ODT attorneys....Can your dust cover prove premeditated murder in a self defense scenario?

[payneed]

haha I do sometime confuse payneed with @Paynefree and vice versa on here.

Don't feel bad, I get you mixed up with @Operator Kitty all the time.
If that "triggers" you, Paynefree said it.

 

[Jcchance]

I don't have anything on my guns that could portray me in a bad light, so I just leave them alone. Besides, much of the decals and such that people stick on their guns are rather gay and very mall commando, IMO. Even the punisher skull has been officially gayed by the mall ninjas.

Personalized stuff is different, as long as it doesn't say "I'ma kill some mofos!"

LMAO!!!!

 

[rbstern]

The Fish case is a real anomaly.

Unfortunately, it isn't. Massad Ayoob has often relayed his experience in NY v. Magliato. Magliato had a self-defense scenario, but had his DA/SA revolver cocked before shooting. That fact was used to sway the jury, ending in a conviction for a man who was had a legit interest defending himself against an attacker. Court cases can be won based on how a prosecutor shapes the acts and facts of the accused in the mind of the jury, even when those acts and facts may be perfectly lawful.

Remember when the George Zimmerman/Treyvon Martin controversy was going on? How the Florida AG's language was heavily slanted to creating sympathy for Martin? While that wasn't in a trial, it could have been. The idea is to deny the state any bonus ammo when they come after you.

Bottom line, if you use a gun for self defense, the less unusual it is, the better. The more liberal the prosecutor in your political jurisdiction, the more that applies.

 

[TapcoFan]

haha I do sometime confuse payneed with @Paynefree and vice versa on here.

just change your handle to @paynefred and watch the world burn

 

[gh1950]

I have often wondered if a prosecutor could get access to all our ODT posts and use that against us in a self defense trial.

You bet. First place they look these days.

 

[gh1950]

Unfortunately, it isn't. Massad Ayoob has often relayed his experience in NY v. Magliato. Magliato had a self-defense scenario, but had his DA/SA revolver cocked before shooting. That fact was used to sway the jury, ending in a conviction for a man who was had a legit interest defending himself against an attacker. Court cases can be won based on how a prosecutor shapes the acts and facts of the accused in the mind of the jury, even when those acts and facts may be perfectly lawful.

Remember when the George Zimmerman/Treyvon Martin controversy was going on? How the Florida AG's language was heavily slanted to creating sympathy for Martin? While that wasn't in a trial, it could have been. The idea is to deny the state any bonus ammo when they come after you.

Bottom line, if you use a gun for self defense, the less unusual it is, the better. The more liberal the prosecutor in your political jurisdiction, the more that applies.

The Fish case and Maglioto involved two entirely separate issues.

In Maglioto, words were exchanged, Maglito went home, strapped on his iron, went back the deceased's house and called him out, drew and cocked his gun, and through one agency or the other, shot the deceased in the head.

I can pretty well guarantee that any time you go home, and come back packing heat, good things are not in your future.

Anyway, the Maglioto case had nothing to do with the choice of weapons or ammunition, and the Fish case is still an outlier for its reliance on those issues.

 

[insulinboy]

Don't get me wrong, when I posted the Mesa Arizona article I wasn't meaning that the dust cover was the only reason he was in hot water, but it sure as hell doesn't help his situation.

Eyewitness reports say that the man reached for his waistband while facing away from the officer, how could the officer know that wasn't a gun and his or someone elses life was in danger? the report he had said there was a man with a gun. But that dust cover sure isn't helping his case any. Yes there are lots of other facts in the case that work against the officer as well, he shot an unarmed man 5 times, and for whatever reason (I admittedly did not read all the articles) it was deemed to be a bad shoot. I don't think the dust cover is the only reason that he himself is now F*****, but the fact of the matter is it doesn't help his situation.

And if you yourself end up in a shoot that is in any way questionable weather you were in fear of you or your families lives or not, something like that doesn't help your situation and can be used against you. Remember Miranda, ANYTHING you SAY or DO can and will be used against you in court. Which is why any gun I carry the only thing ever monkeyed with is grips, sights, and maybe some color fill

 

[rbstern]

The Fish case and Maglioto involved two entirely separate issues.

In Maglioto, words were exchanged, Maglito went home, strapped on his iron, went back the deceased's house and called him out, drew and cocked his gun, and through one agency or the other, shot the deceased in the head.

I can pretty well guarantee that any time you go home, and come back packing heat, good things are not in your future.

Anyway, the Maglioto case had nothing to do with the choice of weapons or ammunition, and the Fish case is still an outlier for its reliance on those issues.

You missed the point: Very small, specific choices (gun, modifications, caliber, ammo, your actions in the heat of the moment) are all fodder for a prosecutors to create a narrative for the jury.

 

[sniper22]

To many Big Words in this thread! Yall need to do like me and give all the toys away and start thinking about yoga or something..

 

[agrant12]

What if it says spread your buttcheeks