Comm2A has filed an amicus in a stun gun possession criminal case at the SJC

[alohadoug]

What model is that? The C2?

Has Taser abandoned the big brother approach, and decided to let the user decide if they are going to file a police report? Also, what obstacles has Taser put in place to prevent people from buying the police or the agricultural unit (the red one that will make a bull look like a fainting goat) for home defense?

Here's the one I was referring to:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/01/25/the-new-taser-pulse/

Aloha

 

[ochmude]

I was not referring to the ID confetti, but to the Taser policy (not sure if it is current) of making buyers go to a paid online service that asks questions like "which of the following places have you held a mortgage", "what color was your first car", etc. to confirm your identity; registers your name to the Taser you bought; and then issues you a software code to enable your device.

Gotcha, I was unaware of that policy. I will say that the consumer version definitely has a leg up over the LE version in a defensive application given that it runs for 30 seconds rather than just five. I can't imagine how much it would suck to be on the receiving end of that.

 

[Coyote33]

What the heck is "ID confetti"?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

What the heck is "ID confetti"?

Confetti that is spit out along with the probes, each piece of which bears the serial number of the taser cartridge used.

 

[dennism]

Where does this stand? Scotusblog (http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/caetano-v-massachusetts/) listed two updates from April 22nd, that I am unable to decipher.

Apr 22 2016	MANDATE ISSUED
Apr 22 2016	JUDGMENT ISSUED

 

[terraformer]

Where does this stand? Scotusblog (http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/caetano-v-massachusetts/) listed two updates from April 22nd, that I am unable to decipher.

Apr 22 2016	MANDATE ISSUED
Apr 22 2016	JUDGMENT ISSUED

The SJC clerk needs to calendar it for debriefing and rehearing.

 

[Coyote33]

At some point existing MGL C140 S131J is going to be history. The writing is on the wall for SJC purposes.
Doesn't the question become what will the legislature replace it with? And doesn't it then fall into the realm of GOAL to advocate?
Legislature has several options:

1) Just delete the section and follow the rest of the US (but hey, this is MA)
...

I'd say convince them to go with option 1). It is human nature to be lazy, and do nothing. This is the easy way out, and legislators are at least as bad as anyone else at this. Present it to them as the ONLY option. ;-)

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Movement:

05/09/2016 #25 JOINT MOTION FOR STAY OF APPEAL, filed by parties.

We'll have to wait and see where this goes.

 

[M1911]

Movement:
We'll have to wait and see where this goes.

Does that mean the two parties have come to an agreement?

 

[browncoat]

Movement:
We'll have to wait and see where this goes.

Does this mean the defendant doesn't have to go to jail until the sjc rehears?

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

I'm not being obtuse, I just don't know yet what this means. I suspect that the Commonwealth and the SJC don't want to go through this process again. Hopefully, they're putting this on the back burner in the hopes that the legislature will do what they're supposed to do.

 

[M1911]

I'm not being obtuse, I just don't know yet what this means. I suspect that the Commonwealth and the SJC don't want to go through this process again. Hopefully, they're putting this on the back burner in the hopes that the legislature will do what they're supposed to do.

I'm wondering what this means in terms of a legal precedent. But I guess we won't know until it all shakes out.

 

[browncoat]

I'm not being obtuse, I just don't know yet what this means. I suspect that the Commonwealth and the SJC don't want to go through this process again. Hopefully, they're putting this on the back burner in the hopes that the legislature will do what they're supposed to do.

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't properly parse your original post. Is there a bill in the legislature to address this? I hadn't heard of anything.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I'm not being obtuse, I just don't know yet what this means. I suspect that the Commonwealth and the SJC don't want to go through this process again. Hopefully, they're putting this on the back burner in the hopes that the legislature will do what they're supposed to do.

From what I've now been told by 2 legislators, nothing is likely to be passed until next legislative session. So we're looking at least a year away as a minimum.

I'm curious, what happens to Caetano (the person) now, out on bail? rotting in jail?

The wait has to be brutal for her.It won's surprise me if she takes a plea bargain just to end it . . . and that will leave us nowhere and the state in the catbird seat with no reason to change the law.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Does this mean the defendant doesn't have to go to jail until the sjc rehears?

The original case was "on file" - a disposition that is a conviction but does not involve time in stir. As such, she is not wearing orange (do they even do that in MA?), and there is no particular incentive to cop a plea. She is now waiting to become an unprohibited person (and I am not sure if that even matters to her). If it does, I suspect she will have not problem finding someone to offer her the MA licensing class for free.

At K. Dragger mentioned before, kudos to the public defender to keeping his teeth in this case and fighting on principle, even after it was clear his client did not have to go to the big house. At this point, defense counsel's professional obligation is getting a resolution without a conviction for his client, and the courts/legislature will have to sort out how to deal with that pesky SCOTUS decision.

 

[jar]

Movement:
We'll have to wait and see where this goes.

Is there a way for mere mortals to get access to the motion? I have no idea how to do anything with state courts. I'm sure it has some info about the reason for the stay.

 

[terraformer]

Is there a way for mere mortals to get access to the motion? I have no idea how to do anything with state courts. I'm sure it has some info about the reason for the stay.

We would have to send a runner to the court or I would have to ask the lawyer involved, which I am loathe to do on a mere curiosity. I can tell you that this guy is doing what's best for his client right now and I agree completely with what I believe is his approach. The reality is this may not be the last case in MA on the issue.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

The reality is this may not be the last case in MA on the issue.

Yeah, but it is going to be tough to get another case to set any precedent.

The ADAs are aware of the SJC decision and will offer a choice - short term CWOF with no penalty or hire an attorney for a full trial. Defendant takes CWOF, goes away with minimal legal fees, and the boat remains unrocked.

 

[Coyote33]

... At K. Dragger mentioned before, kudos to the public defender to keeping his teeth in this case and fighting on principle, even after it was clear his client did not have to go to the big house. At this point, defense counsel's professional obligation is getting a resolution without a conviction for his client, and the courts/legislature will have to sort out how to deal with that pesky SCOTUS decision.

Would it make sense, or be kosher for Comm2A to reach out to this defender, with some advice? It would be nice if he were given guidance which not only helped his case, but helped "the cause".

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Would it make sense, or be kosher for Comm2A to reach out to this defender, with some advice? It would be nice if he were given guidance which not only helped his case, but helped "the cause".

Given his performance, I doubt he is need of advice.

 

[dans]

Would it make sense, or be kosher for Comm2A to reach out to this defender, with some advice? It would be nice if he were given guidance which not only helped his case, but helped "the cause".

Or an invitation to help out with other cases (that would probably include additional financial support).

 

[bigblue]

It would not be the worst thing to at least extend an invite, vote of confidence, and heartfelt thanks for his [performance].

 

[terraformer]

Would it make sense, or be kosher for Comm2A to reach out to this defender, with some advice? It would be nice if he were given guidance which not only helped his case, but helped "the cause".

We have been collaborating with him since his client's case ended up at the SJC. Comm2A has become a goto on these issues and attorneys respect the knowledge we are willing to share. We can't always divulge every discussion or contact with everyone involved in these cases. It's the nature of what we do.

 

[bigblue]

We have been collaborating with him since his client's case ended up at the SJC. Comm2A has become a goto on these issues and attorneys respect the knowledge we are willing to share. We can't always divulge every discussion or contact with everyone involved in these cases. It's the nature of what we do.

But the peanut gallery can chime in because we are so smaaht.

 

[terraformer]

Chime in all you want...

But the peanut gallery can chime in because we are so smaaht.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

I'm curious, what happens to Caetano (the person) now, out on bail? rotting in jail?

The wait has to be brutal for her.It won's surprise me if she takes a plea bargain just to end it . . . and that will leave us nowhere and the state in the catbird seat with no reason to change the law.

Caetano was never sentenced and has been free throughout. The original verdict by the judge was placed 'on file' meaning that no sentence was passed. This in itself was an issue as the Commonwealth tried to assert that because no sentence was passed, she had no grounds for an appeal. The SJC correctly found otherwise.

 

[modernhamlet]

Caetano was never sentenced and has been free throughout. The original verdict by the judge was placed 'on file' meaning that no sentence was passed. This in itself was an issue as the Commonwealth tried to assert that because no sentence was passed, she had no grounds for an appeal. The SJC correctly found otherwise.

Now THAT is douchey...

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Now THAT is douchey...

Half of legal battles is trying to convince the court that the other side has no standing; missed a filing deadline; isn't allowed to testify; etc. If you can cut the opposition off at the pass, you can win without arguing any merits of the issue.

It's like how the AG is arguing that the "safety issue/loaded chamber indicator" is irrelevant since she, and she alone, sits in judgement and under her vision of the law cannot have that decision called into question.

 

[MachineHead]

I wonder if Comm2A can file an "animus" in this case chastising the prosecution. [lol]

 

[modernhamlet]

Half of legal battles is trying to convince the court that the other side has no standing; missed a filing deadline; isn't allowed to testify; etc. If you can cut the opposition off at the pass, you can win without arguing any merits of the issue.

It's like how the AG is arguing that the "safety issue/loaded chamber indicator" is irrelevant since she, and she alone, sits in judgement and under her vision of the law cannot have that decision called into question.

Oh, I get it. What do we need with those pesky checks and balances, right?