The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old September 1, 2017, 07:23 AM   #26
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by wild cat mccane
please realize all the above is nonsense. A trail jury reviews the law. What people are describing above is tv court.
No, I'm pretty sure I wasn't on TV when I researched evidence or jury perception issues. Don't recall ever being on TV during one of my trials, either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wild cat mccane
Your actions are argued and that's it. Someone will cite one or two cases but what I am saying is that it doesn't matter.
One or two cases may be all we have to go on. It's not like jury perception issues show up in appellate opinions.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 07:23 AM   #27
ammo.crafter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 25, 2006
Location: The Keystone State
Posts: 1,308
The jury

Don't overlook a jury's perception of a shooting and
views about issues related to the case as well as wit-
nesses who may be called to testify.

Voir dire is also very important.
__________________
"The Constitution is not an instrument for government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government, lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
Patrick Henry, American Patriot
ammo.crafter is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 08:48 AM   #28
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
A trail jury reviews the law.
A trial jury evaluates the facts presented in court that apply to the case at hand. The jury receives instructions about the law.

Quote:
Your actions are argued and that's it.
Yes--on the basis of evidence about said actions made known to the jury.

Some important evidence may never be made known to the jury.

Some of that may have been lost at the scene--empty shells, an edged weapon....

Some may be ruled inadmissible---GSR test data and related expert testimony if the ammunitionn had been hand loaded.

Other evidence may be incomplete--something moving into the way of video images at an important time.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 08:50 AM   #29
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
I carry my one loads but I live in a state where criminals who get shot in the course of committing a crime are not favored in court.
How about the criminals who do the shooting?

The reason that things go to trial in the criminal justice system is to determine who the criminal is.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 10:06 AM   #30
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,090
Seems how other unqualified individuals have chimed in and seem to disregard the statements of qualified individuals I figure I can chime back in.

Being on trial indicates that the use of a firearm was not so simplistic as to be simply accepted as being self defense or some other legal use. I suppose, an even worse case scenario, is that it is politically motivated and the prosecutor is trying for a political conviction without regards to the actual facts.

The original poster asked about evidentiary concerns. My mistake in my original replies as I am most interested in (but no qualified to give legal advise) on jury deliberations and how evidence may impact a jury (see the Harold Fish) case.

A "standard" load created, marketed, and produced by a neutral third party is not likely, in my unqualified opinion, to present remarkable evidentiary concerns. The two concerns are: does the evidence produced support the chain of events as told by the defendant and if the evidence does not why does it not. For the purpose of this discussion I am going to assume the defendant's memory is accurate and the his or her telling of the chain of events is truthful - obviously both of these things are in question in a non-theoretical discussion.

If the evidence does support the chain of events as told by the defendant then everything is wonderful. In this case the prosecution is not likely to bring it up and, as the defendant is not likely to testify, it is not likely to be part of the defense. The prosecution, in seeing exactly how a particular brand of ammo functions in regards to a particular test is likely to purchase some of that ammo off the shelf and test the results against it. Everything lines up you are good to go.

What if it doesn't line up? This is where you, as a defendant, have a clear advantage over hand-loaded ammunition. Why do you recollect the shooting happening at a couple yards while the prosecution finds evidence, such as gun shot residue, that shows it occurring at a much longer range. You at this point are going to be left questioning the manufacturing process. You're team can pull a few hundred rounds and start testing for consistency - an inconsistency would throw off the test results and throw off the evidence introduced by the prosecutor.

Frankly I am not certain how a database of evidentiary material would help you. It is unlikely the prosecution is going to use round specific evidence to clear you and its unlikely your defense is going to find such detailed forensic information to be central to your case if things have gone that badly for you. In a justified shooting defense you are basically only trying to maintain your version of the events as simply as possible. Evidence introduced to be used against you will need to be called into question or obscured some how but I don't see that being an issue with commonly manufactured "boutique" ammunition that your defense will be readily able to purchase.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 10:38 AM   #31
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 14,263
Just to give you something else to worry about, not all factory ammunition is alike, even if of the same brand and SKU. GSR from your lot might not be the same as gsr from what "CSI" can get to test, if it comes down to that.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 11:26 AM   #32
ATN082268
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats McGee View Post
No, let's please not rehash complaints about the admissibility of the history of the man that Fish shot, nor about why (handload-SD-round proponents) claim that Bias was different because it was a murder charge. I've addressed those in the past.
Besides the admissibility issues of the history of the man that Fish shot, were there also issues regarding forensic evidence for and against Fish? In any case, it doesn't sound like the case hinged on the caliber/ammunition used.


Edit: My knowledge of the case doesn't go much beyond this video. I think the relevant part starts around the 6 minute mark. If this guy is off his rocker in this analysis, then I am too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBkjdutVmFA

Last edited by ATN082268; September 1, 2017 at 11:40 AM.
ATN082268 is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 11:31 AM   #33
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,042
^^Not forensic/admissibility issues. I'm operating purely from memory here, but it seems that post-trial interviews revealed that there was some discomfort (maybe even only one juror?) with the 10 mm that he carried. I'm not sure the case "hinged" on it, but one uncomfortable but vocal juror can make quite a difference in deliberations.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 11:35 AM   #34
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,131
After having sat in many, many court rooms my questions are #1 is it illegal and #2 How is it relevant?
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 11:40 AM   #35
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,131
Quote:
What if it doesn't line up? This is where you, as a defendant, have a clear advantage over hand-loaded ammunition. Why do you recollect the shooting happening at a couple yards while the prosecution finds evidence, such as gun shot residue, that shows it occurring at a much longer range. You at this point are going to be left questioning the manufacturing process. You're team can pull a few hundred rounds and start testing for consistency - an inconsistency would throw off the test results and throw off the evidence introduced by the prosecutor.
Have you ever seen a GSW that was made at extreme close range? It is pretty easy to tell when you know what you are looking for.

Too many people get all wrapped around the axle about this. If you are the victim in a robbery and say the BG was 4 feet away when in reality he was 10 feet away it makes no difference.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 11:44 AM   #36
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,131
Quote:
The reason that things go to trial in the criminal justice system is to determine who the criminal is.
No, a trial is held because there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and the person standing trial committed said crime and he plead not guilty at an earlier hearing and either a plea bargain was not offered or it was rejected. A criminal trial is not held as a fact finding mission, that is called an investigation.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 12:05 PM   #37
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,668
"...using boutique ammunition may be..." And will be debunked just as fast as the whole use of reloads argument by any good lawyer.
"...GSR testing..." Nobody will retain Gun Shot Residue test results. GSR tests only prove a person fired a firearm. Doesn't ID the firearm, gun powder used or what cartridge.
"...not favored in court..." More about civil suits by the criminals mommy and daddy looking to cash in.
"...same kind of records of exactly..." Those records are only for the purpose of repeating the load. They have no use to anybody otherwise.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 12:23 PM   #38
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,090
Quote:
"...GSR testing..." Nobody will retain Gun Shot Residue test results. GSR tests only prove a person fired a firearm. Doesn't ID the firearm, gun powder used or what cartridge.
Would the amount of gun powder on a victim (or no presence at all) not have a reasonable bearing on evidence as to how far away the alleged victim was
Lohman446 is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 01:07 PM   #39
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
...using boutique ammunition may be..." And will be debunked just as fast as the whole use of reloads argument by any good lawyer.
The important part the reloads argument has been settled before SCOTUS--Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals--and the results are reflected in the Federal Rules of Evidences and in those of quite a number of states. Both sides had good lawyers.

Quote:
GSR tests only prove a person fired a firearm.
And they are used to estimate the distance. Have been for years. Not perfect, but they may be dispositive.

Quote:
Doesn't ID the firearm, gun powder used or what cartridge.
True. Irrelevant.

Quote:
Those records are only for the purpose of repeating the load. They have no use to anybody otherwise.
If the records have been prepared properly using calibrated equipment and accepted procedures, by independent factory lot testers who are not at all connected with either party in a trial, and if their maintenance and custody are not subject to question, they make the test data from exemplars admissible in court. Confirmed by Daubert v Merrell Dow, but true beforehand.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 01:21 PM   #40
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
If you are the victim in a robbery and say the BG was 4 feet away when in reality he was 10 feet away it makes no difference.
Maybe not. Maybe it will.

The issue irises when, if you say an attacker was moving at you from extremely close range, and good honest eyewitnesses whose attention was drawn to the situation only after you had moved some distance, you will likely have a credibility problem. That could be a killer.

Perhaps, in some cases, expert testimony concerning the testing of the data from your ammunition will help prove your case.

IF the jury is allowed to hear it..
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:07 PM   #41
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,090
Quote:
If you are the victim in a robbery and say the BG was 4 feet away when in reality he was 10 feet away it makes no difference
Is the suggestion that a defendant's statement being different then the demonstrable facts in the matter making no difference in a case actually being put forward?
Lohman446 is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:10 PM   #42
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk
No, a trial is held because there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and the person standing trial committed said crime and he plead not guilty at an earlier hearing and either a plea bargain was not offered or it was rejected. A criminal trial is not held as a fact finding mission, that is called an investigation.
I'll have to disagree on this one.

"Probable cause" is a specific legal term, and only one part of the criminal trial process. Once probable cause has been found, the State must still prove each element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt. The purpose of the criminal trial is to determine whether the State can do that.

While an investigation is a fact-finding mission, it is the trial that establishes facts for legal purposes. In many appellate decisions, the appellate court makes reference to "the finder of fact," which may be the judge or the jury. If that finder of fact determines that "Spats McGee drove at 70 mph on Roosevelt Road," that fact becomes true for legal purposes. It does not matter how it was proved, whether anybody clocked me with a radar gun, or anything else. It becomes, legally, a fact.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:13 PM   #43
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk
Too many people get all wrapped around the axle about this. If you are the victim in a robbery and say the BG was 4 feet away when in reality he was 10 feet away it makes no difference.
It makes no difference, until it does. One problem is credibility. If I claim the attacker was 4 feet away and was 10 feet away, the jury may look at that and begin to wonder what else about my story isn't quite true.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:15 PM   #44
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,131
Quote:
Maybe not. Maybe it will.

The issue irises when, if you say an attacker was moving at you from extremely close range, and good honest eyewitnesses whose attention was drawn to the situation only after you had moved some distance, you will likely have a credibility problem. That could be a killer.
No, its called distorted perceptions. Under life threatening stress your perceptions are altered.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:17 PM   #45
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,042
^^^Perhaps, but do you expect the jury to know that?
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:18 PM   #46
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,131
Quote:
Is the suggestion that a defendant's statement being different then the demonstrable facts in the matter making no difference in a case actually being put forward?
No, I am saying that under life threatening stress your perceptions are altered significantly. If you take statements from 10 witnesses to a crime you will get 10 totally different stories.

I can't tell you how many times we would be looking from a brown 4 dr and it turned out to be a blue 2dr.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:18 PM   #47
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
No, its called distorted perceptions.
No what? Do you contend that the discrepancy might not severely harm your credibility?

Quote:
Under life threatening stress your perceptions are altered.
Is that directly relevant to the scission at hand?
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:19 PM   #48
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,131
Quote:
I'll have to disagree on this one.

"Probable cause" is a specific legal term, and only one part of the criminal trial process. Once probable cause has been found, the State must still prove each element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt. The purpose of the criminal trial is to determine whether the State can do that.

While an investigation is a fact-finding mission, it is the trial that establishes facts for legal purposes. In many appellate decisions, the appellate court makes reference to "the finder of fact," which may be the judge or the jury. If that finder of fact determines that "Spats McGee drove at 70 mph on Roosevelt Road," that fact becomes true for legal purposes. It does not matter how it was proved, whether anybody clocked me with a radar gun, or anything else. It becomes, legally, a fact.
What are disagreeing with? Probable cause is what is needed to be CHARGED with a crime, which potentially results in a trial. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt of all elements comprising said crime is the burden of the state DURING a trial.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:26 PM   #49
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,042
Here was your original statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk
No, a trial is held because there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and the person standing trial committed said crime and he plead not guilty at an earlier hearing and either a plea bargain was not offered or it was rejected. A criminal trial is not held as a fact finding mission, that is called an investigation.
All I'm saying is that a trial is more than that.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old September 1, 2017, 02:30 PM   #50
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,131
Quote:
No what? Do you contend that the discrepancy might not severely harm your credibility?
That depends on the investigation. If my estimate is 4 feet and it turns out 10 feet, is the discrepancy a material misrepresentation, an oversight, an error in judgement or a outright falsehood. And then does it really have any bearing on the case. It is why when conducting crime scene and accident investigations everything is measured and documented. My point is a simple mistake of fact, when it really does not change anything is irrelevant in the big picture.

Quote:
Under life threatening stress your perceptions are altered.
Is that directly relevant to the scission at hand?
If you are suffering from the stress associated with a life or death situation it is absolutly relevant and well documented.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10832 seconds with 8 queries