GregGry
Member
(((Prove it. Cite the cases.)))
I will send a request to all of the local agencies to find exact cases where handloads where used. I know they exist because I have worked with firearms examiners who have delt with ammo that was obviously shot numerous times (It makes identifying the exact gun used troublesome). I have also been witness to multiple headstamp shells being found on scene, which would suggest handloading or a commercial reloader (Both of which would be bad under conventional theory). There are many people that handload and get other peoples handloaded ammo. To think the possibility is not there for anybody in the USA to use a handload for self defense or in a homicide is foolish.
(((Then you might have problems if you're hoping to use GSR in your defense. Personally, I use quality, commercial ammunition.)))
GSR is something that can be proven and disproven. It could help your case, but if your case isn't strong without it, then there are likely problems dealing with the specifics of the case. In the case where witnesses say that you pulled the trigger on someone that was 50 feet awway, and you have no GSR evidence, sure the GSR might be very significant. However the witness statements will likely trump the GSR evidence in the long run. I don't use handloads for defense because I don't handload pistol rounds, and I doubt that I could create a better load then what I can get on the market.
((((Only if you could establish that it is the same as the rounds fired. That was, for example, a problem in the case of New Jersey v. Bias. Because handloads were involved, the judge would not accept that the rounds remaining in the gun were the same as the round fired and would therefore not admit evidence related to GSR from firing any of those remaining rounds. For an extensive recitation of the facts of that case, see post http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost....&postcount=140 .)))
I can see where establishing the same powder charge might be difficult. However if there is a complete lack of GSR in the case of a suicide such as the one listed on that link, there are ways to establish distance. If the lack of GSR establishes that the shot came from more then 4 feet away, and you have a body that hasn't been moved from where it is laying, it might be possible to establish the distance required wouldn't allow for the shot to have been taken place. If you then have no gunshot residue in the area believed to be where the shooter was, that would further establish that something is wrong with the GSR and it can't be relied on. You could also prove that if the load was a full power (like factory or other handloads found) it would have done different damage to the skull then what was present (Such in the case where a round didn't cause a through and throught to the skull). If you take the damage present and the lack of gunshot residue, and compare that to the distance required to duplicate that on a kadaver skull, you would find its not possible to duplicate the situation. Again this is relying on the facts that the place the body was found is established as the actual place the shot was taken. If the test on a skull suggests the shot had to be taken at 30 yards to equal the penetration and damage found, and there are no holes the the walls, then obviously something is wrong.
Also I am not ruling out that the suicide was indeed a homicide, I have not read the case in detail, it is possible that he is/was guilty. I don't trust anyone to give me just the facts from a case regardless of who they are. I will read the actual case in the future to understand more. Not to mention that case shows that you have an uphill battle if you use low powered handloads in guns you keep in your house that others could kill themselves with. Sure you could infer the gunshot residue issues in a self defense case, but its easy enough to prove that a low loaded ammo could leave little to no residue.
(((Well for one thing, the jury might not believe you without corroborating evidence. Remember, you're pleading self defense. You have to demonstrate that you were justified.)))
If your start is that a person appraoched you with a hand on a buldge in a pocket and said "I am going to shoot you unless you give me your money" and you shot them, that is your testimony and is evidence as to what actually happened. If there is no evidence that can be determined from GSR, or real shaky evidence from GSR that shows they were farther away then you claim, that could easily be trumped in court. Now if you claim you shot them at 5 feet away and there is no residue anywhere, the attmept could be made to give the idea that your lying. However just based on a lack of GSR being the only thing that can be used against you (absent of any other evidence to contradict your story), I find it hard to believe that any D/a would persue a case. In that suicide case you posted I find that no gunshot residue being found as suspicious, and a D/a would likely persue a case.
I will send a request to all of the local agencies to find exact cases where handloads where used. I know they exist because I have worked with firearms examiners who have delt with ammo that was obviously shot numerous times (It makes identifying the exact gun used troublesome). I have also been witness to multiple headstamp shells being found on scene, which would suggest handloading or a commercial reloader (Both of which would be bad under conventional theory). There are many people that handload and get other peoples handloaded ammo. To think the possibility is not there for anybody in the USA to use a handload for self defense or in a homicide is foolish.
(((Then you might have problems if you're hoping to use GSR in your defense. Personally, I use quality, commercial ammunition.)))
GSR is something that can be proven and disproven. It could help your case, but if your case isn't strong without it, then there are likely problems dealing with the specifics of the case. In the case where witnesses say that you pulled the trigger on someone that was 50 feet awway, and you have no GSR evidence, sure the GSR might be very significant. However the witness statements will likely trump the GSR evidence in the long run. I don't use handloads for defense because I don't handload pistol rounds, and I doubt that I could create a better load then what I can get on the market.
((((Only if you could establish that it is the same as the rounds fired. That was, for example, a problem in the case of New Jersey v. Bias. Because handloads were involved, the judge would not accept that the rounds remaining in the gun were the same as the round fired and would therefore not admit evidence related to GSR from firing any of those remaining rounds. For an extensive recitation of the facts of that case, see post http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost....&postcount=140 .)))
I can see where establishing the same powder charge might be difficult. However if there is a complete lack of GSR in the case of a suicide such as the one listed on that link, there are ways to establish distance. If the lack of GSR establishes that the shot came from more then 4 feet away, and you have a body that hasn't been moved from where it is laying, it might be possible to establish the distance required wouldn't allow for the shot to have been taken place. If you then have no gunshot residue in the area believed to be where the shooter was, that would further establish that something is wrong with the GSR and it can't be relied on. You could also prove that if the load was a full power (like factory or other handloads found) it would have done different damage to the skull then what was present (Such in the case where a round didn't cause a through and throught to the skull). If you take the damage present and the lack of gunshot residue, and compare that to the distance required to duplicate that on a kadaver skull, you would find its not possible to duplicate the situation. Again this is relying on the facts that the place the body was found is established as the actual place the shot was taken. If the test on a skull suggests the shot had to be taken at 30 yards to equal the penetration and damage found, and there are no holes the the walls, then obviously something is wrong.
Also I am not ruling out that the suicide was indeed a homicide, I have not read the case in detail, it is possible that he is/was guilty. I don't trust anyone to give me just the facts from a case regardless of who they are. I will read the actual case in the future to understand more. Not to mention that case shows that you have an uphill battle if you use low powered handloads in guns you keep in your house that others could kill themselves with. Sure you could infer the gunshot residue issues in a self defense case, but its easy enough to prove that a low loaded ammo could leave little to no residue.
(((Well for one thing, the jury might not believe you without corroborating evidence. Remember, you're pleading self defense. You have to demonstrate that you were justified.)))
If your start is that a person appraoched you with a hand on a buldge in a pocket and said "I am going to shoot you unless you give me your money" and you shot them, that is your testimony and is evidence as to what actually happened. If there is no evidence that can be determined from GSR, or real shaky evidence from GSR that shows they were farther away then you claim, that could easily be trumped in court. Now if you claim you shot them at 5 feet away and there is no residue anywhere, the attmept could be made to give the idea that your lying. However just based on a lack of GSR being the only thing that can be used against you (absent of any other evidence to contradict your story), I find it hard to believe that any D/a would persue a case. In that suicide case you posted I find that no gunshot residue being found as suspicious, and a D/a would likely persue a case.
Evil ammo has been done, and I'm sad to say it's worked a couple times. One more benefit to using my pretty "Golden Sabre" instead of evil, ugly "BLACK TALON." 
