N.H. woman found with gun at Massachusetts courthouse held without bail

[Glockster30]

yet one more reason to have nation wide carry , enough of this bullshit traveling between states.

It would have prevented someone from getting arrested, though.

-Mike

No argument there, but it appears that this woman shouldn't have had a CC license to begin with. The article lists her address as Londonderry, NH, but her license was issued by the Salem, NH police, so it appears that she might be lying about maybe where she actually lived to obtain the license. The Salem, NH police department that issued the license were unaware that the woman was on a methadone program, which implies that she would not have received a license from them had they known about it, so if national reciprocity were law, it wouldn't have helped her if she shouldn't have had the CC license in the first place.

The woman and her husband aren't what anyone would consider model citizens. Her husband was convicted of drug trafficking and possession of a gun and ammo without a license, which happened in MA. Since she had been to the same courthouse 15 times or more according to the article, it's interesting that she had the gun with her on the day of her husband's sentencing. Perhaps the real motive for this will be found out after they listen to the taped phone conversations.

As we all know, the push for reciprocity is to prevent "accidental criminals" not familiar with the gun laws of other states, and is not for someone that shouldn't have a gun in the first place.

 

[drgrant]

No argument there, but it appears that this woman shouldn't have had a CC license to begin with. The article lists her address as Londonderry, NH, but her license was issued by the Salem, NH police, so it appears that she might be lying about maybe where she actually lived to obtain the license. The Salem, NH police department that issued the license were unaware that the woman was on a methadone program, which implies that she would not have received a license from them had they known about it, so if national reciprocity were law, it wouldn't have helped her if she shouldn't have had the CC license in the first place.

The woman and her husband aren't what anyone would consider model citizens. Her husband was convicted of drug trafficking and possession of a gun and ammo without a license, which happened in MA. Since she had been to the same courthouse 15 times or more according to the article, it's interesting that she had the gun with her on the day of her husband's sentencing. Perhaps the real motive for this will be found out after they listen to the taped phone conversations.

LOL, so she couldn't have moved from one town to the other?

I don't even really care if she was otherwise legally disqualified. It still would have stopped a pointless arrest. The same exact thing could have happened to an otherwise spotless NH resident going into a DC to fight a traffic ticket.

As we all know, the push for reciprocity is to prevent "accidental criminals" not familiar with the gun laws of other states, and is not for someone that shouldn't have a gun in the first place.

Maybe that's the NRA / generic neocon party line/marketing swag for sheep, but most people with more than one brain cell generally view it as an enhancement to one's freedom as a generality.

-Mike

 

[Glockster30]

LOL, so she couldn't have moved from one town to the other?

I don't even really care if she was otherwise legally disqualified. It still would have stopped a pointless arrest. The same exact thing could have happened to an otherwise spotless NH resident going into a DC to fight a traffic ticket.



Maybe that's the NRA / generic neocon party line/marketing swag for sheep, but most people with more than one brain cell generally view it as an enhancement to one's freedom as a generality.

-Mike

There's always a coulda, woulda, shoulda,...etc. The mere fact that I said it's to prevent accidental criminals is proof enough that I implied "freedom" so no need to insult anyone or refer to them as having one brain cell.

NH has a similar law as MA with regard to moving to another community; i.e., notify the licensing authority in the new community that you are licensed, so it's immaterial to whether or not she moved to a new town because none of us know if she followed the law.

Change of Name or Address:
If a resident license holder moves to another community, he or she shall notify in writing the licensing authority in his or her new place of residence that he or she has a current license, and the license shall remain in effect until it would otherwise expire.

https://www.usacarry.com/new_hampshire_concealed_carry_permit_information.html

 

[firestorm]

There's always a coulda, woulda, shoulda,...etc. The mere fact that I said it's to prevent accidental criminals is proof enough that I implied "freedom" so no need to insult anyone or refer to them as having one brain cell.

NH has a similar law as MA with regard to moving to another community; i.e., notify the licensing authority in the new community that you are licensed, so it's immaterial to whether or not she moved to a new town because none of us know if she followed the law.




https://www.usacarry.com/new_hampshire_concealed_carry_permit_information.html

So basically because she might maybe have made an administrative mistake (Failure to notify and register herself with a new town like a sex offender) she is not entitled to a core right to self defense? How about we don't take or restrict rights unless someone is in jail, having been given all due process beforehand. This is the suitability attitude all over again, maybe she was trying to do something nefarious, but there is no proof of that. In any reasonable place they would have found the gun, and told her she can't bring it into the courthouse.

 

[nstassel]

I don't think anyone has ever served this one year mandatory minimum? Charge is always dropped from what I hear. Been on the books since circa.1976 and no one have ever served this mandatory year.

I never understand how this falsehood keeps getting repeated. Thousands of people have served the minimum mandatory sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm. It happens all the time. It is 18 mos. btw since the statute was amended. Don't think for a second that the courts don't impose this all the time.

 

[eboos]

The woman was carrying without a permit in another state. She was familiar with her destination and the security procedures that she would be going through. She made multiple previous visits to the destination. Her boyfriend/husband's sentencing hearing was occurring that day for drug and firearms charges stemming from an investigation into a shooting. When viewing the totality of the circumstances, there is a strong enough inference raising to the level of probable cause to support her arrest and holding until a hearing on her bail can be had.

 

[Glockster30]

So basically because she might maybe have made an administrative mistake (Failure to notify and register herself with a new town like a sex offender) she is not entitled to a core right to self defense? How about we don't take or restrict rights unless someone is in jail, having been given all due process beforehand. This is the suitability attitude all over again, maybe she was trying to do something nefarious, but there is no proof of that. In any reasonable place they would have found the gun, and told her she can't bring it into the courthouse.

You're now carrying this beyond absurdity because none of us know what did or did not happen wrt the facts in this case.

 

[drgrant]

There's always a coulda, woulda, shoulda,...etc. The mere fact that I said it's to prevent accidental criminals is proof enough that I implied "freedom" so no need to insult anyone or refer to them as having one brain cell.
l

I guess what I'm driving at is that I don't really care if she's prohibited on paper or not. If someone on the fringe manages to get more capabilities because of recognition of stupid pieces of paper, then so be it- that's a good thing. Particularly given the number of people in this country that have had their rights taken away by some arbitrary process that often didn't involve due process of law.

-Mike

 

[firestorm]

You're now carrying this beyond absurdity because none of us know what did or did not happen wrt the facts in this case.

No, i'm arguing for freedom first last and always. I don't know she isn't a criminal, but we also don't know that she is. The fact is that except for crossing an invisible line with her gun she did nothing wrong, and even having done that nobody was hurt or threatened. Have you ever known a criminal? had family that broke some law? Does that mean that you are a criminal? With national reciprocity this turns into nothing, she has a legal CCW in NH, they tell her you can't have that here put it in the car, she does so. Since no real crime was committed here, how do you justify throwing her to the wolves?

 

[drgrant]

I never understand how this falsehood keeps getting repeated. Thousands of people have served the minimum mandatory sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm. It happens all the time. It is 18 mos. btw since the statute was amended. Don't think for a second that the courts don't impose this all the time.

It's not a falsehood when we're talking about hoodrats and violent crime, unless mass got rid of that thing that limitation that blocks them from serving HOC and State Prison sentences concurrently. The old deal was the DA's often won't prosecute under bartley fox because that automatically precluded them charging worse felonies that can't be served out in a HOC. A recurring theme in big dump cities in MA was some hoodrat getting busted with a gun after a drive by attempt, and then they end up doing less time functionally than the BF minimum because the judge could "walk everything else down".

The old joke was Bartley Fox was only designed to put grandma in jail. I bet in reality some intermediary thug wannabees, etc, get put in jail by it, though, if they get caught enough times, etc.

-Mike

 

[Glockster30]

I guess what I'm driving at is that I don't really care if she's prohibited on paper or not. If someone on the fringe manages to get more capabilities because of recognition of stupid pieces of paper, then so be it- that's a good thing. Particularly given the number of people in this country that have had their rights taken away by some arbitrary process that often didn't involve due process of law.

-Mike

Then we are arguing the same point because I never said that I was against reciprocity.

No, i'm arguing for freedom first last and always. I don't know she isn't a criminal, but we also don't know that she is. The fact is that except for crossing an invisible line with her gun she did nothing wrong, and even having done that nobody was hurt or threatened. Have you ever known a criminal? had family that broke some law? Does that mean that you are a criminal? With national reciprocity this turns into nothing, she has a legal CCW in NH, they tell her you can't have that here put it in the car, she does so. Since no real crime was committed here, how do you justify throwing her to the wolves?

Read the comment written by eboos in post #36. He is an attorney.

I'm resting my case.

 

[TomMontana]

I think everyone can agree on the absurdity of getting arrested for carrying by simply crossing the NH/MA border. But this lady and her husband are sketchy as hell. High probability of her PSG here.

 

[snax]

This is a staged operation to bring a suit all the way to the Supreme Court to invalidate state licensing laws and pave the way for national constitutional carry.

 

[firestorm]

Then we are arguing the same point because I never said that I was against reciprocity.



Read the comment written by eboos in post #36. He is an attorney.

I'm resting my case.

What he said is totally correct under current mass law, that isn't what we are discussing at all. I have never said she didn't break current idiotic mass law, I said that it was stupid that such a law exists and that we don't have the freedom we deserve. Ill just call this one a win and move on, I won't address you moving the goalposts.

 

[drgrant]

I think everyone can agree on the absurdity of getting arrested for carrying by simply crossing the NH/MA border. But this lady and her husband are sketchy as hell. High probability of her PSG here.

They are sketchy as hell but there's also an equal probability she just left the gun in her purse and forgot it was there. Not that it matters in MA anyways, regardless. Intent is not considered under illegal carry.

-Mike

 

[eboos]

Intent is not considered under illegal carry.

No, but her intentions are considered when determining if she is a danger to the public and to be held without bail.

 

[amm5061]

No, but her intentions are considered when determining if she is a danger to the public and to be held without bail.

Nah, not in MA. All it takes here is "OMG GUNZ!"

 

[Jason Flare]

She doesn't get any points for not walking into the courthouse with guns blazing?

 

[Spanz]

" Ashley Papatola...put her purse on the conveyor belt of an X-ray machine in the lobby of the Ruane Judicial Center on Federal Street in Salem"

I am getting tired of these idiots going way out of their way to get arrested here in MA. Throw the book at her for being so stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

I think everyone can agree on the absurdity of getting arrested for carrying by simply crossing the NH/MA border. But this lady and her husband are sketchy as hell. High probability of her PSG here.

Maybe. But you have to be a special kind of dolt to try to bring a loaded gun into a courthouse...especially one with an XRay machine at the front door. [sad2]

 

[The Anchor]

Interesting. So, if you have jury duty, you can check your firearm at the door. Good to know.

i can attest to them providing me a locker to leave my edc and knife before entering the jury pool in Worcester...

 

[Rob Boudrie]

There is a meaningful difference between "held pending a bail hearing" and "held without bail", though the former is often reported as the later.

 

[Wendell]

The simple mention of 'methadone' does not necessarily mean that she is receiving methadone as a treatment for a substance abuse problem. Nowadays, methadone is also widely prescribed to people who are suffering from chronic pain. Maybe she's a 'prohibited person', but maybe she isn't.

 

[noxin]

There's always a coulda, woulda, shoulda,...etc. The mere fact that I said it's to prevent accidental criminals is proof enough that I implied "freedom" so no need to insult anyone or refer to them as having one brain cell.

NH has a similar law as MA with regard to moving to another community; i.e., notify the licensing authority in the new community that you are licensed, so it's immaterial to whether or not she moved to a new town because none of us know if she followed the law.




https://www.usacarry.com/new_hampshire_concealed_carry_permit_information.html

Two words negate this whole argument. Constitutional Carry.

 

[Bonesinium]

This is BS. Held without bail. I arrested a guy on gun charges who had a prior record, he was out on $500 bail. Due to lucky timing for him when the court clerk showed up he was even released on bail before we finished the damn report..... But this lady needs to be held without bail...

Well you see, the guy you arrested was a common criminal. He might represent a danger to the public, but he doesn't represent a danger to the state. To the contrary, as a common, probably career criminal, they need people like him out there. It keeps the system functioning, and ensures politicians, cops, lawyers, judges, and prison staff employed.

On the other hand, something like this, there is no danger to the public, but without retribution, she does represent a danger to the state. After all, if people who make harmless errors that lacked any victims were left unpunished, then the states role becomes diminished. And the state isn't about to let that happen.

 

[Koolmoose]

I'M surprised no on has asked this yet: Is she guilty?

 

[goodlife30]

Don't come back to Massachusetts once you leave!

 

[KBCraig]

http://www.salemnews.com/news/local...cle_ff41ebeb-a4c0-523f-8d85-f406ffbc330a.html

SALEM — A New Hampshire woman, arrested last May after a court officer spotted a handgun in her purse as she entered the Ruane Judicial Center, was found not guilty of firearms charges by a Salem District Court jury Wednesday.

Ashley Papatola, 30, of Londonderry, admitted that the gun was in her handbag on the afternoon of May 22, but told jurors she had forgotten that it was in there as she rushed to the courthouse to attend her husband's sentencing on heroin trafficking and firearms charges.

Jurors decided that prosecutors hadn't proven that she "knowingly" carried the .40-caliber Smith and Wesson handgun, which was loaded with seven hollow-point bullets, either into Massachusetts or into the courthouse.

That was one of the elements prosecutors were required to prove in the case. The defense had stipulated to the other elements, including that it was a working firearm, and that Papatola had it in her possession that afternoon.

Papatola, who was held in custody from the afternoon of her arrest until her trial on Wednesday, took the stand in her own defense.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Bullshit charge ! Just tell the judge she is protected under the 2nd amendment. say, it must be really hard for you to understand inalienable rights, and the words in the 2A.

 

[namedpipes]

http://www.salemnews.com/news/local...cle_ff41ebeb-a4c0-523f-8d85-f406ffbc330a.html

SALEM — A New Hampshire woman, arrested last May after a court officer spotted a handgun in her purse as she entered the Ruane Judicial Center, was found not guilty of firearms charges by a Salem District Court jury Wednesday.

Ashley Papatola, 30, of Londonderry, admitted that the gun was in her handbag on the afternoon of May 22, but told jurors she had forgotten that it was in there as she rushed to the courthouse to attend her husband's sentencing on heroin trafficking and firearms charges.

Jurors decided that prosecutors hadn't proven that she "knowingly" carried the .40-caliber Smith and Wesson handgun, which was loaded with seven hollow-point bullets, either into Massachusetts or into the courthouse.

That was one of the elements prosecutors were required to prove in the case. The defense had stipulated to the other elements, including that it was a working firearm, and that Papatola had it in her possession that afternoon.

Papatola, who was held in custody from the afternoon of her arrest until her trial on Wednesday, took the stand in her own defense.

So she served 6 months for an unconstitutional crime for which she was not guilty. Meanwhile, chances are she's lost her job (assuming she had one), her apartment and if she had a car loan, her car, too.

 

[amm5061]

So she served 6 months for an unconstitutional crime for which she was not guilty. Meanwhile, chances are she's lost her job (assuming she had one), her apartment and if she had a car loan, her car, too.

That's what she gets for having a gun in her purse in MA. Now if it had been a kilo of heroin, she would have been out on bail within 12 hours.