|
DNS, I have to respectfully disagree with you on several counts. First, all of us in the business have seen a number of absolutely clean shootings that were mischaracterized by an either clueless or politically motivated prosecutor, or much more commonly by a greedy plaintiff's lawyer, as something nefarious.
Second, the old lawyer's advice "Never put the defendant on the stand" is a tactic geared to guilty clients, who comprise the great majority of most defense attorneys' client bases. Most attorneys who defend a lot of wrongfully accused innocent people WANT their defendant on the stand, in hopes of showing what happened from the best possible perspective, the shooter's.
Third, we all know how many anti-gun media editorials have told the public that ordinary people shouldn't carry guns because "they're not qualified and competent like police and security guards." Knowing the jury is vulnerable to it, the argument that "You were incompetent and a danger to us all, packing that piece on our streets" might very well be one of the cards opposing counsel plays. If he should open that door, being able to document competence with things like shooting match score sheets, personal records (as are kept by serious competitive shooters), etc. gives the defense a chance to not only prove the competence of the defendant, but undercut the credibility of the opposing lawyer who is attacking him.
Respectfully,
Mas
|