Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 41011121314
Results 313 to 330 of 330

Thread: Gerald Stanley found not guilty in death of Colten Boushie

  1. #313
    Quote Originally Posted by oagre View Post
    Thanks. That was interesting. Do you know if this evidence was called from a firearms expert at trial?
    The Crown's firearms expert testified that he could not explain the bulged cartridge. Whether the Crown's or Defence expert explained the bit about the Tokarev and the aged ammo being unreliable is unclear other than that info about the make and type was included. The judge made remarks about it during the charge to the jury. Did you read that?

  2. #314
    Official Cyclops Wrangler
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Hanging out with the One-Eyed Monster.
    Posts
    19,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Smooth60 View Post
    The Crown's firearms expert testified that he could not explain the bulged cartridge. Whether the Crown's or Defence expert explained the bit about the Tokarev and the aged ammo being unreliable is unclear other than that info about the make and type was included. The judge made remarks about it during the charge to the jury. Did you read that?
    I must admit that i have been going off 3rd hand reports and have not had time to read any of the original proceedings.

    The judge would need to have properly qualified and sworn expert evidence about the Tokarev and the ammo. He couldn't guess or go by his own reading on the point.
    After 30 years hobbying and 15 years on TERB, maybe I should write my memoirs. I'd call them..... "If these Balls could talk".

  3. #315
    Quote Originally Posted by oagre View Post
    I must admit that i have been going off 3rd hand reports and have not had time to read any of the original proceedings.

    The judge would need to have properly qualified and sworn expert evidence about the Tokarev and the ammo. He couldn't guess or go by his own reading on the point.
    Here is one section of the Charge to the Jury.

    "Although both experts did not know what caused the bulge both theorized that one possible explanation would be a hang fire or delayed reaction."

    http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/...a-jurors-shoes

    If the Crown's expert witness cannot explain and goes so far as to admit that it is possible that the defence explanation of hang fire is possible then I think your fucking case is sunk wouldn't you think?

  4. #316
    Official Cyclops Wrangler
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Hanging out with the One-Eyed Monster.
    Posts
    19,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Smooth60 View Post
    Here is one section of the Charge to the Jury.

    "Although both experts did not know what caused the bulge both theorized that one possible explanation would be a hang fire or delayed reaction."

    http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/...a-jurors-shoes

    If the Crown's expert witness cannot explain and goes so far as to admit that it is possible that the defence explanation of hang fire is possible then I think your fucking case is sunk wouldn't you think?
    I think that contributes mightily to "reasonable doubt" and probably helped a lot to obtain the acquittal.
    After 30 years hobbying and 15 years on TERB, maybe I should write my memoirs. I'd call them..... "If these Balls could talk".

  5. #317
    Quote Originally Posted by oagre View Post
    I think that is indeed the thrust of Gladue . The wrongdoer is given community service with the band and is made to publicly ackowledge the harm he has done, instead of being jailed.
    Was reading reaction this morning and the Gladue case was mentioned. For those who don't know, the government passed a law that jail should be a last resort and background/circumstances considered. Gladue was the first case to test this law.

    What's sad is the summary stated Gladue was 19-year old indigenous woman with alcohol and other issues and she killed her husband for SUSPECTED ADULTERY. She got 3 years for manslaughter and the case was appealed saying the judge didin't follow the law about sentencing. Does anyone else think it's outrageous that the big case involved killing somebody else for essentially nothing? I couldn't believe it.
    Find a lady who loves a lickin', that'll keep a man's heart tickin'!
    Show me the DATY!

  6. #318
    Official Cyclops Wrangler
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Hanging out with the One-Eyed Monster.
    Posts
    19,771
    Quote Originally Posted by sempel View Post
    Was reading reaction this morning and the Gladue case was mentioned. For those who don't know, the government passed a law that jail should be a last resort and background/circumstances considered. Gladue was the first case to test this law.

    What's sad is the summary stated Gladue was 19-year old indigenous woman with alcohol and other issues and she killed her husband for SUSPECTED ADULTERY. She got 3 years for manslaughter and the case was appealed saying the judge didin't follow the law about sentencing. Does anyone else think it's outrageous that the big case involved killing somebody else for essentially nothing? I couldn't believe it.
    I checked out the case and I was surprised at how low the sentence was as well. But Gladue was actually NOT A GLADUE CASE. The trial judge didn't apply the special sentencing provisions for aboriginal offenders, as Gladue lived off reserve. He gave her 3 years based purely on general sentencing principles. The SCC used the Gladue case to discuss aboriginal sentencing generally, but didn't alter the judge's original sentence.

    Gladue was highly intoxicated and very young - 19 years. And she pleaded guilty quickly. These seem to be the reasons and all the levels of court accepted them as being a logical basis for the sentence.
    After 30 years hobbying and 15 years on TERB, maybe I should write my memoirs. I'd call them..... "If these Balls could talk".

  7. #319
    Area 51 Escapee
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Stuck in Lodi again
    Posts
    717
    And this woman in London, Ontario tried to stop an Indigenous man from stealing her truck and she was the one who ended up dead. Will be interesting to see how this trial ends up when it eventually comes to court

    http://www.lfpress.com/2018/02/18/br...al-hit-and-run

  8. #320
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...cid=spartanntp

    Poll finds Canadians divided over verdict in Colten Boushie case

    A new poll by Angus Reid says Canadians are divided over the decision made by the jury in the Colten Boushie case.


    Boushie, 22, was shot and killed on a Saskatchewan farm in July 2016.
    A jury found Gerald Stanley not guilty of second-degree murder.
    The poll released Tuesday by Angus Reid said 32 per cent of those surveyed who knew about the case found the verdict “flawed and wrong.” Another 30 per cent said the decision was “good and fair” while the largest group – 38 per cent – were unsure.
    However in Saskatchewan, 63 per cent of those surveyed said the jury’s decision was fair, with 17 per cent saying it was wrong and 21 per cent saying they were undecided.
    Figures may not add up to 100 per cent due to rounding.
    After the verdict was rendered, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said the country’s justice system must do better in the future as he expressed his sympathy to the Boushie family.
    Nearly half of those polled – 46 per cent – said Trudeau’s comments were inappropriate, with 32 per cent saying the comments were appropriate and 22 per cent undecided.
    When it comes to jury reform, 59 per cent agreed with the statement “we should reform these rules to ensure juries reflect the whole community better.”
    Much was made of the fact that no one on the jury in the Stanley trial was Indigenous.
    The federal government is now considering modifications to jury selection, including the rules for peremptory challenges, which allows each legal team to excluding any would-be juror without having to provide a reason.

    The Angus Reid survey was conducted on Feb. 18 and 19 of 2,501 adults who are members of the Angus Reid forum.
    The margin of error is +/- 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
    The Saskatchewan numbers are highly indicative.
    Find a lady who loves a lickin', that'll keep a man's heart tickin'!
    Show me the DATY!

  9. #321
    Quote Originally Posted by sempel View Post
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...cid=spartanntp

    Poll finds Canadians divided over verdict in Colten Boushie case

    A new poll by Angus Reid says Canadians are divided over the decision made by the jury in the Colten Boushie case.




    The Saskatchewan numbers are highly indicative.
    Frankly, I'd say any numbers indicating less than two-thirds of the people believe a verdict of the courts was fair and proper is cause for concern. And for taking action to restore the trust in the law and justice sytem.

    What progress?

  10. #322
    Haven't read every page in this thread - but just wondering if any of the people who buy the verdict and the hangfire explanation are proponents of Trump's idea of arming teachers in schools. Never mind the lack of training, just think about the probability of a tragic "accident" vs the probability of stopping an attack. That alone would seem to be enough to dismiss the idea. Presumably, Stanley knew how to safely operate his weapon - yet he killed a man ("accidentally").

  11. #323
    Quote Originally Posted by essguy_ View Post
    Haven't read every page in this thread - but just wondering if any of the people who buy the verdict and the hangfire explanation are proponents of Trump's idea of arming teachers in schools. Never mind the lack of training, just think about the probability of a tragic "accident" vs the probability of stopping an attack. That alone would seem to be enough to dismiss the idea. Presumably, Stanley knew how to safely operate his weapon - yet he killed a man ("accidentally").
    I also wonder if the gun-toting defenders of the verdict here all go around and point guns at other people?
    The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent anybody else.

  12. #324
    Quote Originally Posted by danmand View Post
    I also wonder if the gun-toting defenders of the verdict here all go around and point guns at other people?
    Hangfires are rare but happen - of course, one of this length is extremely rare - maybe even impossible to reproduce. They occur with older ammunition when the primer is activated but there is a delay before the propellent ignites. (vs a misfire which is a complete failure). Usually a hangfire is measured in fractions of seconds - but can sometime be longer. But long enough time to "check the weapon", run out, etc - would be very very very rare. Further - if he checked his weapon and was sure that it was a misfire (as opposed to a hangfire) - he should have ejected the cartridge. Any well trained, knowledgeable gun owner would know not to ever point a loaded gun at anything unless you were planning on shooting it - and after a misfire or hangfire - you should wait, and don't even eject the bullet until you're sure that it's not going to fire. (Unless you're in the military and in a firefight - in which case you tap rack and continue shooting.) So this verdict is troubling and anybody who buys it, should also acknowledge the stupidity of arming teachers if they buy that this was an "accident". Also - given the budget and pay of teachers in the U.S. - they may be more inclined to buy cheap or surplus ammunition - which increases the odds of misfires, and hangfires.

  13. #325
    Quote Originally Posted by essguy_ View Post
    Haven't read every page in this thread - but just wondering if any of the people who buy the verdict and the hangfire explanation are proponents of Trump's idea of arming teachers in schools. Never mind the lack of training, just think about the probability of a tragic "accident" vs the probability of stopping an attack. That alone would seem to be enough to dismiss the idea. Presumably, Stanley knew how to safely operate his weapon - yet he killed a man ("accidentally").
    Good question. I don't think the solution to curb violence is to introduce more guns/weapons. Just a recipe for disaster. But I'm also assuming the guns given to teachers won't be decades old with old ammo. But mishaps do happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by oldjones View Post
    Frankly, I'd say any numbers indicating less than two-thirds of the people believe a verdict of the courts was fair and proper is cause for concern. And for taking action to restore the trust in the law and justice sytem.
    Almost a 1/3 of people are undecided. Maybe they don't have an opinion or don't think they have enough info to answer the question. Even here, many are speculating based on what is known via media and could easily have a different opinion if we were a member of the jury that gets a more detailed story.
    Find a lady who loves a lickin', that'll keep a man's heart tickin'!
    Show me the DATY!

  14. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by sempel View Post
    Good question. I don't think the solution to curb violence is to introduce more guns/weapons. Just a recipe for disaster. But I'm also assuming the guns given to teachers won't be decades old with old ammo. But mishaps do happen.
    The problem is not just old ammunition. It's the lack of training. Here's a guy who legally owned a handgun in Canada - making him a minority even amongst Canadian gun owners. Yet his defence essentially boils down to ignorance and carelessness. He didn't know how to manage a misfire/hangfire. Worse, he didn't know the golden rule that you NEVER sweep anybody with a gun (loaded or unloaded) UNLESS you plan on shooting them.

  15. #327
    Quote Originally Posted by essguy_ View Post
    The problem is not just old ammunition. It's the lack of training. Here's a guy who legally owned a handgun in Canada - making him a minority even amongst Canadian gun owners. Yet his defence essentially boils down to ignorance and carelessness. He didn't know how to manage a misfire/hangfire. Worse, he didn't know the golden rule that you NEVER sweep anybody with a gun (loaded or unloaded) UNLESS you plan on shooting them.
    I think you can easily train someone on how to operate, store, and clean a gun. Very hard to provide enough training to teach them how/when to use it. Most occupations where guns are used (law enforcement) do a ton of training, not that they always get it right either.

    What you might see is a kid who is using something non-lethal in a supposedly threatening manner getting shot by an overzealous teacher. I think the more obvious answer is trained police officers or security personnel. I'm thinking if you are planning to budget for guns/training for teachers, that same budget is more/less a wash to hire a couple of officers for each school.
    Find a lady who loves a lickin', that'll keep a man's heart tickin'!
    Show me the DATY!

  16. #328
    Official Cyclops Wrangler
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Hanging out with the One-Eyed Monster.
    Posts
    19,771
    Quote Originally Posted by essguy_ View Post
    Haven't read every page in this thread - but just wondering if any of the people who buy the verdict and the hangfire explanation are proponents of Trump's idea of arming teachers in schools. Never mind the lack of training, just think about the probability of a tragic "accident" vs the probability of stopping an attack. That alone would seem to be enough to dismiss the idea. Presumably, Stanley knew how to safely operate his weapon - yet he killed a man ("accidentally").
    Trump's idea is of course ludicrous - in fact perhaps the most ludicrous of all the ludicrous things that ludicrous man has said. Assuming you actually give Ms Jones the poetry teacher a firearm and she isn't scared silly of it, how on earth are you going to give non professionals the sort of crisis firefight training that Navy SEALS work years to acquire??!!??!!

    I felt considerable sympathy for the sheriff's deputies who were lambasted and scapegoated by Generalissimo BoneSpurs. To expect ordinary police officers to intervene effectively in a mass shooting situation - especially one behind closed doors where the players(s) and situation are unclear - is unrealistic and unreasonable. Highly trained SWAT team officers would need at least a sitrep before they went into that building. And those are guys who are trained and equipped for this type of work.

    Every day, the GOP and the POTUS become more and more assinine.
    After 30 years hobbying and 15 years on TERB, maybe I should write my memoirs. I'd call them..... "If these Balls could talk".

  17. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by essguy_ View Post
    Hangfires are rare but happen - of course, one of this length is extremely rare - maybe even impossible to reproduce. They occur with older ammunition when the primer is activated but there is a delay before the propellent ignites. (vs a misfire which is a complete failure). Usually a hangfire is measured in fractions of seconds - but can sometime be longer. But long enough time to "check the weapon", run out, etc - would be very very very rare. Further - if he checked his weapon and was sure that it was a misfire (as opposed to a hangfire) - he should have ejected the cartridge. Any well trained, knowledgeable gun owner would know not to ever point a loaded gun at anything unless you were planning on shooting it - and after a misfire or hangfire - you should wait, and don't even eject the bullet until you're sure that it's not going to fire. (Unless you're in the military and in a firefight - in which case you tap rack and continue shooting.) So this verdict is troubling and anybody who buys it, should also acknowledge the stupidity of arming teachers if they buy that this was an "accident". Also - given the budget and pay of teachers in the U.S. - they may be more inclined to buy cheap or surplus ammunition - which increases the odds of misfires, and hangfires.
    That is all correct. Even then, If somebody points a gun at another man's head, and this man ends up dead, I call it manslaughter.

    Nobody with any knowledge of guns would ever point a gun (loaded or not) at anybody's head if he did not intend to kill.

    I have had guns since I was 12 years old, and I have never once pointed a gun at anybody.
    The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent anybody else.

  18. #330
    Quote Originally Posted by oagre View Post
    Trump's idea is of course ludicrous - in fact perhaps the most ludicrous of all the ludicrous things that ludicrous man has said. Assuming you actually give Ms Jones the poetry teacher a firearm and she isn't scared silly of it, how on earth are you going to give non professionals the sort of crisis firefight training that Navy SEALS work years to acquire??!!??!!

    I felt considerable sympathy for the sheriff's deputies who were lambasted and scapegoated by Generalissimo BoneSpurs. To expect ordinary police officers to intervene effectively in a mass shooting situation - especially one behind closed doors where the players(s) and situation are unclear - is unrealistic and unreasonable. Highly trained SWAT team officers would need at least a sitrep before they went into that building. And those are guys who are trained and equipped for this type of work.

    Every day, the GOP and the POTUS become more and more assinine.
    Yeah, the scapegoating was BS. I don't know if they attempted to ascertain what the situation was though because at some point, intervention might be needed if it's clear it's not a hostage situation so much as a killing spree. But as mentioned, Trump's statement that he personally would have gone in unarmed is total BS. I'd like to boast that I'd run into a burning building to save someone and maybe I would but it's easy to state it without being put to an actual test. Very difficult to know how anyone will react in a life/death situation unless trained.
    Find a lady who loves a lickin', that'll keep a man's heart tickin'!
    Show me the DATY!

Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 41011121314

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •