And don't get me started about the legions of worthless shitheels that populate the TSA...
For the FreeRepublic "banglist", please click HERE .
First let me say that I knew more about this case than my wife did, before the trial even started. I personally would never have gotten on the jury because of my previous knowledge about the case.
At no time did I ever offer my opinions on the case until after the case was declared a mistrial.
At no time did I offer any of my previous knowledge about the case, again until after it was declared a mistrial.
Several times I stated to my wife that I wasn't going to discuss it because I knew things that she did not yet know (and found out after the trial she never did know).
My wife is not a gun rights activist, she doesn't pay attention to every little gun law and gun case like I do. She had no knowledge of this case at all prior to walking into jury duty on Thursday morning.
She was never told that the case she was on was was not actually a criminal trial, but a civil case brought on by the City of Boise (owners and operators of the Boise airport) by the democrat anti-gun mayor who was pissed about the newly passed Idaho firearms preemption laws. (yea that last commentary is why I never would have been on the jury.)
Notice in the second article the hung jury count was either 5-1 or 4-2. The entire deliberations there were two hold outs, my wife and another. When deliberations went long the other hold out changed from not-guilty to guilty solely to get the trial over with, regardless of what they really thought.
Please be kind to my wife when she posts for her first time...it will be long.
Ping for the list
Wife posted but she’s a new user so it’s flagged for review.
Wow this is really long! I do sincerely apologize for this great wall of text but if you would take a few minutes and read what I have to say, you will NOT be disappointed!
The last two days of my life was an interesting yet frustrating two days. I was chosen to sit on the jury for the State vs. Ferdinand Trial. I have now had time to reflect upon this experience. I was the only person of the jury who continually returned to the written law. I found there was no physical or witness evidence to support the Prosecutor’s claim that this man intended to bring a firearm onto an aircraft.
The law states to commit a crime there must be intent to commit a crime along with the act of committing that crime. The two facts of intent and action are NOT to be separated as so stated in legal writing for all of the jury to read. I believed with all my mind, soul and body that this man did not intent on bringing that firearm to the airport that day! There was no evidence proven without a reasonable doubt (in my mind) that he had any intention to do so. His actions spoke to me that he did not act with intention either. I continued to hold my ground and hours later came to the conclusion that I was alone in my thought process, except one other person whom I will get to later.* I listened diligently to all other jury members, their story’s, analogies, and still could not find beyond any reasonable doubt that this man would intentionally bring a weapon to the airport, much less onto an air craft.
*Once the evening hours hit and we were getting hungry, one of the members decided that they would change their vote in an effort to get us out of there sooner and tried to convince me that it would be better to vote guilty. Then this person would start to attempt to rationalize reasons why this person might actually be guilty. I became increasingly frustrated, and trying desperately to find some reason that this man might be guilty. I went back to the paperwork where the law was written. I read it aloud several times. I asked people to look at it, and read it! I was still unable to find any intention in the Commissioners actions that would clarify that he did in fact knowingly bring a gun to the airport and didn’t just simply or innocently forget that it was in a pocket that he doesn’t normally store it in.
The first article that I read when I got home mentions the “Smirk” comment by TSA Official Nancy Love, who said that when the Commissioner was at the X-ray machine he appeared to have a “Smirk” on his face. However, after some objections regarding the “Smirk” comment from the Defense, it was stricken from the record. Many jurors kept going back to this point. That body language was a key factor that could hold some weight. So to ride out the thoughts, I asked, “How are the TSA agents qualified enough to assess someone’s innocents by body language?” Most of the jurors said that they were professionally trained to know these things. It was not a part of the evidence and it had been stricken from the record, so it was a mute point anyway! But the issue continued on, and finally everyone moved on to other points. I voiced concern that people who are not specifically trained in body language (which we have no idea what the TSA agents training includes as it was not part of the evidence) that they did not have any basis to make the claim that his body language had any effect on this case.
Facts: What I knew from the information presented to the jury.
These are some of the key points, not all information is included. I am not leaving anything out on purpose.
1. The Commissioner acted in a manor and was compliant to all TSA regulations.
2. The Commissioner previously removed un-desirable items from his luggage the night before.
3. The Commissioner did only have 30 mins – 1 hour of sleep that night before leaving to the airport to board for Washington D.C.
4. The Commissioner was fully aware that guns were not allowed in airports and not allowed in Washington D.C. He has made this trip before for the same convention he was about to attend.
5. The Commissioner was calm and not showing signs of anxiety as he approached the security check points.
6. The Commissioner was calm when he was being questioned.
7. The Commissioner answered all the questions asked to him in a calm and cooperative manor.
8. One of the officers did have a friendly and light conversation with the Commissioner stating that he was glad to meet the Commissioner. Although he stated that he’d wished it was under better circumstances.
9. The Commissioner was not arrested and not found to be a threat by Boise Police Officers, and was allowed to board the plane for his flight on time.
10. The Commissioner was cited for a misdemeanor but left it to the courts to decide his innocents or guilt.
11. The Commissioner showed ID to the officers when asked. (ID included his concealed weapons permit)
12. The Commissioner was an Eagle Scout. (Irrelevant I know….)
13. The Commissioner didn’t take a concealed guns permit class. As when he received the gun permit he was not required to do so. All elected officials are given this privilege in Idaho. Although during that time when he received it, no class was available either.
14. A TSA agent and screener said that he believed that he would have had a 100% identification of a firearm had it passed through his x-ray machine. So in other words, the firearm would have never entered the secure area, much less the aircraft itself.
15. When he was detained he could not think of any reason why he would be detained. It was only until the officer asked him if he could possibly have a “Firearm” that the Commissioner said… “Oh No… Are you kidding me?”
Facts: What I know now!
1. This case was not a criminal case.
2. This case was the civil trial brought forth by the City of Boise against the Commissioner. (Our tax dollars) They didn’t tell us that. We had no idea why the jury’s numbered in six and not twelve.
3. The Mayor of Boise city is an advocate against gun rights.
4. The Commissioner has paid restitution (I’m unsure if it was voluntary or forced) of a $1,500 fine.
5. Concealed weapons permit looks just like a driver’s license identification. So it “was” completely appropriate for him to give this as identification prior to finding out that the firearm was the reason for his detention. It also has the same ID number as your drivers licence number. It is a valid form of identification.
My Outrage!
I’m pretty livid about this case. For several reasons, I kept asking myself “Why are we even here?” “What did this man do criminally?” “When are they going to show some solid evidence that he is guilty?” I could not find any fault other than the man simply was negligent in his actions while packing his bag for his flight. We as jurors were not there to decide if he was negligent. We were there to decide if he “knew” or “Knowingly” attempted to bring a firearm aboard a public aircraft! I am however glad that at least this hung jury has brought forth a chance that this case will not re-appear. However after hearing comments about our Boise Mayor and his (axe to grind) with gun rights, I feel it may not be the end of torture for this innocent man!
Another point that I kept on leaning towards this question; I asked myself and the other jurors, “Why would anyone knowingly bring a firearm into an airport and bring it directly to federal agents with metal detecting screening capabilities?” It just made no sense to me at all. There was no logic or reason to support why he would do such a thing. You could speculate a lot of things but we had no evidence to support him doing such an act of total insanity.
By the end of the deliberation session, I finally gave up. The points had been hashed and re-hashed with no gain. When I would state the written law, jurors would continue to go back to hearsay to support their view. I decided to call the bailiff and state that I had, had enough and to notify the Judge.
Conclusions: I believe that this case has a very political and profound impact on our America way of life. I was not about to send out a guilty verdict without reasonable cause. I had plenty of reasonable doubt as I know I am a reasonable person enough to conclude that the evidence just wasn’t there. No witness’s came forward and said that the Commissioner had preplanned to take the gun on the plane, nor was there any solid evidence such as written, audio, or otherwise. I believe that the jurors were in total disagreement. However, they were all in agreement that the Commissioner did not intend to bring the firearm onto the plane that day. I believe that the vote at the end was 5 against the commissioner vs. one for the commissioner (me) by the end of the deliberation. I believe that it was actually 4 vs. 2 but that juror changed their mind when it became just too frustrating to continue, and not because they fully believe that he was guilty.
I believe that the Prosecutor’s entire case was built on hoping that the jury wouldn’t believe that he could “forget” there was a firearm in his backpack.
My heart sincerely goes out to David Ferdinand, his family, friends, continuants, and associates. I wanted to tell him… God Bless you and do not give up!
I was flying out of Seattle once, sitting at 34,000 or so watching the sunset.
I reached into my pack to get something, though “What the H is this?”, and pulled out a fully loaded clip from one of my guns... no gun, just the clip.
Been shooting the weekend before and you know all the paranoia about keeping the ammo separate from the gun I had stuck it in there while it was in the trunk and completely forgot doing it...
Not to mention that some travel bags have more pockets and cubbyholes and pouches in them than you can shake a stick at...
Chit happens!
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 !
And don't get me started about the legions of worthless shitheels that populate the TSA...
For the FreeRepublic "banglist", please click HERE .
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.)
A civil case? Then why is there a guilty/not-guilty verdict? There are guilty/not-guilty verdicts only in criminal trials. In a civil trial you fined for either the plaintiff or the defendant.