Jump to content

St. Louis Prosecutor's Office Busted Altering Evidence


mab22
 Share

Recommended Posts

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.

 

57ba192f-2954-481b-a07e-b5ed0ae41c78_114

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

 

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

 

 

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

Lol 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

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

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

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

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

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

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

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...