|
Post by cadman on Jun 5, 2024 12:23:15 GMT -5
Hunter will be guilty on the two felony charges involving filling out the form. He may be found not guilty on the possession charge as I am not sure possession can be proven if he was not caught with the gun in his possession. I know he had to possess it, but not sure how the law works on knowing he had to possess and actually having proof he had possession for that charge. If Hunter is found not guilty, there will be no appeal. Hung jury will just restart the process. Prosecution cannot appeal a not guilty verdict. Double jeopardy clause prevents it. The defense can appeal any guilty verdict. I think the coke residue is pretty indicative that he possessed the gun. A homeless guy got the gun out of the dumpster according to reports. Plus the girlfriend threw it away. I think the defense could easily raise doubts there. They know he had to possess it at some point, he bought it. But is that enough for the federal law or does there need to be witnesses who saw him possess it or physical evidence of it in his possession. I do not know. Bullfrog might know the answer. It the only charge I am not sure he will be convicted on. The other two should be an easy guilty verdict.
|
|
|
Post by bullfrog on Jun 5, 2024 14:28:58 GMT -5
I think the coke residue is pretty indicative that he possessed the gun. A homeless guy got the gun out of the dumpster according to reports. Plus the girlfriend threw it away. I think the defense could easily raise doubts there. They know he had to possess it at some point, he bought it. But is that enough for the federal law or does there need to be witnesses who saw him possess it or physical evidence of it in his possession. I do not know. Bullfrog might know the answer. It the only charge I am not sure he will be convicted on. The other two should be an easy guilty verdict. In Florida, possession has to be either actual or construction. Actual means its on your person. Constructive means its not on your person but you know about the gun and its an area you can exercise control. I doubt I’d be allowed to convict on inference alone if his prints or DNA aren’t on the gun. I’d want a witness that can actually put the gun in his hand at some point. It could be the person who sold him the gun. If a clerk at a gun store can say “yeah that guy right there sitting at counsel table came into my store and walked out with this gun” that would be enough to get past a JOA and even get him convicted. That someone else discarded it later won’t be that much of an issue. The possession doesn’t have to me measured from the point it was found in the garbage. Not unless the prosecution charged the possession charge for that specific date. They should have charged it for a range from the date he bought it to the date it was discarded, and then be presenting evidence that at some point in that date range he possessed it. Either by a witness putting it in hand or him talking about having the gun and a witness confirming he at least had the gun in a room or a vehicle he exercised control over. A print or DNA on the gun could also circumstantially establish actual possession. Say his DNA is on the gun. The theory would be that between the date of purchase to the date of disposal, he actually possessed it, or else his DNA wouldn’t be there. That would be 100% circumstantial, but its permissible.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jun 5, 2024 16:56:04 GMT -5
A homeless guy got the gun out of the dumpster according to reports. Plus the girlfriend threw it away. I think the defense could easily raise doubts there. They know he had to possess it at some point, he bought it. But is that enough for the federal law or does there need to be witnesses who saw him possess it or physical evidence of it in his possession. I do not know. Bullfrog might know the answer. It the only charge I am not sure he will be convicted on. The other two should be an easy guilty verdict. In Florida, possession has to be either actual or construction. Actual means its on your person. Constructive means its not on your person but you know about the gun and its an area you can exercise control. I doubt I’d be allowed to convict on inference alone if his prints or DNA aren’t on the gun. I’d want a witness that can actually put the gun in his hand at some point. It could be the person who sold him the gun. If a clerk at a gun store can say “yeah that guy right there sitting at counsel table came into my store and walked out with this gun” that would be enough to get past a JOA and even get him convicted. That someone else discarded it later won’t be that much of an issue. The possession doesn’t have to me measured from the point it was found in the garbage. Not unless the prosecution charged the possession charge for that specific date. They should have charged it for a range from the date he bought it to the date it was discarded, and then be presenting evidence that at some point in that date range he possessed it. Either by a witness putting it in hand or him talking about having the gun and a witness confirming he at least had the gun in a room or a vehicle he exercised control over. A print or DNA on the gun could also circumstantially establish actual possession. Say his DNA is on the gun. The theory would be that between the date of purchase to the date of disposal, he actually possessed it, or else his DNA wouldn’t be there. That would be 100% circumstantial, but its permissible. I forgot the clerk who sold it would be a witness if he remembered him. I don't know if they found prints or DNA, that hasn't been released. That is why I am not certain of a guilty conviction on the possession charge.
|
|
|
Post by pinman on Jun 5, 2024 18:59:42 GMT -5
You mean the difference between 34 misdemeanor book keeping errors pumped up into felonies by a crooked prosecutor and tried by an extremely corrupt and biased judge and the very dangerous criminal act of lying to purchase a firearm by a drug addicted person? What is more dangerous to the public? A drug addicted person with a firearm or a person whose accountant made a disputable bookkeeping error? “Come on man” 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂 How many guys on here lied when purchasing a firearm? Bunch of fucking hypocrites. Glass houses and all. Not me.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on Jun 5, 2024 19:50:30 GMT -5
I am sure I didn't either.
|
|
|
Post by PolarsStepdad on Jun 5, 2024 20:11:07 GMT -5
I just renewed my pistol license. One of the questions was do you suffer from mental defect. I'm pretty sure after reading all this yall some lying sumbitches if you said no.
|
|
|
Post by meateater on Jun 6, 2024 11:10:57 GMT -5
I just renewed my pistol license. One of the questions was do you suffer from mental defect. I'm pretty sure after reading all this yall some lying sumbitches if you said no. saying if you vote for joe biden is a mental defect is kinda judgmental on your part , you shouldnt paint with such a broad brush.
|
|
|
Post by PolarsStepdad on Jun 6, 2024 11:22:06 GMT -5
I just renewed my pistol license. One of the questions was do you suffer from mental defect. I'm pretty sure after reading all this yall some lying sumbitches if you said no. saying if you vote for joe biden is a mental defect is kinda judgmental on your part , you shouldnt paint with such a broad brush. Or donating to a "billionaire"
|
|
|
Post by meateater on Jun 6, 2024 12:26:28 GMT -5
im proud to be a non donating american. well except st.jude childrens hospital, they get my tithe not a church hope jesus forgives me.
|
|
|
Post by PolarsStepdad on Jun 6, 2024 12:29:15 GMT -5
im proud to be a non donating american. well except st.jude childrens hospital, they get my tithe not a church hope jesus forgives me. I think you'll be alright. Those children need it a lot more than the church.
|
|
|
Post by walkerdog on Jun 8, 2024 12:57:04 GMT -5
Lowell is the best in the business. Also choose wisely where you break the law. Not saying its right but a cattle rustler in Lubbock , Texas is likely to get a non sympathetic jury pool. Same as a gay basher in San Francisco. Trying to follow your logic here but not having much luck. Are you telling us that you believe most people in Delaware can sympathize with drug addicts?
|
|
|
Post by walkerdog on Jun 8, 2024 13:01:55 GMT -5
They were 85% of the way there. Then the last judge read 85% of the deal and saw the rigging the 85% did. So the system worked and Hunter Biden will be judged by a jury of his piers. Piers can’t judge. They aren’t people. Just trying to help you out there!😆
|
|
|
Post by walkerdog on Jun 8, 2024 13:09:40 GMT -5
saying if you vote for joe biden is a mental defect is kinda judgmental on your part , you shouldnt paint with such a broad brush. Or donating to a "billionaire" Doubt Gore needed the donations anyway, with all the money he made off of inventing the interwebs.
|
|