St. Louis couple charged for pulling guns at protest

Evidently, the handgun did not work due to a bad assembly with the firing pin installed backwards. Apparently, at the direction of the prosecutor, ballistics reassembled the gun correctly so that the prosecutor could formalize charges against the homeowners to state they had pointed an active weapon. I suspect this prosecutor won't be around for long.

 

*sigh* I said the McClosky's have stated WITH COUNSEL. Those two extra words are important dear. Do include them when you analyze the sentence.

Al Watkins is their attorney. Statements by your attorney working the case are statements by yourself according to the Rules of Evidence. Statements by your attorney working the civil case, as to facts that directly relate to criminal liability in the criminal case, are also admissible in the same fashion. This isn't a statement by "outside counsel" it is a statement by their criminal defense attorney working this case.

Additionally: Statements by party opponents or their Agents (like their attorneys for instance) are EXEMPTED from hearsay IE they are not hearsay. This is to be distinguished from something that is EXCEPTED from hearsay like an excited utterance, which is hearsay that is allowed because its nature is such that it is somewhat trustworthy. For example: Excited utterances, exclamations that occur during or just after an incident, tend to be trusted because they are a reflexive action. Hence they are allowed even though they are hearsay.

Practicing attorney here. You'll have to pardon me if this comes off as condescending: Leave the legal points to the lawyers. You're not any good at it.

 

It doesn't matter if the gun works or not, you point it at someone intending them to think it does and that counts.

 

Not according to the way the law was written in Missouri. Sorry

 

Assault is placing someone in the apprehension of an immediate physical injury in Missouri. Pointing a gun at their face will do that. They can still be charged with assault, and if you were correct that unlawful use can't lie as against them they already would've been.
I'd also need to see a case saying "if you can't put a mag in, rack the slide and fire it doesn't count as brandishing".
I'd also then need some form of actual evidence showing that the thing was even installed backwards and therefore inoperable at time of brandishing because it doesn't appear to be installed backwards in the stills from the tape.

 

I sure would like to see what you would do if some crazy ass mob ran up on your house as you and your family cower inside. I bet you would do whatever is possible to keep your family safe.

 

I'd stand to the side of the entrances, inside, and shoot anyone who actually tried to enter or anyone who approached the house with an incendiary.

I would not stand on my porch sweeping my wife with a loaded weapon, nor allow my wife to variously stand on the porch with the gun pointed at my ****ing head and wander about the property wildly gesticulating at persons not on the property and wandering out of my sight so I could not support and defend her if she actually needed help. Come to think of it, I wouldn't have my wife roaming the property wildly gesticulating at all, because that's dumb as **** from a "will she be safe" perspective. To say nothing of legality.

 

So, you wouldn't stop them from running up to the house and start throwing things at windows, tearing up the yard and trashing your car. That is you, but most people would defend their ****. And, glad to see you are the alpha male whose wife is supposed to be defenseless comletely reliant on her husband like women were 50 years ago. Welcome to the 21st century.

 

Running to the house to throw things in the windows: You can get shot.
Tearing up my yard: Even in Missouri you still have to pass a reasonableness test so no I don't think you're going to get shot if all you're doing is harming the lawn. I'd need to tie you to some other behavior which imminently threatens the safety of the homestead itself, like throwing things in the windows, and tearing the lawn up doesn't count.
Tearing up my car: See yard I'd need more than just that, unless they present with fire in which case they can get shot because gas explodes.

Alpha male? No, far from it, its just tactically about the dumbest thing ever to get out of LOS of your only support when you're outnumbered, or if you fear armed assailants in a crowd of people to stand in the open where you can be easily targeted instead of behind both cover (brick will stop a bit) and concealment (you also cannot see through brick or wood). You also avoid getting stressed and doing something ****ing stupid like wildly gesticulating with a firearm at all and sundry or roaming the property in areas you cannot be supported by your only backup.
That's leaving aside the fact that Karen there has probably not ever handled that firearm and it really shows, while my wife has taken more firearms training than I have.
Plus I don't let anyone point a gun at me, 21st century or not. Era has no basis on whether or not I let someone sweep me with a firearm like a ****ing idiot. Treating my wife as I'd treat an equal, and telling them "that's a stupid idea, stay in cover and wait for them to actually try something so we don't go to prison or get shot standing on the ****ing porch or wandering the property like idiots" or "don't point that ****ing gun at me, what is wrong with you" is being an equal opportunist. She's an equal, she doesn't need kid's gloves or for me to endorse foolishness on her part because "girl power".

 

This is not a dating site.

 

Aren't you so full of wit!

 

I wonder if nothing happens here when this perp pulls an assault rifle in road rage dispute.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rage-incident-North-Carolina-gas-station.html

 

Well, it's official the democrats are not only against the right to bear arms and the right to free speech they are against private property rights. How is it they accuse Trump of being an asset to Putin and yet they act like the Stalin regime.

 

Biden and company has already stated they want to do away with suburbs and houses. They want multi-family homes and apartments for all. Sounds like decreasing the middle class to flatten the curve. We can just have the elite rich and the rest of us at that rate.

 

Great and we'll all live in an episode of Good Times.

 

Democrats oppose Putin's ownership of Dopey Donald Trump.

 

No one ran up on anyone's house. They were marching by.

 

Who threw things at windows, tore up yards or trashed cars? If we are making stuff up why not throw in...pushed your grandma in the pool in her wheelchair, urinated on your daffodils and poisoned your dog? Might as well go full throttle

 

It's one thing to be naïve or gullible, but when one chooses to believe a known lifelong con man and pathological liar, that is just a downright obvious bad choice.

 

St. Louis prosecutor ordered crime lab to reassemble Patricia McCloskey's gun

Is this enough evidence for you Reality?

You say that you're a practicing attorney...of which State? There's a reason that States require that you be certified in their State laws before being able to practice law in their States.

 

White lives matter.....let's all agree.

 

To me, Biden and Trump are equally corrupt and horrible human beings. There is just as much Biden has said falsely as Trump if you want to go that far. Sad state of affairs that we have to choose between two morons in an election. But, when it comes to choosing between Democracy and Full on Socialism, I take Democracy and whatever Freedoms we still have left over the far Lefts indoctrination towards Communism.

 

I am sure those protestors were all sorts of peaceful as they broke down the gate, screaming about how they were going to to kill people living there, kill their dog and burn their house down. I for one, will not stand idle when someone threatens me, but you can stay in your home as it burns if they decide to do so and thank the protestors.

 

Evidence of what? Are you saying you consider that evidence tampering? When its initial condition was logged in the chain of evidence and so was what was done to it? You call testing logged through the chain of evidence tampering? O my sweet summer child.

You realize its not a gunsmith level fix to flip the spring around and put the slide back on on a PPK? It being that way days later when the search warrant was served, or years prior at trial, doesn't mean it was that way day of. Its a question for the jury to decide, whether or not they think it was operable day of. Its been disclosed to the defense and logged properly just as all other testing of evidence is. The jury will hear the arguments of both sides, see the evidence for themselves, and make a decision. That's how a trial works dear. Calm down.
You've heard the defense already: They intend to show records from a prior trial, and the chain of evidence log noting its condition when seized days after the event.
I expect the prosecution to bring up: Mark says they were in fear for their lives and going to defend the homestead...... so he handed his wife a gun he knew to be inoperable? That's a pretty thin explanation to me. You've heard our expert on firearms tell you that flipping the spring is the work of a few minutes if you're taking your time.
Do you find it credible that a man apparently in fear for his and his wife's lives would hand his wife a weapon he knew didn't work then allow her to roam the property jamming it in the faces of persons they claim she was in terminal fear of? Or is it more likely that the McCloskys, skilled litigators, simply flipped the spring as they already knew how to do, so they could make the exact argument they're trying to make to excuse Patricia jamming a gun in the face of X number of people who were not an imminent threat?
Then I expect the jury to decide. If the prosecutor is worried about victory on the unlawful use charge, I expect them to bring simple assault charges for each instance of her jamming that gun in someone's face.

I'm licensed in Texas and in the Southern District of Texas. You don't need to be barred in Missouri to have reciprocity and admission by motion. I was a clerk for 2 years full time while in school, and I've been licensed for 3 years. That's full time 5 of the last 10 years which is the main requirement. I'd need to take a CLE refresher course that Missouri promulgates which I guarantee does not include this particular issue within itself. So I'm reasonably qualified on this issue.

Whether or not the weapon was operable at the time is a fact issue for the jury at trial to decide as the finder of fact, and its still not tampering with evidence to test fire a firearm in evidence so long as you note its initial condition and that you had to field strip it and assemble it properly to do so on the chain of evidence. That's LITERALLY how all testing of evidence is performed ffs.

 

Then do not vote in elections. Politicians are not in the business of honesty or integrity, but rather selling the biggest lie to the most people to ensure their reelection for as long as possible.