And don't get me started about the legions of worthless shitheels that populate the TSA...
For the FreeRepublic "banglist", please click HERE .
Posted on 08/29/2008 9:21:57 PM PDT by Domandred
Criminal charges were already taken care of without a trial, Ferdinand just paid the $1,500 fine, apologized for the accident, then thought it was over and done with.
City of Boise later filed civil charges for $7,500 (I think that was the amount) in damages, would have to find the monetary value in another article as it wasn’t posted in either of these two.
HAHA!
I think one of the other jurors today called me “independent and bold” Or something to that effect.
My husband knows and he still married me. =0)~
It is federal only AFTER you pass through security.
Looks to me like this case would fall under “Crimes against the bureaucracy.”
No victim, only offense against the state and the arbitrary rule by unelected bureaucrats.
The world saw a lot of that in fascist Germany and soviet Russia.
The thing I just can’t wrap my head around is; How can all the jurors believe that the Commissioner had no intention and did not know that he was carrying a firearm into an airport? Yet the majority said he was guilty of it! I believe even the jury wanted to make this man pay for simply “forgetting” or simply “being negligent in handling his pistol”.
However, our decision as instructed by the judge was NOT to decide if he was negligent or forgetful. It was a case of did we believe that he knew or intended on bringing a firearm to the airport to begin with? Was there evidence to support this claim?
I do say, NO! None, Zero, Zilch!!!
It's not that they failed to shine a light on the truth. Revealing the truth was never their goal. Obscuring the truth was their goal. Pulling the wool over the jurors' eyes was their goal. Your goal was justice. Their goal was to interfere with your goal.
Being deceived on such a grand scale sure leaves you drained, doesn't it? But you sifted through the deception, and got to the facts that mattered. Good job.
Nicely done. Bravo!
< *applauds*>
Ping. Don’t miss this, especially Netalia’s #5.
Anyone bring up a question as to if I bring too much shampoo that is forbidden on a flight they make me dispose of it or take it back home ......Are firearms on that same TSA verboten list as shampoo or large quantities of bulk fluids etc ??
Here where I live I can escort friends and family right up to the TSA checkpoint in the airport . I can carry in the airport but not in the secure areas past teh TSA checkpoints.
I can see an arrest for a IED etc as those aren’t licensed to carry......... a firearm is. Should be just a ....sorry sir you can’t bring this on the flight...... You must place it in checked baggage etc .......
This not a legal issue it is a political pissin match IMO that isn’t about safety it’s about personal socialist agendas and costing the taxpayers a bunch of time and money !
Hope the man survives this case.
Stay safe !
1) Should the Commissioner known he had a gun? Yes, and all the juror's including my wife agreed on this point.
2) Did the Commissioner know at that time he had a gun? No, and again all the juror's including my wife agreed on this point.
The intended action should have been decided right then and there as not guilty. However other jurors kept trying to justify in their minds how to come back with a guilty verdict.
On juror (and this blows my mind) said something to the effect of "well he was cited for it so he must be guilty". Guess innocent until proven guilty didn't apply.
On this point, my wife was unaware as it was never mentioned, that lawful gun owners can actually check a firearm through baggage...and that firearm is on the same plane as the passenger (just not accessible)
I don't think it would have changed the opinions of the others, nor was it really relevant to the case as I don't think the Commissioner had anything but his carry on.
Interesting thought though is would the case even be brought if he declared a firearm, checked his baggage, but was mistaken as to which bag the firearm was in (checked or carry on).
I can't remember if you have to show the firearm or if you just get the tag to throw in the luggage that has the firearm.
How was the city of Boise harmed $7,500 worth so as to be seeking to recover it from him? Are they saying those were their costs for the incident. If so, I call Bravo Sierra. And are they now going to start suing everyone convicted of anything for costs?
You are correct
During the proceedings it was never told to the jury, that it was a civil case. It was never told to the jury that the city of Boise was asking for $7,500. There was no proof of the city or TSA having wasted any extra man power, time or money in dealing with the problem.
The entire process took place within approximately 20 minutes at the airport and the Commissioner was able to board his flight on time (but they were last on onto the plane). So maybe a few of the passengers may have felt slightly disgruntled to the lagged behind passengers, as they finished boarding. But no delay or cost occurred as a result.
It is correct, that this is a witch hunt to further the political agenda to remove firearms from law abiding citizens of this state and country. While neglecting our second amendment to the bill of rights!
I’m outraged that several jury members were so quick to want to hand down a guilty verdict! With no evidence to support a guilty verdict!
And don't get me started about the legions of worthless shitheels that populate the TSA...
For the FreeRepublic "banglist", please click HERE .
Who the hell do you have running your courts up there??? How can a jury deliberate without knowing the standard of proof, which is different in a civil vs. a criminal case? How about the amount of the damages? If you all had voted against the guy, would the amount requested automatically be assumed to be the right amount? Normally in a lawsuit, the plaintiff asks for a certain amount, but the jury actually awards a specific figure, which can be different from the suit amount.
Are you sure this was an official trial and not just the bailiff wanting to play judge so he buys a robe and lets himself into the courtroom? If I were in a situation like that, I’d nullify EVEN IF I THOUGHT THE GUY WAS GUILTY because that kind of abuse of the process is a worse hazard than any individual criminal. So my natural inclination would be to give them the opposite of whatever they’re trying to achieve till they run the case in a proper and Constitutional manner.
I would imagine you have to demonstrate the firearm is incapable of being fired; slide locked back, cylinder out, or breech open, depending on type of boomstick. I would then also imagine that you have to lock it in front of them.
The culture war seems to be heating up in Boise, with the influx of barking moonbats from Planet Commie Nutbar.
On the one hand, there are still a lot of people who seem to have their heads on straight, but on the other, you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a whacko or two.
A few weeks ago I called the police because a neighbor’s pit bulls were up on the fence barking and snarling at my kids. When they came in the house to talk to me, they didn’t say a word about the shotgun leaning up in the corner or the box of shells next to it. (As it happened, there was no need to load.)
Oh they knew the standard of proof, the judge did his job there (except the part that the case never should have gone to trial).
It was very specific in the instructions to the jury. The act have to have been committed and the defendant had to have knowingly committed the act. It was very specific that the answer to both had to be YES in order to render guilt. The answer to the second was an agreed upon NO but 4 of the 6 member jury still wanted to come justify coming back with guilty. The fifth flipped because they wanted to get out and not carry over till Tuesday.
Normally in a lawsuit, the plaintiff asks for a certain amount, but the jury actually awards a specific figure, which can be different from the suit amount.
That may have been the case. I knew (my wife didn't) that Boise was seeking $7,500. It may have been that with a guilty the jury was to set the actual amount based on some guidelines, but since it ended up with a hung jury never got that far to find out how that would have been handled.
Non-related post. Keep forgetting to change my tag from yesterday.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.