• 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.

Westford custodian fired for gun found in car at school.

je25ff

NES Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
14,011
Likes
9,917
Feedback: 10 / 0 / 0
Ex-School Custodian Due in Court After Gun Found in Trunk

The charges are from the Westford PD:

1 Large Capacity Firearm, Posses, Without LTC
1 Large Capacity Feeding Device, Without LTC
1 Firearm On School Grounds, Carry <----- It was found in his trunk???
1 Firearm, Store Improper, Large Capacity
1 Firearm Serial Number, Defaced
1 Ammunition, Possession of, Without LTC

Looks like he had a thrown down in his trunk and he posted something on Facebook about it. Not too smart.
 
This doesn't tell us much.

The w/o a license charges could only be because he hasn’t provided an LTC. Remember, the license is an affirmative defense to the crime of possessing a firearm. It’s up to the person charged to come forward with a license. Until they do that, the assumption is that their conduct is illegal.

The ‘defaced’ serial number could be holster wear. SOP for prosecutors is to over-charge and then dismiss charges as they become inappropriate or negotiated away.

And we have very bad precedent concerning 'carrying on a school grounds'. In your car counts.
 
This doesn't tell us much.

The w/o a license charges could only be because he hasn’t provided an LTC. Remember, the license is an affirmative defense to the crime of possessing a firearm. It’s up to the person charged to come forward with a license. Until they do that, the assumption is that their conduct is illegal.

The ‘defaced’ serial number could be holster wear. SOP for prosecutors is to over-charge and then dismiss charges as they become inappropriate or negotiated away.

And we have very bad precedent concerning 'carrying on a school grounds'. In your car counts.
Guilty till proven innocent, sounds like the IRS.
 
I'd wager all charges except the storage/carry stick. In fact (I posted about this here previously Posession of a firearm within a school zone.) the storage charge is what I'm wondering about. Doesn't the MGL completely lack anything about storage?? Unless they mean he stored them not locked in the trunk or under his seat or something. If that's the case, then they actually read the law and aren't charging him for storing a firearm on school grounds.
 
Unfortunate situation. Obviously not the brightest light bulb in the box posting pics on social media. But as far as the breach of trust and the other " Oh my gawd were all gonna die " im sure the guy was a good employee, but now they mark him as an evil person, give me a break..But this being Marxisachusetts, criminals get out in 24 hours this guy will be made an example of.

Funny how its the " Guns fault " when a shooting happens, but if a gun is just locked up in a trunk its the owners fault.,,Liberal logic.
 
I'd wager all charges except the storage/carry stick. In fact (I posted about this here previously Posession of a firearm within a school zone.) the storage charge is what I'm wondering about. Doesn't the MGL completely lack anything about storage?? Unless they mean he stored them not locked in the trunk or under his seat or something. If that's the case, then they actually read the law and aren't charging him for storing a firearm on school grounds.

Stored loaded one of his problems, I hope the carry is dropped also since he was not carrying. I'd like to know how they got in his car in the first place, did he let them search it?
 
If indeed Mr. Healy did not have a LTC and did post a video while holding a gun then the police should add an additional charge, being stupid in the 1st degree. This is definitely one for the show America's Dumbest Criminals. Why does social media cause people to do some outrageous and stupid things ? Hey ! Let's do a drive by, video it and then post it on You Tube. Hey ! Look at me, I'm a terrorist ! Now I need to make a video and post it on Facebook. Nowadays the police don't have to investigate anything, all they have to do is watch Facebook.
 
I was concerned this was the beginning of a witch hunt against gun owners, looks like he deserved it. By this I mean you are seen online with a gun and subsequently get your car searched at work.
 
1 Firearm On School Grounds, Carry
1 Firearm, Store Improper, Large Capacity
Well that's contradictory.

He could have talked himself into this one.:
"How did it get in the trunk?"
"I took it out of my coat and put in in the trunk in the lot when I got to the school."​
or some such. If that were the case, he was carrying it on school grounds before storing it.
 
Last edited:
Guilty till proven innocent, sounds like the IRS.

Or El Presidente Trump.

Isn't defacing a firearm's serial number a federal charge ?

Not that this guy isn't screwed as it is.

I can't imagine the Federales have time or resources for this. That shouldn't STOP them, but just a quick view of "how much of a backlog of real stuff versus spending 100 hours on this after the state is gonna butt-rape him" scale means they shouldn't even care.

FWIW - he's 21 and doesn't have an LTC. I wonder if he Ghostgunnd a Poly80. No serial # (defaced). High capacity firearm. Buys a magazine online from a vendor that doesn't worry about what state you are shipping to. Boom. All done.
 
Here's the post apparently..(supplied by my ex somewhat ironically)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1707.JPEG
    IMG_1707.JPEG
    63.5 KB · Views: 201
We don't have a precedent until there is a court decision. Even a plea bargain does not establish a binding precedent. Historically, 269/10j charges get dropped if competent defense counsel successfully argues the issue of "not on ones person".

As to the storage charge, the defense should raise an entrapment by estoppel defense and show the quote from Gun ownership in Massachusetts:
Handguns: Under an LTC, the holder is allowed to transport a loaded or unloaded handgun on his person or in a motor vehicle if the handgun is under his direct control. If the handgun is not under his direct control or is left unattended, it must be unloaded and in a locked case, locked trunk, or other secure container.
 
Last edited:
What is considered a small capacity feeding device? If there are large what is small?

''Large capacity feeding device'', (i) a fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip or similar device capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition or more than five shotgun shells; or (ii) a large capacity ammunition feeding device as defined in the federal Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(31) as appearing in such section on September 13, 1994. The term ''large capacity feeding device'' shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with,.22 caliber ammunition.
 
(b) No person carrying a firearm under a Class B license issued under section 131 or 131F shall possess the same in a vehicle unless such weapon is unloaded and contained within the locked trunk of such vehicle or in a locked case or other secure container. Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of $500.
Do not count on the courts not considering leaving a gun in a car "carrying". While one can argue this does not impose a requirement of unloaded storage, doing so is cheap insurance against a possibly bogus charge.

Also, 10:1 the custodian did not respond with "I will not answer any questions; I do not consent to a search of my person, car or house; am I free to go?".
 
Last edited:
The word "carry" is specifically used in Mass law with respect to firearms in a vehicle. Haven't you ever watched cops? Anything in your car is presumed to be yours! May not stick in court though.

Anyone remember that chick with the criminal record that included being pulled over with a illegal AK in her back seat complete with drugs? Someone let her walk so she could eventually kill that guy out at the Lowell Commuter rail? Either the stuff in the car is yours, or it isn't. Make up your mind MA, but if you prosecute on this it is another nail in the coffin- the laws aren't about criminals, they're about stopping gun owners.

Stored loaded one of his problems, I hope the carry is dropped also since he was not carrying. I'd like to know how they got in his car in the first place, did he let them search it?

Didn't Scalia have a line in the Heller decision about storing unloaded and locked probably isn't constitutional?
 
Didn't Scalia have a line in the Heller decision about storing unloaded and locked probably isn't constitutional?[/QUOTE]

Maybe IDK, but since when does MA care about the COTUS regarding gun laws. I still want to know why the knucklehead let them search his car.
 
Stored loaded one of his problems, I hope the carry is dropped also since he was not carrying. I'd like to know how they got in his car in the first place, did he let them search it?

According to the news talking head last night, voluntary consent was obtained.
 
Carrying is the same as unlawful possession of a firearm not at home or place of work. Cops generally referring to this as carrying as that was the language originally prior to the current wording of Ch. 269 Section 10(a).
 
Back
Top Bottom