Posted on 12/30/2022 10:24:15 PM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
ST. LOUIS (AP) — A Missouri judge has ruled that a pardon from the governor doesn't mean the St. Louis lawyer and his wife who gained national attention for waving guns at racial injustice protesters in 2020 should get back the weapons they surrendered and fines they paid after guilty pleas last year.
Mark McCloskey sued last year to have returned a Colt AR-15 rifle and a Bryco .380-caliber pistol that he and his wife, Patricia McCloskey, surrendered when they pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the confrontation with protesters. McCloskey said he was entitled to the guns and remitted fines because Republican Gov. Mike Parson pardoned him and his wife weeks after their guilty pleas.
On Wednesday, Circuit Judge Joan Moriarty ruled that the pardon had no bearing on the plea agreement, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.
“Plaintiff and his wife are required to follow through with their end of the bargain,” she wrote.
Mark McCloskey said he plans to appeal.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
They broke down a metal gate on their home, for God’s sake.
So far the legal fees are probably greater than the value of the firearms by at least one order of magnitude and maybe more (considering that the McCloskeys are both lawyers and probably aren't billing themselves for their own time).
But yes, of course I'd like to see where this goes, as long as they are paying their own way and my taxes aren't paying their legal fees.
Buy new guns and don’t show them to anyone. Even when you are ready to use it.
Prolly listened to bis lawyer.
Warning shots, the Easter Bunny, and unicorns don’t exist. COM.
************************************************************
With all due respect, I’ve carried for a long time, but I have told myself for a long time that “IF” there was an opportunity to fire a warning shot I would do so because I don’t want to take another human life IF AT ALL POSSIBLE.
Having 50 years experience with guns and owning many guns and going to shoot regularly, I have no doubt I could shoot someone coming at me in the legs too IF there is/was time to do so.
Yes there is risk in a warning shot but there sure as hell RISK in shooting and killing someone too. If your not standing on the right square of real estate, things can get real bad for you as Mr. McCloskey found out standing on Missouri ground. In 90% of Texas, no one LIVING IN TEXAS would have thought much about what McCloskey did.
Better to keep the gun at half guard until you have to shoot. It is just as intimidating and more defensible in court.
They pleaded down to a lesser crime, rather that risk it all by getting the “full ride” (a greater crime) from a (liberal) jury.
Not so. The BLM mob broke down the gate to the private community clearly marked no trespassing. With the destruction of private property and the illegal gathering of the mob, these people clearly felt threatened. I admire their restraint.
I’m not sure what I would have done. IOW, don’t mess with a gated community. You don’t know what lengths they will go to protect their property. This could have easily been a massacre.
Does anyone remember why they pleaded guilty?
The StL district attorney charged them with felonies. This would be the same D.A. who hounded governor Greitens out of office and who declined to charge any of the people (racial injustice protestors) who broke into their private, gated neighborhood, or tore down statues in St. Louis.
Governor Parsons had promised them a pardon, but as I understand it, under the Missouri Constitution, he can only issue a pardon after a case has been decided. When they were offered a plea deal, plead guilty to a misdemeanor and end the case now—and get the pardon they took the deal. I imagine they saved much more money in legal fees than the two guns were worth.
This is not to say that they should get the guns back. Despite Missouri’s overall conservatism, St. Louis is not a place where whites who resist ‘racial injustice protestors’ are likely to get a fair shake from the powers-that-be.
That's easy to say when it's not your liberty at stake.
Thank you
I would consider breaking through the gate into my gated community threatening.
Also, those guns were not loaded and one was not operable.
WE’RE GOING TO NEED TO START KILLING A LOT OF DEVIANTS
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO START KILLING A LOT OF DEVIANTS
YOU DEVIANT
Also, those guns were not loaded and one was not operable.
And yes, having a mob break down a door/gate to gain access to your neighborhood (they were on the way to the mayor’s home) is threatening in and of itself and the prosecution of the couple instead of the mob (led by Congresswoman-elect Cori Bush) is typical of how justice is administered by Soros-backed prosecutors.
Despite being found to be unethical in her prosecution of Greitens, she was still re-elected to office and will likely hold the job as long as she wants. That’s how a majority of St. Louis voters roll.
I think it was a lawyer that said "The law is an @$$."
Years of watching it operate has convinced me that the legal system far too often gets it wrong.
I remember an announcement years ago about a man who spent 15 years in prison being released because DNA proved he was innocent.
At the time I thought to myself, "How do you prove a man "guilty" when he did not in fact commit the crime?"
It should be impossible, yet here we have seen it time and time again.
Somehow juries do the impossible and "prove" someone did something when the reality is that the person did not do the thing.
That very day I realized our legal system had a big freaking hole in it.
If you stop breaking your models, you won’t have to glue them back together so much and you will be able to think clearly.
I think it was a lawyer that said “The law is an @$$.”
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.