Man charged with brandishing gun in Milton road rage case

S

stumpg26

Joined
Jun 12, 2009
Messages
386
Likes
79
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Brandishing?

Just saw this story on line. http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/07/man_charged_wit_24.html

I guess it's o.k. to brandish a baseball bat with the intent of threatening harm to someone, but not o.k. to let the person know that you will defend yourself if needed. It seems that the gun owner would have faced equal or lesser charges had he shot and killed the guy with the bat, in self defense of course. I stay clear of road rage incidents, and both parties were foolish, but to me it is ridiculous that brandishing one weapon is legal and brandishing another is not. Damn.
 
An apparent road rage incident early today in Milton led to the arrest of a Middleborough man who allegedly brandished a handgun at another driver, State Police said.

Thirty-five-year-old Edward Murphy of Halifax became angry at 6:15 a.m. because the man in the pickup truck in front of him, William F. Wilton Jr., 47, of Middleborough, was driving too slowly on Route 138. When Wilton arrived at the Neponset Valley Parkway, he pulled to the right and waved Murphy, driving in a Mercury Mountaineer SUV, past him. But Murphy, according to police, stopped next to Wilton and the two began arguing.

Police say that's when Murphy allegedly waved an 18-inch souvenir baseball bat at Wilton, and Wilton responded by holding up his holster with a handgun in it. Wilton has a license to carry a gun. Wilton then drove off but Murphy followed him and called 911. Milton police stopped Wilton and then State Police showed up and arrested him. Murphy later showed up at a State Police barracks to give a statement and was issued a summons.

Wilton faces arraignment Thursday for assault with a dangerous weapon and threats to commit a crime. No date has been set for Murphy's summons on charges of assault by means of a dangerous weapon. Both charges are felonies.
Click to expand...

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/07/man_charged_wit_24.html

Gotta love the Boston Globe. Makes it sound like 'Brandishing' is illegal in MA. I wonder why they didn't mention the first guy with bat in the title. Anti-gun much? Either way both these fine gentlemen will likely never own guns again.
 
I think that both "gentlemen" will be charged with felonies

No date has been set for Murphy's summons on charges of assault by means of a dangerous weapon. Both charges are felonies.
Click to expand...

But the Globe is ridiculous. The title is all about the guy who 'Brandished' his holster and not about the guy who 'Brandished' his baseball bat first!
 
Apparently the dude with the gun never heard of Linda Hamilton.

What's that scorpion on ATHF say?

"Don't pull it out unless you gonna use it!!!"

-Mike
 
Horrible said:
I think that both "gentlemen" will be charged with felonies



But the Globe is ridiculous. The title is all about the guy who 'Brandished' his holster and not about the guy who 'Brandished' his baseball bat first!
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying. Aside from the Globe's sensationalism, both guys were idiots. If someone pulls any kind of weapon on you, and you are carrying, what are you supposed to do? Like I said, I stay far away from road rage as well as other scenarios of stupidity, but if I'm carrying and my life or well being is threatened, the other guy will not be around to testify as a witness. If I "brandish my gun" I'm shooting it. Besides, it's easier to defend in court with no witness and evidence in your favor.[rolleyes]
 
EddieCoyle said:
Idiots. The guy with the bat sounds like a bigger idiot though.
Click to expand...

+1

Police say that's when Murphy allegedly waved an 18-inch souvenir baseball bat at Wilton, and Wilton responded by holding up his holster with a handgun in it. Wilton has a license to carry a gun. Wilton then drove off but Murphy followed him and called 911. Milton police stopped Wilton and then State Police showed up and arrested him. Murphy later showed up at a State Police barracks to give a statement and was issued a summons.
Click to expand...

The guy pulls up, waves a bat, gets shown a gun, then he calls the Police? [rolleyes]

Wow a huge bucket of stupid in this story.
 
This is exactly like one game I reffed. I watched some moron cross check another player in the back. Before I could raise my hand for the delayed penalty the player who was cross checked turned around and snapped the guys stick. The guy who's stick snapped turned to me complaining I didn't call a penalty. I told him they could both play or both go to the box. I wasn't about to call them both unless it continued.
 
C-pher said:
They say that the first one to call the poice is the one that looks like it was a problem.
Click to expand...

Really? I've always been told that if I were ever in a situation where I had to use a gun to defend my life I was to call the cops ASAP, preferably before the other guy (if he was still able).
 
Here is a stupid question:

If he had TOLD the bat weilding guy that he was armed and prepared to defend himself - but never showed him a gun, would it still be a felony assault thing?
 
New story line - free state version, Two men face off with weapons.

Two men face off with weapons. One man (stu p. idiot) backs off when he learns his weapon is inferior. The man then calls 911 afraid for his life. When the police arrive he is surprised to learn he is going to jail for assault with stupidity, failure to understand that he initiated the altercation when he brandished his bat at the other individual.

The second man (name withheld to protect the innocent) was freed after it was learned that he showed his weapon (S&W .40) to prevent any farther escalation of the situation and to show he was willing to protect himself from attack with a bat.

Update at 11
 
kurtb said:
If he had TOLD the bat weilding guy that he was armed and prepared to defend himself - but never showed him a gun, would it still be a felony assault thing?
Click to expand...
Not a stupid question.

IANAL, but I think it likely still would be. Wilton's goal in holding up his gun was to scare Murphy. If Wilton had instead told Murphy he had a gun, his intent would have been the same -- to scare Murphy.

Unless you, or another innocent, are in immediate danger of death or grave bodily injury, keep your gun concealed and don't talk about it.
 
M1911 said:
Not a stupid question.

IANAL, but I think it likely still would be. Wilton's goal in holding up his gun was to scare Murphy. If Wilton had instead told Murphy he had a gun, his intent would have been the same -- to scare Murphy.

Unless you, or another innocent, are in immediate danger of death or grave bodily injury, keep your gun concealed and don't talk about it.
Click to expand...

SO .... if your intent is to scare someone by holding up a bat or telling that you are going to bash their head in with a tire iron .. you would think the ultimate charges would be the same. That is, you can die from a bat just as much from a gun - thats MA for ya!

thx
 
Sounds to me like Wilton's going to be having a bit of a garage sale soon. Here's to hoping he has (er...had) a good collection.

Or would the Milton PD just take all his firearms for "safe keeping".
 
kurtb said:
SO .... if your intent is to scare someone by holding up a bat or telling that you are going to bash their head in with a tire iron .. you would think the ultimate charges would be the same. That is, you can die from a bat just as much from a gun - thats MA for ya!
Click to expand...
I suspect both would be assault with a dangerous weapon. Same charge.

That's true in many other states as well (though it might be called assault with a deadly weapon).
 
M1911 said:
I suspect both would be assault with a dangerous weapon. Same charge.

That's true in many other states as well (though it might be called assault with a deadly weapon).
Click to expand...

But not brandishing in the case of the bat...
 
kurtb said:
But not brandishing in the case of the bat...
Click to expand...

From the article:
Wilton faces arraignment Thursday for assault with a dangerous weapon and threats to commit a crime. No date has been set for Murphy's summons on charges of assault by means of a dangerous weapon. Both charges are felonies.
Click to expand...

They were both charged with assault with a dangerous weapon.
 
In this state both of these guys are probably screwed, to some degree or another.... but how much you want to bet the idiot with the small bat walks?

At a minimum, he's probably going to get a lesser punishment, even if he started the whole thing, because he didn't use an eeeeeevil gun. [thinking]

-Mike
 

Similar threads

NC Man Charged With "Weapon Of Mass Destruction" In Justified Shooting.
Replies
13
Views
684
Nick Fury
Nick Fury
Video! Man pulls gun on pastor giving a sermon at church - Gun jams
Replies
9
Views
218
M1911
M1911
Ohio man, 81, is charged with murder for shooting dead female Uber driver who was called by a scammer to pick up parcel outside his home
Replies
11
Views
386
slugworth
slugworth
Flint man becomes first person charged under Michigan's new gun storage law
2
Replies
42
Views
1K
Mark from MA
M
What not to do with your new gun.
2
Replies
42
Views
1K
Coyote33
Coyote33
Back
Top Bottom