mab22 Posted July 22, 2020 at 09:40 PM Share Posted July 22, 2020 at 09:40 PM Is a prosecutor allowed to make something that is non-functional functional? https://www.zerohedge.com/political/patricia-mccloskey-pistol-was-non-operable-prop-so-prosecutors-office-ordered-it The pistol Patricia McCloskey waved at protesters who broke down a gate to trespass on their private street was a non-operable 'prop' used during a lawsuit they were involved in, so a member of Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner's staff ordered the crime lab to disassemble and reassemble the gun - allowing them to classify it as "capable of lethal use" in charging documents filed Monday, according to KSDK5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScopeEye Posted July 22, 2020 at 09:52 PM Share Posted July 22, 2020 at 09:52 PM If that prosecutor looses their job they can come to IL/Chicago, were always looking for talent.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted July 22, 2020 at 10:17 PM Share Posted July 22, 2020 at 10:17 PM Either they're geniuses for being able to make a Jimenez discharge a round without exploding, or they're complete morons for trying to make a Jimenez discharge a round at all. Meanwhile, the crime lab confirmed that it was inoperable at the time of the incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaeghl Posted July 22, 2020 at 10:43 PM Share Posted July 22, 2020 at 10:43 PM The bad part is, it's been noted that the crime lab photographed the process of tampering with evidence. Lots of "used to be a lawyer" district and assistant district attorneys are looking at jail time, if this is pressed. Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch JMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted July 22, 2020 at 11:10 PM Share Posted July 22, 2020 at 11:10 PM time to quit talking about it and start arresting and prosecuting these "prosecutors" who are pushing their anti American agendas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted July 22, 2020 at 11:32 PM Share Posted July 22, 2020 at 11:32 PM The gun does not have to be functional for a crime to be committed. See #3, and possibly #4, below.Do I think that they are guilty? No, because they were dealing with what they perceived as a serious threat to themselves. “Assault, fourth degree: This crime exists in any one of the following situations: 1 - Attempting to cause or recklessly causing physical injury, physical pain, or illness to someone; 2 - With criminal negligence, causing physical injury to someone by using a firearm; 3 - Deliberately placing another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury; 4 - Recklessly engaging in conduct that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person; 5 - Knowingly causing/attempting to cause physical contact with a disabled person, which a reasonable person (without a disability) would consider offensive; or 6 - Knowingly causing physical contact with another person knowing that person will consider the contact offensive”.https://statelaws.findlaw.com/missouri-law/missouri-assault-laws.html The prosecutor’s actions do seem to be a breach of ethics and could compromise his case. I have heard, elsewhere, that the governor has said that he would pardon the couple if they were convicted.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/mccloskeys-missouri-governor-pardon-black-lives-matter-protest-st-louis-a9629021.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted July 22, 2020 at 11:37 PM Share Posted July 22, 2020 at 11:37 PM Isn't it a 3-year stretch felony for a prosecutor or law enforcement agent to deliberately tamper with or suppress evidence evidence that would be exculpatory to a defendant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagSlap Posted July 23, 2020 at 12:43 AM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 12:43 AM The gun does not have to be functional for a crime to be committed. See #3, and possibly #4, below.Do I think that they are guilty? No, because they were dealing with what they perceived as a serious threat to themselves. “Assault, fourth degree: This crime exists in any one of the following situations: 1 - Attempting to cause or recklessly causing physical injury, physical pain, or illness to someone; 2 - With criminal negligence, causing physical injury to someone by using a firearm; 3 - Deliberately placing another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury; 4 - Recklessly engaging in conduct that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person; 5 - Knowingly causing/attempting to cause physical contact with a disabled person, which a reasonable person (without a disability) would consider offensive; or 6 - Knowingly causing physical contact with another person knowing that person will consider the contact offensive”.https://statelaws.findlaw.com/missouri-law/missouri-assault-laws.html The prosecutor’s actions do seem to be a breach of ethics and could compromise his case. I have heard, elsewhere, that the governor has said that he would pardon the couple if they were convicted.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/mccloskeys-missouri-governor-pardon-black-lives-matter-protest-st-louis-a9629021.html Hmmm...interesting.I would suggest #3 and #4 could be applied to the rioters...Just sayin'..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkhalil61 Posted July 23, 2020 at 02:05 AM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 02:05 AM time to quit talking about it and start arresting and prosecuting these "prosecutors" who are pushing their anti American agendas^^^ THIS x 1000 and arresting these CROOK politicians Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted July 23, 2020 at 02:32 AM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 02:32 AM The gun does not have to be functional for a crime to be committed. See #3, and possibly #4, below.Do I think that they are guilty? No, because they were dealing with what they perceived as a serious threat to themselves. “Assault, fourth degree: This crime exists in any one of the following situations: 1 - Attempting to cause or recklessly causing physical injury, physical pain, or illness to someone; 2 - With criminal negligence, causing physical injury to someone by using a firearm; 3 - Deliberately placing another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury; 4 - Recklessly engaging in conduct that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person; 5 - Knowingly causing/attempting to cause physical contact with a disabled person, which a reasonable person (without a disability) would consider offensive; or 6 - Knowingly causing physical contact with another person knowing that person will consider the contact offensive”.https://statelaws.findlaw.com/missouri-law/missouri-assault-laws.html The prosecutor’s actions do seem to be a breach of ethics and could compromise his case. I have heard, elsewhere, that the governor has said that he would pardon the couple if they were convicted.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/mccloskeys-missouri-governor-pardon-black-lives-matter-protest-st-louis-a9629021.html Hmmm...interesting.I would suggest #3 and #4 could be applied to the rioters...Just sayin'..... Yes! That is what justifies the action of the couple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honeybee42 Posted July 23, 2020 at 02:56 AM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 02:56 AM The gun does not have to be functional for a crime to be committed. See #3, and possibly #4, below.Do I think that they are guilty? No, because they were dealing with what they perceived as a serious threat to themselves. “Assault, fourth degree: This crime exists in any one of the following situations: 1 - Attempting to cause or recklessly causing physical injury, physical pain, or illness to someone; 2 - With criminal negligence, causing physical injury to someone by using a firearm; 3 - Deliberately placing another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury; 4 - Recklessly engaging in conduct that creates a substantial risk of death or serious physical injury to another person; 5 - Knowingly causing/attempting to cause physical contact with a disabled person, which a reasonable person (without a disability) would consider offensive; or 6 - Knowingly causing physical contact with another person knowing that person will consider the contact offensive”.https://statelaws.findlaw.com/missouri-law/missouri-assault-laws.html The prosecutor’s actions do seem to be a breach of ethics and could compromise his case. I have heard, elsewhere, that the governor has said that he would pardon the couple if they were convicted.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/mccloskeys-missouri-governor-pardon-black-lives-matter-protest-st-louis-a9629021.html Hmmm...interesting.I would suggest #3 and #4 could be applied to the rioters...Just sayin'..... Yes! That is what justifies the action of the couple. And that (the fear that the rioters would have evoked) seems to be what the focus should be, not irrelevant issues like functionality of the guns in question, because then you'd have to worry about the retro-info if the bad guy pointing a gun at you had a gun that was unloaded or otherwise unable to function making a legit self-defense shooting "well, you weren't really in danger, so it wasn't ok after all". But the actions taken by the staff and "crime lab" are just the cherry on the whole bad-faith sundae of charging the couple in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicagoresident Posted July 23, 2020 at 05:19 AM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 05:19 AM Lol https://www.ksdk.com/mobile/article/news/local/gardner-staffer-ordered-crime-lab-to-reassemble-patricia-mccloskeys-gun/63-be112149-d06c-4f54-a225-6545e74b5c2dPatricia 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:11 AM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 06:11 AM The handgun is a Jimenez 380. The City of Kansas City, MO, sued Jimenez Arms for arms trafficking. Maybe the McCloskeys were KC's lawyers, which would pretty much mean they were Everytown's lawyers. Kansas City Star Kansas City is suing a group of firearm businesses and individuals that it says formed a trafficking ring that provided guns to known felons, Mayor Quinton Lucas announced in a news conference Tuesday. The lawsuit makes Kansas City the first city to sue the gun industry in more than a decade, said officials and attorneys representing the city. They filed the suit in Jackson County Circuit Court with help from Everytown Law, a branch of the national nonprofit Everytown for Gun Safety. ... The suit takes aim at a gun trafficking scheme led by James Samuels, a former Kansas City Fire Department captain who was charged with federal gun crimes in October 2018. But it goes beyond Samuels, claiming Nevada-based manufacturer Jimenez Arms, several local gun dealers and individuals were also responsible. ... According to the lawsuit, Samuels repeatedly placed orders for firearms from Jimenez Arms and had them shipped to a previously licensed local gun dealer called Conceal & Carry that had been dissolved by the state of Missouri. Samuels is awaiting trial on related criminal charges in U.S. District Court in Kansas City. On two occasions, Jimenez Arms shipped guns directly to Samuels' home, "knowing that he was not a licensed dealer and knowing that he was going to resell these guns," said Alla Lefkowitz, director of affirmative litigation at Everytown Law. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybermgk Posted July 23, 2020 at 01:05 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 01:05 PM Discussion by actual lawyers (albeit one a Canuck) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicagoresident Posted July 23, 2020 at 04:34 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 04:34 PM Here’s the gun lawsuit the McCloskey’s were involved inhttps://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-8th-circuit/1096698.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted July 23, 2020 at 09:29 PM Share Posted July 23, 2020 at 09:29 PM If that prosecutor looses their job they can come to IL/Chicago, were always looking for talent..As has been posted elsewhere - two prosecutors that are in legal "trouble", both are dems, both are African-American, both are female, both are name "Kim", and their last names are only one letter apart - Foxx and Gardiner. Weird ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted July 24, 2020 at 03:42 AM Author Share Posted July 24, 2020 at 03:42 AM If that prosecutor looses their job they can come to IL/Chicago, were always looking for talent..As has been posted elsewhere - two prosecutors that are in legal "trouble", both are dems, both are African-American, both are female, both are name "Kim", and their last names are only one letter apart - Foxx and Gardiner. Weird ! You forgot both had campaigns funded by spookey dude himself "Soros". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted July 27, 2020 at 05:34 PM Share Posted July 27, 2020 at 05:34 PM If that prosecutor looses their job they can come to IL/Chicago, were always looking for talent..As has been posted elsewhere - two prosecutors that are in legal "trouble", both are dems, both are African-American, both are female, both are name "Kim", and their last names are only one letter apart - Foxx and Gardiner. Weird !You forgot both had campaigns funded by spookey dude himself "Soros".Uh, what democrat isn't funded by that "Jew-hating" Jew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted July 27, 2020 at 07:25 PM Share Posted July 27, 2020 at 07:25 PM I agree what the prosecutors did was wrong, but I can see them claim it was permissible to prove that the gun could be functional and then claim the two set the gun up so it would not work after the incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanc Posted July 28, 2020 at 03:54 PM Share Posted July 28, 2020 at 03:54 PM I agree what the prosecutors did was wrong, but I can see them claim it was permissible to prove that the gun could be functional and then claim the two set the gun up so it would not work after the incident. ^This. We don't know the state of that pistol at the time of the trespassing incident. The "fix" was pretty simple. I wonder how often attorney's keep their "props" after trial. That wasn't just grampa's old shotgun hanging over the door, that was dangerous and unsafe firearm by their own pleadings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim85 Posted July 29, 2020 at 10:38 PM Share Posted July 29, 2020 at 10:38 PM Haha, I want Barnes law on my side... stogie and all.Discussion by actual lawyers (albeit one a Canuck) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neumann Posted August 14, 2020 at 12:01 AM Share Posted August 14, 2020 at 12:01 AM I'm thinking the best defense for person and property may be a video camera, backed up by potentially noisier means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted December 11, 2020 at 02:15 AM Share Posted December 11, 2020 at 02:15 AM UPDATE:St. Louis prosecutor, Kim Gardiner, removed from the case by Judge Thomas Clark for alleged "misconduct". He said: "her emailed solicitations for campaign contributions demonstrated she and her office have a personal interest in the case and jeopardized Mark McCloskeys’ right to a fair trial." https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/kim-gardner-mccloskey-case-judge-dismiss/63-779eab2f-32d7-4f8e-b171-5d77307b89b7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chislinger Posted December 11, 2020 at 02:53 AM Share Posted December 11, 2020 at 02:53 AM UPDATE: St. Louis prosecutor, Kim Gardiner, removed from the case by Judge Thomas Clark for alleged "misconduct". He said: "her emailed solicitations for campaign contributions demonstrated she and her office have a personal interest in the case and jeopardized Mark McCloskeys’ right to a fair trial." https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/kim-gardner-mccloskey-case-judge-dismiss/63-779eab2f-32d7-4f8e-b171-5d77307b89b7"Should Clark's ruling stand, a special prosecutor will be appointed to handle the case. In St. Louis, the presiding judge picks the special prosecutor." So is the presiding judge a political hack too or will he/she appoint someone with ethics and professionalism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted December 12, 2020 at 04:01 AM Share Posted December 12, 2020 at 04:01 AM Well, the news article posted is about the husband ONLY. The wife's case is in front of a different judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.