't effect his RKBA since it's a misdemenor and the judge had good sense to do all he could to minimize the damage.
 
What should have happened is:
Unconstitutional law = Jury nullification.

------------------
"Lead, follow or get the HELL out of the way."
 
A few years ago you would have said the same of a "domestic violence" misdemeanor; "Who cares whether or not you got fined $1 for spanking your kid in public?" Then Congress came along and passed a law which RETROACTIVELY made any "domestic violence" misdemeanor a cause for stripping you of your rights. Who's to say they won't do the same for other misdemeanors in the future? Maybe all "weapons related" misdemeanors?

He should definately challenge this conviction, if he's got the bucks to pay the legal costs!

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
Jury nullification indeed.

Every TFL member should understand the principles of jury nullification. Get on juries and make the da*n system just. Check out www.fija.org ... you and I can make a difference, and we can do it with direct action in the courts.

The fine was great ... but, the conviction was a travesty.

Regards from AZ
 
Brett,

True it could effect him in the future, but as of now it does not. Honestly and regretfully I doubt he has more then two years before he or we will be illegal regardless. I absoultely agree that he should challenge it to the end too however.

[This message has been edited by scud (edited July 19, 2000).]
 
Realistically we have a lot longer than that, it's going to be long, slow and grinding - and very similar to Canada (not Australia).

In Australia they were smart - they got everyone to register everything up front. Of course, the English-speaking countries being out of synch means that Americans (at least those paying attention) know what licencing/registration are for.

You will be able to keep/use your guns for quite some time - even the most optimistic licencing/registration schemes would take a long time to implement in a country with this many guns.

It will be a long lingering slow process here, currently with the "safety" legislation they're trying ot jack up the minimum cost of guns (the 500 extra safeties/smartgun).

Needs-based licencing will cull "new" gun owners out, then just wait for the old guys to die.


Battler.
 
Supporting family puts grocer at risk

He, others talk of fear, holdups that put him in concealed-gun debate

By Mark Johnson of the Journal Sentinel staff
Last Updated: July 18, 2000

When he left Jerusalem for America 26 years ago, Munir A. Hamdan did not see himself selling bottles of beer and bags of chips at a small corner store. He wanted to fly planes.

But Hamdan was 28 years old with a wife and 3-month-old son, and after arriving in Milwaukee, he grounded his dream of becoming a commercial pilot and entered the corner grocery business.

"It's much better to stay with the wife and family," he now says, "than to be away from them all of the time."

But while the store allowed Hamdan and his family to work long hours together, there was "a dark side" to the business, says Nasser
Hamdan, the eldest of Munir Hamdan's six children. That dark side included confrontations with armed strangers, the chill of a gun thrust against Hamdan's forehead, and the days and sometimes weeks
it took for the fear to recede a little.

It was this side that thrust 54-year-old Munir Hamdan, a quiet,
reserved man, into the spotlight.

Between 1997 and 1999, he survived three armed robberies, including a 1997 shootout that left the robber dead on the sidewalk and Hamdan so badly shaken that he missed a month of work. A week ago, Hamdan was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon after bringing a .32-caliber pistol to his store, Capitol
Foods at 2483 W. Capitol Drive. On Monday, Circuit Judge Robert Crawford fined him $1, saying the case was a difficult one and Hamdan "deserves a slap on the wrist for this offense."

Hamdan has not paid his fine and won't say whether he's still bringing the pistol to his store. His lawyer, Jorge Gomez, says Hamdan is strongly considering an appeal of his conviction, based on a 1998 state law
allowing people "to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation, or any other lawful purpose."

Even if the appeal succeeds, Hamdan may be ready to leave the business. He says that on the whole, people in the neighborhood are very nice. He enjoys watching the children grow, even remembers when some were no bigger than bulges in their mothers' bellies.

And yet, his family worries about the time he spends in this corner shop with its thick bulletproof glass installed after the 1997 shootout.

"God knows he has been downplaying the number of times he has been robbed," his son Nasser says. "He may have been robbed a dozen times in 20 years."

He doesn't like to talk about the robberies. In Jerusalem, where he was raised, it would be unusual for a merchant to bring a handgun to work, he says. "Nothing happens like this."

His father was a farmer. In school, Hamdan had no experience with bullies.

In Milwaukee, he opened his first store, Community Food, at the corner of 27th and Hadley streets, and a few months afterward, began bringing the .32-caliber gun to work.

"I see so much crime around here, I feel the best thing to do is be safe," he says.

Even with family helping, Hamdan worked 10 to 12 hour days, seven days a week, seldom taking vacations.

"It really is kind of an immigrant story: Moved to this country 20 years ago, got involved in the business and everyone in the family contributes," says Gomez.

But it was not the immigrant story seen in movies. Hamdan and his family shared the work and the danger that went with it. One morning 16 years ago, a robber pulled a gun on Hamdan and his wife. The robber, not content to have received his money, cracked Hamdan and his wife over the head with his gun.

"He tried to put both of us in the cooler, a walk-in cooler," says Hamdan's wife. Hamdan's son Nasser was at the store the night in February 1997 that Chris A. Robinson put a gun to Hamdan's head.

The shootout that followed left Robinson dying on the sidewalk. It was over in a few chaotic seconds. The shaking, Nasser Hamdan says, went on much longer.

"You never get used to the fact that someone has a gun to your head no matter what you do for a living," he says, looking over at his father.

Family members describe the elder Hamdan as conservative and traditional, a man who keeps his emotions in check. But there is a break in his wall of reserve when he talks about the shooting that left his would-be robber dead. He says quite simply, "It made me sick in the stomach."

Today, the merchant would much rather discuss the letters of support and donations he has received during his prosecution for carrying a concealed weapon. They came from around the state and as far away as Alabama, North Carolina and Missouri.

In the high-crime neighborhood where he works, Hamdan has his supporters and his detractors. Daryl Page, a barber one door down, calls his neighbor "a pretty nice person" and says that bringing a gun to
work isn't such a bad idea.

"If we didn't have the security we have, I probably would want to," he says, explaining that his customers must ring a buzzer to enter his business.

Crime, Page says, may not be the only obstacle Hamdan and his family face in the neighborhood. Some folks, he says, "give foreigners a hard time."

Others are less sympathetic to Hamdan. Steve Sheppard, an occasional customer, still resents the way that Hamdan refused to sell him beer when he was 20 cents short, even though other customers have been allowed to buy items for less than the full price. Sheppard insists Hamdan wouldn't need to bring a handgun to the store "if he treated people right."

But Hamdan professes affection for the neighborhood, despite all that's happened.

"Why don't you tell him the truth?" his wife says, coaxing him to admit that he has considered moving and finishing with the grocery business.

Yes he has, he says, but there remains a strong reason for staying. "You have to support your family."

Appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on July 19, 2000.

**********************

That's the followup story. Hamdan, I'm told, will probably appeal so that he can get a CCW if we ever get the law passed. The judge, Crawford, is a gun owner and shoots at the same range I do (although he's even a worse shot than me ;) )


Dick
Want to send a message to Bush? Sign the petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/monk/petition.html and forward the link to every gun owner you know.
 
I like that the writer includes some bum who thinks that this man should cut him a break on the price of his beer.

Does "treating people right" include having some scumball try to intimidate you into giving stuff away? Next time, the guy would be $.40 short, and so on.

I think we should chip in so this man can buy a bigger gun than a .32. ;)
 
Hamdan didn't deserve a slap on the wrist.

He deserved a pat on the head, the caress of a hand, and a brotherly hug.

But now, we slap heros.

Regards from AZ
 
But after declaring that Hamdan's case
"illustrates the problem" with some gun laws and noting that one juror wept in the courtroom after the guilty verdict was announced, Circuit Judge Robert Crawford concluded that the shopkeeper deserved a break.

"This was a difficult case which tore at the jurors," Crawford remarked. "I think that Mr. Hamdan deserves a slap on the wrist for this offense."

The jury found Hamdan, 54, guilty of the misdemeanor last week and even though he walked out of the courtroom Monday with just a $1 fine, he and his lawyer said they still might appeal the case on constitutional grounds. The foregoing from the original post.

In this case, the judge may well have shown more sense than did the jury, which found the store keeper guilty.

As for "the tearful juror", every time I see, hear or read about that particular genre I feel ill, then annoyed.

These people strike me as HYPROCRITES. If they felt that circumstances justified a NOT GUILTY VERDICT, notwithstanding judges instructions or anything else, then they should obviously have voted NOT GUILTY. The nature of the charge being beside the point.

Since they seem to lack the courage of their convictions, no pun intended, their later protestations are akin to the maudlin ramblings of Messrs. Clinton and Gore, among other professional liars that one might name.
Rather like the wind in the trees, making sounds, but without meaning or value.

If these are the types of persons that get onto juries, we are well and truly, in deep trouble.

[This message has been edited by alan (edited July 20, 2000).]
 
This can be handled . The attorney petitions the court for ACD . Simply put if he stays out of trouble for 6 mos. the whole thing goes away . The judge seems the type to go for it .

------------------
TOM
SASS AMERICAN LEGION NRA
 
If the judge wanted to give the guy a break, he could have directed a verdict of not guilty. Given that he had that option, and elected not to use it, I'm not particularly impressed that he fined him "only" $1.

TB., NC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top