You be the Judge

L

loknload

New member
The other day I was called for jury duty.Doing my civic duty I did nothing, even using my recent hand injury as an excuse to be excused from serving. After sitting through jury selection and the 12 plus 2 alternates were to be picked, I thought that I was just about home free. Notttt juror No#13 was picked ,Me I was No#13 an Alternate.Which means I would have to sit and listen to the story and the likelyhood of giving my 2 cents was nil. But I will do my duty.
The case believe it or not was an Illegal Firearms pocession charge. A gun case and I can't say anything or vote. Unless this goes into overtime and someone gets sick.
The case is as follows. A 35-40yr old male was spotted on opening day of Spring gobbler season carrying a shotgun across someones yard which would put him in the safe zone. Two Game Wardens spotted him and stopped him on a routine check. Check license and to make sure he had permission to be where he was. They made him unload his shotgun and took note of model and seriel number. Finding
he was legal they had no reason to further detain him or charge him with anything and no reason to confiscate the shotgun. He was left go to go do his thing.
Now for some reason this was reported to the local police chief. We were not told why. The police chief then files the above charges since this guy was a "Convicted Felon" They do not tell us why. The guy is on Probation.
During the trial the two game wardens were there to testify that they stopped the guy and let him go because he did no violation of game laws. When the warden was ask if he knew the defendent, He replied he knew of him.When ask if he knew that he was a covicted felon, He replied that he had heard rumors but nothing official to the fact.
Both wardens emphasized they had no reason to confiscate the shotgun.
Now evidence wise there is none, The local police chief did not show to testify and there was no SHOTGUN. The guy in question takes the stand and testifies on is own behalf that yes he was there and he was stopped by the two wardens but he was not carrying any shotgun.
That was the case his word against theirs.

My conclusion is this: Since there is a lot more to the story then what we were told, And since there was no testimony from the charging officer and the very last most important thing there was no shotgun. They(the wardens) had a model and seriel but no physical shotgun was entered as evidence. The guy said he was carrying a big stick and he did not know why they were trying to do this to him.
My verdict would have been Not Guilty
Now I must warn all of you I still have not found out what the verdict was since I was excused before it was read. The other alternate and myself went back and waited about 45 minutes and no verdict. I will find out though.
So what will it be Guilty as charged or Innocent, Case dismissed?

I would have liked to have heard the arguments in the jury deliberation room
afterwards :) This made for an interesting day and I'm always glad to do my duty :rolleyes:


I'm not Perry Mason and I don't pretend to be either :)

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous
 
It should be Not Guilty, but dollars to donuts it won't. :(

Interesting timing on this story. At last night's Libertarian meeting, our guest speaker was the local FIJA rep. He reminded us that it only takes ONE dissenting vote to hang the jury. Only ONE person who knows what Jury Nullification means and is willing to stand firm.

Folks, let this be a warning: next time, it could easily be one of us in the dock. If you're called and weasel your way out of it, you're abandoning your brothers. Get on that jury and go with your conscience.
 
Coinneach, I can't agree with you more. This is the second time I've been called locally and served. I always enjoy it ;)

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous
 
I would love to get onto a "Gun Case" woohoo! I bet I can interpert laws as good as anyone else (to suit my views of course)

------------------
Dead [Black Ops]
 
I would think the sheeple will find him guilty because the wardens had a make/model no. and a serial number - items not usually found on a stick. ;) Unless they could prove the guy had the gun (4473, etc.), his lawyer could argue they made up the numbers, although why they would do that would be another question. It boils down to the reputation of the wardens.

And, why would the wardens stop him if he did not have a gun, unless they thought the guy would be knocking turkeys in the head with his "stick".

What really bothers me is why the wardens took down the serial number if he was not breaking the law? Where is the law, or justification for that?



[This message has been edited by Oatka (edited August 31, 2000).]
 
Oatka, My question exactly, Why would the warden copy down make and model. Many times I've been out hunting and ran across a Game Warden. It's been more like Howya doin,Seen anything and so on. Never have I been ask to surrender my weapon for examination. My question as a defense attorney would have been,Did you stop anyone else before and after, Since this was a pretty popular shotgun and seriel numbers can be remembered.
The big stick could have been mistaken at a distance, Could have by the way of carry, Big maybe on that. This is big hunting area of this County and I'm sure there is alot of poaching going on. Like I said there is alot more to the story then we were told.
But again as far as I'm concerned no gun,no case. You know as well as I do some and I say some LEOS hold grudges for some reason or another. Some Game Wardens can be mighty big feeling. Just my thoughts ;)

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous

[This message has been edited by loknload (edited August 31, 2000).]
 
I would be curious to know what the felony was he had been convicted of. Of course, other than the charge of being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm, his past criminal history can not be dicussed during the trial phase. That could only be dicsussed during the sentensing phase. The reason I am curious is many felons are only prohibited from possessiing a conealable firearm as a stipulation of their probabtion/parole.
Based on what you have told us I would have to say his attorney was not on the ball.

------------------
Gunslinger

I was promised a Shortycicle and I want a Shortycicle!
 
Yes sir, all i had was just a big stick to hunt them durn sneaky turkeys with.

Was that a 12 or 20 guage stick??? lol.

Guilty.
 
Gunslinger,I believe the guy was being defended by a public defender. Here in PA. it is any firearm,State law and it may be a misdemeanor offense, A Protection of Abuse order would not allow you to own and have in your pocession. The guy could have had one of those against him and slapped his ex for all I know and that would have screwed him.
I'm real sure there is much more to this and I will never know ;)And I don't think I really want to either :)

I'm not Perry Mason and I don't pretend to be either :) The facts and nothing but the facts :)

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous

[This message has been edited by loknload (edited August 31, 2000).]
 
Depends what the definition of "stick" is.
Damn Klinton and OJ have forever warped my mind so I say "Innocent".
This police chief is either doing his duty or acting out a grudge.

------------------
"In my opinion, anyone pushing through anti-gun legislation is a bloody traitor and should be sent up for treason" N.H. Stuart
 
I have seen turkeys travel at the speed of light . If this guy can hunt them with a stick he needs to be in Sydney Australia next month and represent us in Track and Field .

------------------
TOM
SASS AMERICAN LEGION NRA GOA
 
My .02 here.
First, unless he's had the felony reduced to a misdemeanor, he's not allowed to have any firearm at all, not just concealed firearms. There is a process in NY where certain persons otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms can be allowed to have a hunting firearm, but bottom line is that Felons are prohibited persons under Federal law.
Second, it's not that unusual for LEO's to record and run the serial numbers of any firearm we come in contact with to see if the weapon is stolen. I am sure the officer wrote down the numbers for that purpose, and they were still in his notes.
Third, although we're getting all of this second hand, I'd say the arresting officer wasn't there to testify because he had no direct testimony to provide. I am sure that the game warden probably let the officer know of his field interview, the officer had the warden write out a voluntary statement about the contact, and the defendant was arrested based on the voluntary statement. In such a case, the officer would have no reason to testify.
Last, those of you who say that you'd love to hear a gun case should know that one of the judges instructions will be that you can only use the facts presented in the court in deciding the verdict. You cannot use personal knowledge in assisting you with a verdict. A couple of months ago I transported a jail inmate to a gun-related supression hearing. The arresting officers and other officers at the scene testified, and were asked by the defense attorney about a gun law related topic. They answered incorrectly, and it was all I could do to not jump up and advise them of that. Sure enough, in closing arguments, the Defense used the incorrect testimony to buttress their claims. I tried to minimze the damage by pulling the brand new ADA over and letting her know of the error, but I don't know if it did any good in the long run.
Hope this has been helpful.
 
From the evidence presented.... as I see things.... Was anyone harmed in any way? Threatened? The answer is NO. Was any of the ten commandments broken? Again NO. If the answer to these questions is no, then no law has been broken. The law he was being tried on is only paper law and not real law. To preserve liberty we must all keep this in mind. If no harm to another is done, then the law itself is wrong.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
Bookie:
I dunno if I'd get that restrictive on laws. You're advocating that only when someone is hurt should someone be punished. However, many of our laws are built to be preemptive..safety standards in food, medicine , etc for instance, are designed to ensure that those items are safe for our use. Likewise, the laws about Felony possession of a weapon exist because society has said that these people lose their right to a firearm because their past crime is of a certain severity. Now one could argue that only violent felonies should suffer this fate, and I might agree with you. there seems to be a trend to inflate the number of felony level crimes. However, that should be addressed through the legislative process in order to be changed. I am not in favor of simply saying that a law is not a valid law simply because it doesn't meet some level of severity you have personally set.
 
I have never been called for Jury Duty. If I did isnt there a law that states my employer must give me time off to do this for however long it takes?

------------------
Try to take away my gun...and you will see my 2nd Amendment Right in ACTION!!! -Me

FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!
 
Tcsd1236:

Preemptive safety standards are a crock. We have other laws to protect people from the actions of unsafe products. Such as manufacturers are liable to the public for any damages that their product causes as a result of them being unsafe. If there products harm someone they are responsible for damages caused by their product. The only thing that a preemptive law gets us is more government, higher taxes and less freedom. It’s the same argument…. If one is going to make an unsafe product and sell it, (like a criminal misusing a gun) are your preemptive laws going to stop them? You can’t stop criminal behavior, you can only hold them accountable for their actions.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
Bookie:
And why are they liable? Because of a mix of court case and LAWS. Exactly my case.My point is that you cannot simply expunge all laws which are preemptive in nature.
Let me put it this way: I was just at the State Fair. Would it not be a reasonable expectation for me to assume that the roller coaster has passed some sort of safety examination BEFORE I get on the ride, or should I console myself that my family MIGHT get some money from the company once my crushed body has been picked up off the ground from under the roller coaster when it fails? According to your thinking, we should just roll along pell mell, with no sort of preemptive laws or controls. Try doing that in the complex society we live in, and soon everything will simply fall apart. You forget that all of these laws have come into being because of past events; they didn't just spring forth in someones mind.
I know that you're approaching this from the gun rights perspective, but I am talking about laws in society in general, not just the gun issue in particular.

[This message has been edited by tcsd1236 (edited September 01, 2000).]
 
Not guilty.

Like the guy said (sort of) in Jerry McGuire, "Show me the gunny".

And the chief filed the charges, then didn't show up? How do you cross-examine an affidavit?

Does this mean I think he didn't have the gun? No. Does it mean the chief slapped together a half-assed case with no evidence? Yes.
 
OK Guys here it is, I got the verdict tonight.
The Jury of 8 women and 4 men found the Defendant Guilty as Charged..........

I would have taken bets on that one ;)

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top