Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prosecuting The Victim
www.gunowners.org ^ | Jan. 2005 | Larry Pratt

Posted on 01/21/2005 4:33:15 AM PST by B4Ranch

Prosecuting The Victim

Bill and Kathy Hosack had no premonition on a February morning in 2004 that their entire world would come crashing down upon them.

Hosack had been coroner of Coos County, Oregon, until his retirement in 2004, and a pathologist in a local hospital. He had put four children through college and graduate school on his salary.

Out of the blue, a day in the country turned into a nightmare of violence. Hosoack's rural property was invaded by four angry young men. Hosack's sister (Candace Upchurch), his nephew (Sam Upchurch), and his friend (Don Wyatt) had inadvertently splashed the four as they drove up the mountain dirt road.

The four assailants went looking for a fight and tracked down Upchurch and Wyatt on the edge of Hosack's property. Josh Andrade, 19, attacked Wyatt, 54, and began beating him -- breaking several bones. Not surprisingly, Andrade has a record of prior assaults.

Hosack, 63 at the time, came upon the scene in response to the ruckus, but he was unable to disengage Andrade orally. Andrade was pummeling Wyatt and trying to drown him. At this point, Hosack took out his .45 pistol and fired two warning shots. Andrade was probably on drugs because, rather than backing off, he charged Hosack.

Rather than shoot the assailant, Hosack struck him with the butt of the gun (actually, Andrade may have struck Hosack's gun as he charged), causing a round to discharge which hit Justus Cloud, 22, who was standing nearby. Cloud has a record of several prior convictions and was wanted at the time of the attack for failure to appear in court on a drug charge.

Wyatt commented that had it not been for Hosack's intervention, he would have been dead. Cloud tested positive for several drugs, but Andrade, strangely, was never tested -- even though Andrade was in violation of probation on drug charges at the time of his assault. Andrade was found to be drunk when his blood was tested. In addition to the beating from Andrade, Wyatt saw another of the assailants coming at him with a knife.

Wyatt called in a 911 report, fearing that the four assailants would make good on their threat to return -- not what one would expect of a group where one of their number had been shot. Anger sustained by drugs may well have been responsible for the threats.

While this initial threat was over, Wyatt, unfortunately, did not report that one of the assailants had been shot.

After over an hour, Hosack, his nerves quite rattled, drove his wife and mother home to Coos Bay. They passed a police car on the way down the mountain, but had no way to know that the cops were interviewing the assailants and forming an initial impression that the assailants were the victims -- an opinion the authorities never changed.

Hosack, reacting as do many victims of assault, drank some alcohol after returning home. He was still rattled when a state trooper came to his door and interviewed him. It was then that Hosack said that he had been drinking -- without qualifying that he had not been drinking before the attack. (Is it OK to drink as long as one knows that there will be no attack?)

Hosack's behavior is quite typical of victims suffering post-traumatic stress. Amazingly, the police wanted to test Dr. Hosack's blood alcohol, but never tested two of the four assailants. Since the authorities already "knew" that the senior citizens were the assailants, they only looked for evidence to convict the victims.

Anti-self defense Judge Richard Mickelson heard the case and found Hosack guilty of recklessly shooting Cloud. Mickelson said that Hosack had had time to "safe" the .45 during the attack. He based that opinion on the assailant's testimony and on the judge's own assumptions as to where the spent casings were located.

Hosack had fired two rounds in the air, then had accidentally discharged a third round after hitting his attacker on the head. Naturally, the casings were in two different areas. The judge assumed that some period of time had passed during which Hosack had moved and would have had time to put the .45 on safety.

One has to wonder at the degree of expertise Judge Mickelson has with guns since he referred to the .45 as a semi-automatic revolver. Revolvers, of course, do not discharge spent casings. Semi-auto pistols eject casings all over the place, even when the gun is fired at the same target at a range. This is especially true if two rounds are fired in the air followed right away by an accidental discharge which has the gun in another position.

Mickelson then concluded that Hosack had taken a gun to a fist fight -- a fist fight conducted by a group of young men who may all have been on drugs, but only Cloud had been tested. Evidently older men should disregard the danger to themselves and their womenfolk and be sporting enough to duke it out with assailants a third of their age. For the offense of inappropriate force -- used irresponsibly (according to the judge's expert opinion about firearms) -- Hosack was sentenced to 30 days in jail, three years probation, loss of his right to own a gun, assessed $20,000 in restitution to Cloud and fined $5,000.

At sentencing the judge opined that Wyatt, an ex-longshoreman, should be ashamed of himself to have allowed a smaller man (Andrade) beat him up. Would the judge have had the same opinion about a taller woman raped by a shorter man?

Happily, Hosack is retired, because he is likely to lose his medical license which would have cost him his job. The legal expenses have wiped out his meager savings (remember, he bore four sets of costly college tuitions). Hosack faces retirement broke, unable to practice his profession -- and a lawsuit from Cloud who has subsequently been arrested since the assault.

Judge Mickelson's decision was wildly unjust, and the personal harm to Dr. Hosack has been devastating. All of this because the Judge had a prejudice against self defense with a gun, and a willingness to believe assailants who invaded another's property and who attacked older people with no provocation. Incredibly, these assailants were untested for drugs even though there was plenty of reason to do so.

Coos County District Attorney, Paul Burgett, is just as politically correct. In other cases, he chose not to prosecute two police officers for shooting a man with one arm in a sling and another man for brandishing a marking pen. The D.A. believed the cops' lethal action was justifiable, but Hosack's non-lethal action was felonious. Double standard anyone?

For those wishing to communicate with Judge Richard Mickelson and District Attorney Paul Burgett can do so as follows:

Judge Richard K. Mickelson Curry County Courthouse PO Box H Gold Beach, OR 97444

District Attorney Paul Burgett 250 North Baxter Street Coquille, OR 97423 541-396-3121

For those wishing to defray the costs of Dr. Hosack's appeal, tax-deductible donations may be sent to Gun Owners Foundation at 8001 Forbes Place, Springfield, VA 22151.

Please be sure to write "Dr. Hosack" in the memo line if sending a check.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Oregon
KEYWORDS: banglist; criminaljudge; donutwatch
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: Glenn
Yes, I'm a lawyer, but I don't practice criminal law. I've heard basically the sad story with minor variations on a theme literally dozens on times. It pains me every time I hear how badly people get themselves in legal jeopardy because they thought representing themselves in a criminal case can be a "DIY" job.

The reasons why I guessed that this guy didn't have a lawyer is that 1) no lawyer was mentioned 2) the case was tried to the judge not a jury (which I cannot imagine any lawyer ever doing under these circumstances and 3) the same clueless way the guy defended himself against the initial assault (not even calling in a report after he's wounded a guy in legitimate self defense!) tells me that he would be equally clueless about defending himself in court.
41 posted on 01/21/2005 8:24:36 AM PST by Iwo Jima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SASsySIGster

Well said. As much of a gun advocate as I am, there are people whom I do not suggest arm themselves because they are not psychologically ready to use it. A gun which you are not prepared to use can easily become a gun which can be taken away and used against you.


42 posted on 01/21/2005 8:28:08 AM PST by Iwo Jima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch

Will frangible bullets kill?


43 posted on 01/21/2005 8:28:12 AM PST by DonnerT (Any job worth doing should be done to completion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch

So many in control of our country have their heads up their asses.


44 posted on 01/21/2005 8:30:41 AM PST by satchmodog9 (Murder and weather are our only news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima
The reasons why I guessed that this guy didn't have a lawyer

You guessed.

"The legal expenses have wiped out his meager savings (remember, he bore four sets of costly college tuitions)."

What, exactly, is your definition of "legal expenses".

45 posted on 01/21/2005 9:00:22 AM PST by Glenn (The two keys to character: 1) Learn how to keep a secret. 2) ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: pau1f0rd

Disgraceful. Thank God for British justice.


46 posted on 01/21/2005 9:01:23 AM PST by jjbrouwer (Chelsea for the Championship!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DonnerT
Will frangible bullets kill?

They can, as all types of bullets can. More to the point, they leave a real ugly wound, contaminated with itty-bitty bits of bullet. A wound like that is very hard to treat. Also it is impossible to reconstruct the bullet to read the marks from the barrel lands, so it cannot be traced back to a specific firearm.

47 posted on 01/21/2005 9:03:47 AM PST by Petruchio (<===Looks Sexy in a flightsuit . . . Looks Silly in a french maid outfit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Iwo Jima

And what would your thinking be if it turned out he did in fact have a lawyer? Would you agree that it was a complete waste of money in addition to commenting on the performance of his attorney? Alternatively, if he did not have a lawyer, what would be your thinking on a system hijacked by the legal sector to the extent that a person can't possibly hope for justice without an attorney?


48 posted on 01/21/2005 10:01:38 AM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: DonnerT

Yes, very effectively.


49 posted on 01/21/2005 10:05:46 AM PST by B4Ranch (Don't remain seated until this ride comes to a full and complete stop! We're going the wrong way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: JFK_Lib

Agreed. A lot of judges rule on their personal opinions rather than hear all the facts or rule on the law. Disgusting, just disgusting when that happens.


50 posted on 01/21/2005 10:11:35 AM PST by tob2 (Old Fossil and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SASsySIGster
You've probably analyzed the situation correctly.
51 posted on 01/21/2005 10:56:36 AM PST by Gritty ("comparing Jesusland with present-tense Eutopia, it is obvious which is more out of whack-Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower

I read about 1/2 the article and just couldn't bear to read the rest. It's disgusting to know that certain judges can just get away with doing or saying practically whatever they want..regardless of the victim's circumstance. Granted, in a criminal case, the victim is just a witness. Maybe that should be CHANGED.


52 posted on 01/21/2005 11:40:39 AM PST by Freedom2specul8 (Please pray for our troops.... http://anyservicemember.navy.mil/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
More proof that, in many cases, the best method is to shoot, shovel and shut up.

Bang!, Bang!, Bang!, Bang!. Then see above... : ) <<< me

53 posted on 01/21/2005 12:47:49 PM PST by stopsign ( ("What great fortune for government, that people don't think". ...Der Fuhrer... [hummmm...]))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower

"A quadruple homicide would hardly solve their problem"

How not? Please elaborate.

Because you are not judge, jury, and executioner all rolled into one.

54 posted on 01/21/2005 12:54:27 PM PST by Chemist_Geek ("Drill, R&D, and conserve" should be our watchwords! Energy independence for America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek
"Because you are not judge, jury, and executioner all rolled into one."

Well, thanks for the hot tip.

Here's a bit of news for you: If I'm protecting my life and the lives of my loved ones against goblins like the the ones described in this story, I'll stack them up to the sky if that's what's necessary.

Twice in my life I've been forced to use a firearm to prevent me from becoming meat for predators and I'm still here. If you want to tap-dance with scumbags, you go right ahead.

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

55 posted on 01/21/2005 1:05:32 PM PST by Joe Brower (The Constitution defines Conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
Twice in my life I've been forced to use a firearm

Uh-huh. And did you follow your own advice to "shoot, shovel, and shut up"?

56 posted on 01/21/2005 1:07:40 PM PST by Chemist_Geek ("Drill, R&D, and conserve" should be our watchwords! Energy independence for America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek
"Uh-huh. And did you follow your own advice to "shoot, shovel, and shut up"?

Nope. Didn't have to. The goblins just beat feet. If they had behaved differently, so would have I.

Any more questions, oh great expert on self-defense issues?

Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!

57 posted on 01/21/2005 1:10:25 PM PST by Joe Brower (The Constitution defines Conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

Comment #58 Removed by Moderator

To: Iwo Jima

Honestly, in some of these cases, it doesn't matter if the accused has a good lawyer, if the judge is biased.

The lawyer will refrain from challenging the judge too strenuously, even when the judge is being biased, because he knows he might have a case in front of that judge again, and the judge will just take it out on his next client.

I've heard horror stories about biased judges from my colleagues who practice criminal law.


59 posted on 01/21/2005 1:26:37 PM PST by Altamira (Get the UN out of the US, and the US out of the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: B4Ranch

I pray something has been left out of this story.


60 posted on 01/21/2005 1:49:12 PM PST by XHogPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson