How your gun looks - in court

[benEzra]

Telperion, thanks for the clarification and the link. I'm glad to hear it turned out OK.

In that case, it seems then that even the use of a MACHINEGUN didn't result in a wrongful conviction, although it did appear to result in an unjust and vicious prosecution for an otherwise clear-cut case of self-defense. And had the guy not been able to hire a good lawyer, it could have turned out differently.

 

[Erebus]

I find it hard to believe that a jury is going to care too much what your gun looks like in an HD situation. It's going to be hard for an ADA to convince the jury you were looking for a victim in an HD situation. It would require you being responsible for the burglar being in your house in the first place. Unless he can show that your doors were left chalked open and the pizza and beer in your fridge was there as bait he ain't got much to go on. What weapon is minor compared to why it was used.

Out on the street it could be very different. Skull N' Crossbone grips may send the wrong message in court.

 

[TooTaxed]

A defense lawyer, paid specifically to get his client the best deal possible, is going to put into play anything his fertile mind can dream up. And that will include you, your gun, and your actions. ESPECIALLY those...

There has been some fine advice offered here...check (right now!) to see what the local police...and others...carry, and make sure your own lawyer is well versed in defending "you, your gun, and your actions." Rehearse with him, and work to fill in the weak spots.

 

[Manedwolf]

This is one of the reasons why it's been suggested that a lever-action magnum-pistol-caliber carbine is not a bad idea for home defense.

It has stopping power, and in court, all the lawyer can hold up is a brass-and-wood "John Wayne's gun" whose overall look is associated with BB fights and heros.

 

[Roadwild17]

No, I don't have any proof of such an event happening, that's why I asked

but are there any documented cases in which this has been proven, or does anyone else have any more information on the subject?

Anyway, here's an example of what I'm talking about;

You use a ******** (insert AR, AK, Beretta CX4 Storm, or any other "evil" black gun) to defend yourself from an armed intruder. In court the weapon will more than likely be brought in and paraded to the jury as a killing machine with no purpose other than to take a like (totally leaving out the fact that this gun had previously been used for hours fun planking with the kiddies and had also saved your life/entire family's life). I tend to believe that would have a lasting impact on a probably gun-dumb jury.

A jury is just a bunch of average joes, some are hard headed and some just think all guns are evil. I do believe a large percent of your future in this care wold lye with the draw of the jurors. You can bring in a million gun experts and if the experts aren't capable of swaying the jury's mind from the words of prosecution, then it just going to get ugly.

Until I find a few documented cases of this happening around my area, I will continue to use whatever weapon I find necessary to ensure my safety/ safety of my loved ones.

Just my $.02

 

[YellowLab]

Most court cases are won in the jury selection process.

The defense just has to get 1 person who will see it your way.... but more the merrier.

I've been on 2 juries and selected for 4 'seatings'... and you can tell by the questions they ask who they are looking for.. its not as obvious are the retards on Law & Order etc but the defense wants people already 'in thier court'. The prosecution, on the other hand, does not.

Both verdicts were not guilty... one becuase the LEO OBVIOUSLY framed the guy (yes, it was obvious... all 12 jurors had the exact same comment after the first vote was unanimous.... was like a 30 minute deliberation). The second was a guy taking pics of his stepdaughter for a modeling agency. But when the prosecutor handed him a phone book of the city he said they were in, he didn't even open it and said it was not in there. Plus more BS like that.

One old friggen lady kept voting 'not guilty' because she was upseet about about the pervert not seeing his stepdaughter (whom he loved dearly). We tried to get her kicked off but the judge said no, you have to convince her... man did we lay into that old hag... for two days. He still got off. One of the jurors told the pervert that he should buy that old lady dinner cause she was the only one keeping his ass out of jail.

 

[hoji]

One juror voting not guilty would have made it a hung jury, not an an acquittal.

 

[Mannlicher]

as I said earlier, I have yet to see credible case on this where the gun used was a factor in the case. In the age of "FindLaw.com", lexus-Nexus, Google, etc, if there is a case it should be easy to find.
Here is a link to a story that involves my old friend Harry Beckwith. He too used a sub machine gun to foil a robbery. This did not even make it to trial.

http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html

 

[brickeyee]

Self defense is an 'affirmative defense'.
This means you admit to having fired the weapon that resulted in someones death, but that under the laws you had a legal right to do so.
The actual weapon would not need to be produced for any reason.
You have admitted the shooting.
The argument will be over if it was the response of a reasonable person, and that said resonnable person would be in fear of death or grave bodily injury.
Some states have more statute law than others covering self defense shootings. If you live in such a state you should have reviewed these laws, and any cases that have been decided using them.
In other states (Virginia is one) the self defense law is all case law (AKA 'common law'). It is slightly harder to review this, but any major library should have a copy of both the state code and the court reporter volumes that detail the case law decisions.
You can also pay for a few hours of a good attorneys time to provide a summary to you and answer questions. They have additional law books that summarize case law and lay out the durties of the state to prove a case.

 

[evan price]

With the exception of improved grips (So that I can assert EVEN BETTER control over my gun) or a +1/+2 mag floorplate (So that I can shoot paper targets more without having to reload) or a rail-mounted Streamlight (So that I can positively identify any target's threat level before engaging) I leave my guns stock. No lasers, no custom work, no Pictinny rail mounted pistol bayonets, nothing.

 

[Zundfolge]

Nobody here seems to be taking into account the most important element; jurisdiction.

A self defense shooting with a "Tacticool" tricked out pistol in rural Texas or Idaho is likely a non issue. But an honest to God self defense shooting with a blue snubnose .38 is going to get you dragged before a vicious anti-gun DA in places like Miami or Seattle.

So far the only evidence given is a guy using a MACHINE GUN in self defense (and killing his attacker) recieving a bit of over zealous prosecution ... a full auto rifle is a LONG WAY from a tricked out 1911.

So if you are one of the privelidged few who is allowed to carry in a leftist hell hole of a state than yes, its wise to stick with a simple, plane jane DAO 9mm and leave your tricked out 1911 w/laser and compensator at home in the safe.

Keep in mind, that if you use it, your gun WILL be taken as evidence, and even if you get it back, it will likely have been sitting, uncleaned, in a damp property room for who knows how long. I'm not willing to maybe lose a high-dollar show piece when I know a reliable cheapie and good tactics is all I need.

Now THAT's a good reason.