• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

UPDATE: Police RAID house of gun-toting St. Louis lawyer couple and confiscate the AR-15

Do we have a case where that happened?
Not only do we, it's been discussed here. JC Arms, the manufacturer, helped pay for the defense. I believe he said that soon he'll be able to tell us more

 
Possibly. But for probable cause i doubt whether the gun was operable matters. Also if I recall I heard that gun was in a lawyer's possession after the incident, and that clouds its condition at the time of the incident.
Having the gun in the possession of the defendants for a period of time would also cloud things.

I believe the requirement for it to legally be a gun in MA is either operable or can be made operable with a "minor repair or adjustment" - with considerable ambiguity as to the exact meaning of that term.
 


more detail on what happened from protester's POV

They really sound like a couple of obnoxious, entitled "look at me for too long and I'll call my lawyer" types.
 
Not only do we, it's been discussed here. JC Arms, the manufacturer, helped pay for the defense. I believe he said that soon he'll be able to tell us more

Ugh, I missed that story. Wish it surprised me more.
 
Is this like the procedure where when confronted with a fixed mag JP Arms rifle, police chose to physically destroy the fixed 10-round magazine in order to attach their own post-ban standard capacity magazine so they could charge the guy with all kinds of AWB violations?
No much different. If the police had sent that to a ballistics expert to do a step by step "repair" to analyze how much work it took to make it accept a detachable magazine, that would be analagous. Afaik the police there just ripped into the gun, damaging it, to frame someone for an awb violation.
 
Right, but hers looks like a pps which definitely has the spring in front of the pin.


more detail on what happened from protester's POV

The link says "clearly no continuous maintenance" yet the lawn is mowed, the garden is in perfect order, and I bet he'll produce a bill for the shoveling of the sidewalk.
 
Just thought of something:
You suppose she knew the pistol was neutered?
Or did hubby hand it to her, and say,
"in the gravest extreme you can fight them off with this

Yes they did. It was deactivated for a previous case he had involving a firearm.

They really sound like a couple of obnoxious, entitled "look at me for too long and I'll call my lawyer" types.

No. He is the lawyer you call during those cases. Huis background is civil right's law among other specialties. He won't be a pushover.

"Stay off the property...yet they are clearly on the property?????
 
No. He is the lawyer you call during those cases. Huis background is civil right's law among other specialties. He won't be a pushover.
Read up on him. He seems to have a long history of abusing other with "I am an attorney and you will do what I say or I will run up your legal bills".
 
Fixing an inoperable gun is normal in any prosecution as long as the steps taken to correct a defect are documented.
The DA's office is now squawking that they never made any request.

The lab told the DA's office the gun was inoperable and couldn't be test fired. The DA's office then demanded it be fixed. The DA's office wanted the evidence mucked with and didn't count on the crime lab doing the right thing in documenting everything. The DA's office did not have grounds for charges in the inoperable condition the firearm was in when it arrived at the crime lab.
57ba192f-2954-481b-a07e-b5ed0ae41c78_1140x641.jpg


The DA is now calling her critics racist and getting a letter of support from all the other clowns DAs/AGs on the unrepentant Nazi collaborator and convicted felon payroll.
 
Last edited:
Only new factoid for me there is that the rioters approached the gates
by marching northbound on Kingshighway Blvd. (Shrug; jus' sayin').


But I like how the narrator says the protestors
are not even walking towards the McCloskey's mansion,
as the guy taking the video is walking towards the McCloskey's mansion.

You can trust the St. Louis Post-Dispatch -
they're not like those other newspapers.
 
The link says "clearly no continuous maintenance" yet the lawn is mowed, the garden is in perfect order, and I bet he'll produce a bill for the shoveling of the sidewalk.
"Yet"?

I bet the McCloskeys sprang for the flower bed.
I wouldn't be the least surprised if they made their landscapers
bill separately for the gore of lawn.

But what does mowing the lawn and shoveling snow
have to do with painting a rusty iron gate?

...​
((2))2. Plaintiffs are unaware of any maintenance performed b((y defendants​
on the)) iron gate at any time within the ten-year period immediately ((preceding​
<date>)) and certainly there has been no "continuous maintenance" of su((ch infrastructure​
as claimed in Exhibit)) 51, Paragraph 25).​

((Doubly-parenthesized words totally made-up by me,
because I can't find the lawsuit PDF...)).

Addams-Family-Opening-Credits-Gomez
 


more detail on what happened from protester's POV

That is a joke though. The "protestors" were on PRIVATE property. Maybe it wasn't the McCloskey's but it was still PRIVATE property.

Then they try to impugn the McCloskeys for prior exercising their rights in Court - weaksauce all the way.

Not to mention the property they were on is undisputed to be THEIR property - so they have a right to be there.

This one is a big nothingburger being made out by the MSM as something else. Bah.

.
 
Take that in the face you POS St Louis DA:

Missouri attorney general dismissing case against St Louis couple charged with brandishing gun.

“The right to keep and bear arms is given the highest level of protection in the Missouri Constitution and their laws, which I am charged for protecting,” Schmitt said. “This includes the Missouri castle doctrine, which provides broad rights for Missourians to protect and defend their personal safety, and property against those who wish to do them harm.”

The attorney general described Gardner’s litigation as nothing more than a politically motivated move.

“The shameless circuit attorney filed suit against a St. Louis couple who, according to published reports, say they were doing just that–defending the safety of their property,” he said. “A political prosecution, such as this one, would have a chilling effect on Missourians exercising their right to self-defense. The law of Missouri is clear and must be protected … enough is enough.”


Missouri attorney general dismissing case against St Louis couple charged with brandishing gun
 
FINALLY, !!!!

Now let them sue the DA personally, and in her Official capacity, and the City and if needed the County

Sue every one who had a part in this violation of rights, and f*ck their claims of qualified immunity, they knew it was a illegal seizure of property and malicious prosecution
 
The article is 8+ days old.
Does it contain any actual information whatsoever?

Here is an article that's only 8+ hours old,
and the case is still on:

St. Louis prosecutor used McCloskey case in campaign literature and should be dismissed, according to new motion

Yes, people here... sometimes don't read articles critically.

That posted article says nothing we didn't already know. State AG wants the case dismissed (but can't do it), CA is still prosecuting (because dropping the case makes her look stoopid), Governor standing by to pardon.

SSDD.
 
Wait, isn't that one of the things "Antifa"/BLM are trying to fight for?

Qualified Immunity only applies if a reasonable person has reason to believe their actions are legal.

Since the Circuit D.A. is a Lawyer, and had plenty of time to research the charges before she brought them, and even seek out legal opinions from Judges, and still brought the charges IMHO knowing damn well she could never get a conviction, that, again IMHO is proof she knew what she did was wrong, and hence outside of the scope of her employment and therefor not covered by Qualified Immunity.

Where the EFF is the N.R.A. on all of this? They should have been FRONT AND CENTER defending these people, members or not, instead of cowering in a corner and trying to figure out where the money for Wayne's next necktie is coming from.

At least Trump and his campaign have publicly supported the McCloskey's

 
Mark and Patricia McCloskey have filed a lawsuit to disqualify St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner and her office as the council for Missouri. They say that her campaign for reelection is influencing the case against them. They face felony charges for displaying guns during a protest.


The motion filed by the McCloskeys describes several emails sent to Gardner’s supporters. Several of them reference the events surrounding the couple standing in front of their Central West End home while protesters marched to the Mayor’s home in June.


The motion quotes a portion of Section 56.110 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri: “The courts have stated that a prosecutor should be disqualified if the prosecutor has a personal interest in the outcome of the criminal prosecution which might preclude affording the defendant the fair treatment to which defendant is entitled.”


If Kim Gardner’s office is removed from this case then another prosecutor would be assigned. Gov. Parson has said that he would pardon the couple. President Trump has also said that he supports the McCloskeys.

The motion describes the email listed as “Exhibit A.”


“Because you are a supporter of Kim, I want to make you aware of a few late-breaking developments that are making national headlines right now. You might be familiar with the story of the couple who brandished guns during a peaceful protest outside of their mansion.


Instead of fighting for the millions of Americans affected by the pandemic, including 31,000 Missourians, President Trump and the Governor are fighting for the two who pointed guns at peaceful citizens during the Black Lives Matter protests.”


The motion said links in the email go to a donation page. Text on the page allegedly said:


“St. Louis will have an opportunity to re-elect progressive circuit attorney Kim Gardner, who time and time again has shown us she isn’t afraid to stand up and hold those accountable who are perpetuating a system of police brutality.”


A search of the website did not show that this paragraph is on Kim Gardner’s campaign website. That does not mean that it does not exist elsewhere on the internet. But, the motion did contain copies of emails sent to Gardner’s supporters. Exhibit A and B are posted below.

Gardner’s campaign sent this tweet on July 14:

“It was surprising to see Gov Parson call for my removal today. I will not play politics with any case the way the governor is. It’s shocking to see him focused on me on a day with a record number of new COVID19 cases in Missouri. Governor, you do your job, I’ll do mine.”
VoteKimGardner.com Twitter account

It was surprising to see Gov Parson call for my removal today. I will not play politics with any case the way the governor is. It's shocking to see him focused on me on a day with a record number of new COVID19 cases in Missouri. Governor, you do your job, I’ll do mine. pic.twitter.com/G66gok0nkS
— VoteKimGardner.com (@votegardner2020) July 15, 2020

  • Screen-Shot-2020-07-29-at-10.25.31-AM.jpg
  • Screen-Shot-2020-07-29-at-10.18.23-AM.jpg
  • Screen-Shot-2020-07-29-at-10.25.31-AM.jpg
  • Screen-Shot-2020-07-29-at-10.18.23-AM.jpg
 
Mark and Patricia McCloskey have filed a lawsuit to disqualify St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner and her office as the council for Missouri. They say that her campaign for reelection is influencing the case against them. They face felony charges for displaying guns during a protest.
...
Good for them. They ARE scumbag experienced lawyers.
 
Back
Top Bottom