Jump to content

Couple draws guns at crowd in St Louis


Euler
 Share

Recommended Posts

The video makes it look like the gate was just opened. If that is the case, why was it also destroyed? If the mob that trespassed onto the property were there just to chant, the gate should have been left alone. Seeing a mob come through an open gate only to destroy the gate, I'd be pretty concerned about them encroaching my house just the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There was a picture of the gate being destroyed, but I'm not sure when that happened.

I saw video where the rioters were coming through the gate and it was still on its hinges and intact, so it's possible the gate was broken later.

 

I think this might be the video that you're talking about.

 

https://twitter.com/alexiszotos/status/1277607426934616065?s=20

 

 

Yup, that's the one. So apparently the gate really was destroyed at a later time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Video of the protestors walking through the undamaged gatehttps://twitter.com/alexiszotos/status/1277607426934616065?s=21

Meaningless, you have no idea what happened prior to the start of the video.
Im not here to prove innocence or guilt, thats for the courts to decide. Just pointing out no matter how hard you want to adopt these liberal idiots as your 2nd amendment saviors theres more to it than homeowners castle doctrine vs BLM.

 

That being said, please post more footage, Im very curious to know how the gate got destroyed. Was it the white people that always show up at peaceful BLM protests and cause it to turn into a violent mob? (as the McCloskeys claim)

Edited by chicagoresident
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Video of the protestors walking through the undamaged gatehttps://twitter.com/alexiszotos/status/1277607426934616065?s=21

Meaningless, you have no idea what happened prior to the start of the video.
Im not here to prove innocence or guilt, thats for the courts to decide. Just pointing out no matter how hard you want to adopt these liberal idiots as your 2nd amendment saviors theres more to it than homeowners castle doctrine vs BLM.

 

That being said, please post more footage, Im very curious to know how the gate got destroyed. Was it the white people that always show up at peaceful BLM protests and cause it to turn into a violent mob? (as the McCloskeys claim)

 

 

 

 

http://www.illinoiscarry.com/forum/uploads/monthly_07_2020/post-14647-0-09883100-1595389177.jpg

post-14647-0-09883100-1595389177_thumb.jpg

Edited by ChicagoRonin70
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was watching a youtube video discussion of the incident by Anthony Brian Logan, a conservative black guy. He said

that the man's AR15 was not loaded. Has anyone heard that? I guess that could be since they had a history of supporting

gun control.

 

Anyone else here watch Anthony Brian Logan on youtube?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was watching a youtube video discussion of the incident by Anthony Brian Logan, a conservative black guy. He saidthat the man's AR15 was not loaded. Has anyone heard that? I guess that could be since they had a history of supportinggun control.Anyone else here watch Anthony Brian Logan on youtube?

Yeah, its been stated in several stories that the AR wasnt loaded and the handgun was non functional. I love how a serialized firearm is now being referred to as a prop in recent stories.

 

These statements were cleared with their lawyer and the lawyer had possession of the wifes gun before turning it over to evidence.

 

Now, theres no way to verify if the AR mag was loaded or not and if the handgun was functioning and later disabled before giving it to the lawyer. But the woman waiving the handgun around with the finger on the trigger would make me assume it wasnt able to fire a round.

 

So whats the legal strategy here? If they were building a case for fearing for their lives why would they say they brought out non functioning guns in defense of their house? You only pull a non functioning gun on someone if you assume they dont have a gun.

 

I dont see the McCloskeys as the type of lawyers that would cut a deal, so playing down the lethality of the force in defense of their life doesnt make sense.

 

The layers on this case are really interesting.

Edited by chicagoresident
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you rob a grocery store with a toy gun, isn't that still an armed robbery?

 

These 2 high-dollar lawyers should keep their mouths shut and rely on the castle doctrine. If they're saying the guns weren't operational/loaded, that actually weakens their case in my eyes. If they were truly in fear of their lives, they weren't meeting lethal force with lethal force. They may not have had the duty to retreat but that was the far better option vs. brandishing props. Maybe they're foils in a bid to sabotage the castle doctrine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These 2 high-dollar lawyers should keep their mouths shut and rely on the castle doctrine.

So heres a theory

From other thread

https://www.ksdk.com/mobile/article/news/local/gardner-staffer-ordered-crime-lab-to-reassemble-patricia-mccloskeys-gun/63-be112149-d06c-4f54-a225-6545e74b5c2d

Patricia 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.

Scroll down to the video in the article and look at who its credited to

https://www.revealnews.org/article/guns-at-center-of-saturday-night-special-lawsuit-to-be-destroyed/

The gun being waived around against the protestors was a Jimenez, but if you know the ring of fire guns all the companies are the same people that reincorporate after lawsuits. They likely were involved in a lawsuit against Bryco for a slamfire condition. They might of had the Jimenez to show it could have the same issue. Which would mean that merely putting the gun in condition 1, which any reasonable person would believe if you were in lethal danger, the gun would discharge or go full auto into a crowd of protestors. They knew this information would come out in the discovery. This is why they turned that gun over to their lawyer to figure out how they were going to reckon that previous case.

 

Edit, heres the lawsuit

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-8th-circuit/1096698.html

Edited by chicagoresident
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

 

Only to be dismissed by a liberal judge when they come to court.

 

You make the huge assumption the DA even charges them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The Grand Jury returned indictments today. :-(

 

https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20201006/news/310069886/

 

ST. LOUIS -- A grand jury on Tuesday indicted the St. Louis couple who displayed guns while hundreds of racial injustice protesters marched on their private street.

Al Watkins, an attorney for the couple, confirmed to The Associated Press the indictments against Mark McCloskey, 63, and his wife, Patricia McCloskey, 61. A spokeswoman for Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner declined comment.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Grand Jury returned indictments today. :-(

 

https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20201006/news/310069886/

 

ST. LOUIS -- A grand jury on Tuesday indicted the St. Louis couple who displayed guns while hundreds of racial injustice protesters marched on their private street.

 

Al Watkins, an attorney for the couple, confirmed to The Associated Press the indictments against Mark McCloskey, 63, and his wife, Patricia McCloskey, 61. A spokeswoman for Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner declined comment.

As they say, any DA can indict a ham sandwich. It's a completely one-sided case and the DA can withhold exculpatory evidence and present "facts" completely at odds with the evidence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Grand Jury returned indictments today. :-(

 

https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20201006/news/310069886/

 

ST. LOUIS -- A grand jury on Tuesday indicted the St. Louis couple who displayed guns while hundreds of racial injustice protesters marched on their private street.

 

Al Watkins, an attorney for the couple, confirmed to The Associated Press the indictments against Mark McCloskey, 63, and his wife, Patricia McCloskey, 61. A spokeswoman for Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner declined comment.

As they say, any DA can indict a ham sandwich. It's a completely one-sided case and the DA can withhold exculpatory evidence and present "facts" completely at odds with the evidence.

 

Looks like this is going to be the new Dem norm Indict people who attempt to protect themselves.

This isn't the first case like this lately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Grand Jury returned indictments today. :-(

 

https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20201006/news/310069886/

 

ST. LOUIS -- A grand jury on Tuesday indicted the St. Louis couple who displayed guns while hundreds of racial injustice protesters marched on their private street.

 

Al Watkins, an attorney for the couple, confirmed to The Associated Press the indictments against Mark McCloskey, 63, and his wife, Patricia McCloskey, 61. A spokeswoman for Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner declined comment.

As they say, any DA can indict a ham sandwich. It's a completely one-sided case and the DA can withhold exculpatory evidence and present "facts" completely at odds with the evidence.

 

But talk about the Hubris of indicting the COUPLE for tampering with evidence, when that is exactly what the DA did. Either that, or it's self defense for the DA's illegal tampering.

Edited by cybermgk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

UPDATE:

St. Louis prosecutor, Kim Gardiner, removed from 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

  • 7 months later...

Politico

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson on Tuesday announced that he made good on his promise to pardon a couple who gained notoriety for pointing guns at social justice demonstrators as they marched past the couple's home in a luxury St. Louis enclave last year.

 

Parson, a Republican, on Friday pardoned Mark McCloskey, who pleaded guilty in June to misdemeanor fourth-degree assault and was fined $750, and Patricia McCloskey, who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor harassment and was fined $2,000.

...

Because the charges were misdemeanors, the McCloskeys did not face the possibility of losing their law licenses or their rights to own firearms.

 

The McCloskeys were indicted by a grand jury in October on felony charges of the unlawful use of a weapon and evidence tampering. Callahan later amended the charges to give jurors the alternative of convictions of misdemeanor harassment instead of the weapons charge.

...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politico

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson on Tuesday announced that he made good on his promise to pardon a couple who gained notoriety for pointing guns at social justice demonstrators as they marched past the couple's home in a luxury St. Louis enclave last year.

 

Parson, a Republican, on Friday pardoned Mark McCloskey, who pleaded guilty in June to misdemeanor fourth-degree assault and was fined $750, and Patricia McCloskey, who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor harassment and was fined $2,000.

...

Because the charges were misdemeanors, the McCloskeys did not face the possibility of losing their law licenses or their rights to own firearms.

 

The McCloskeys were indicted by a grand jury in October on felony charges of the unlawful use of a weapon and evidence tampering. Callahan later amended the charges to give jurors the alternative of convictions of misdemeanor harassment instead of the weapons charge.

...

 

 

Good. Now, make sure the local judicial system admin refunds any and ALL fines paid out by the victims, the McCloskeys.

 

And just to make sure justice is met, indict, try, convict and sentence the whole district attorney's office and staff for their actions to falsely imprison an obviously innocent couple for political gain. 20 years in State prison with million dollar fines each sounds about right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Politico

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson on Tuesday announced that he made good on his promise to pardon a couple who gained notoriety for pointing guns at social justice demonstrators as they marched past the couple's home in a luxury St. Louis enclave last year.

 

Parson, a Republican, on Friday pardoned Mark McCloskey, who pleaded guilty in June to misdemeanor fourth-degree assault and was fined $750, and Patricia McCloskey, who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor harassment and was fined $2,000.

...

Because the charges were misdemeanors, the McCloskeys did not face the possibility of losing their law licenses or their rights to own firearms.

 

The McCloskeys were indicted by a grand jury in October on felony charges of the unlawful use of a weapon and evidence tampering. Callahan later amended the charges to give jurors the alternative of convictions of misdemeanor harassment instead of the weapons charge.

...

 

 

Good. Now, make sure the local judicial system admin refunds any and ALL fines paid out by the victims, the McCloskeys.

 

And just to make sure justice is met, indict, try, convict and sentence the whole district attorney's office and staff for their actions to falsely imprison an obviously innocent couple for political gain. 20 years in State prison with million dollar fines each sounds about right.

 

this is what will have to be done to stop these political persecutions by activist prosecutors. Make it hurt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...