What law is he respecting here? And this is without any expert testimony indicating it's dangerous.
Posted on 02/22/2014 5:25:51 PM PST by kingattax
A legally blind man who was acquitted in the shooting death of another man fought in court Thursday to get his guns back.
John Rogers said he has the right to have both of his guns returned to him.
While Judge John Galluzzo said he did not want to return the guns to Rogers, he said it was the law.
Rogers' guns were confiscated by law-enforcement officers after he fatally shot a man. He was later acquitted.
"I have to return property that was taken under the circumstance," Galluzzo said. "I have researched and haven't found case law to say otherwise."
Galluzzo said he had no choice but to return Rogers' 10mm Glock and a rifle that was used to kill James DeWitt, 34.
(Excerpt) Read more at wesh.com ...
I can understand the gun used in the incident being taken as evidence, but to have every gun you own taken, just because? So much for innocent until proven guilty.
Many people, even upon acquittal, never see their guns again.
Wow.
A judge that actually respects the law, even if he wishes otherwise.
What law is he respecting here? And this is without any expert testimony indicating it's dangerous.
Yes the judge is clearly in error here. If stored even fairly well, ammo will last at least 50 years. I have shot some 7.65 Belgian Mauser ammo which was made by FN in 1933. It was 100% reliable tho corrosive.
I don’t believe they should be able to take your gun UNTIL you are found guilty. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Wow.
A judge that actually respects the law, even if he wishes otherwise.
Actually no...this judge does NOT respect the law...he merely could not find a way to contort and abuse the law
to allow him to steal this mans firearms. And in doing so
he made his position on the matter crystal clear...he
openly stated that he did not want to give them back but
simply could not find an excuse he could use to keep them.
He DID however make his point by stealing the ammunition that the man owned.....a clear case of theft under color of authority.
And the theft of ALL firearms in a home during an investigation is also another criminal act that occurs
on a routine basis that has no justification in the law.
‘Legally” Blind is not Blind. My late Aunt was Blind. Her late Husband was “legally” Blind. He and I would watch TV together when I was a child.
Blind is Blind. Being Legally Blind could mean you couldn’t see well enough to drive a Car but you see well enough to perform many other activities.
I love how the Headline is inaccurate, but that is exactly why it’s the Headline. Gotta sell the product to the idiots.
Truth matters. At least it used to.
When I was in college, one of my best friends was the Son of a long time police chief. His Father had a large gun collection he had taken or stolen from people over the years.
A judge that actually respects the law, even if he wishes otherwise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.