Simple Assault!

[hopalong]

Carrying a weapon on school property is a felony even if you have a PERMIT.
Thus even though you felt threatened you would be in direct violation of the law and not have a legal right to be carrying a gun and could and should be charged with homicide if you killed the person,

So it is better to let someone kill you than be in violation of the law and you should be charged with homicide if you don't let them kill you. :shock:

I'm going to have to think on that. :roll:

Kind of goes to "I;ld rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6"

I believe what he was trying to say was those that shoot first and then expect the law to protect them such and a jury of 12 which has to follow the law other than the heart will let them go has never set on a jury or listenrd to a judges instructions to a jury,
Anyone who believes a jury can disregard the law as it is written is sadly misinformed.
Dun I expected more from you than a comment like that.

 

[VanC]

Anyone who believes a jury can disregard the law as it is written is sadly misinformed.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... ation.html

 

[dun]

Carrying a weapon on school property is a felony even if you have a PERMIT.
Thus even though you felt threatened you would be in direct violation of the law and not have a legal right to be carrying a gun and could and should be charged with homicide if you killed the person,

So it is better to let someone kill you than be in violation of the law and you should be charged with homicide if you don't let them kill you. :shock:

I'm going to have to think on that. :roll:

Kind of goes to "I;ld rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6"

I believe what he was trying to say was those that shoot first and then expect the law to protect them such and a jury of 12 which has to follow the law other than the heart will let them go has never set on a jury or listenrd to a judges instructions to a jury,
Anyone who believes a jury can disregard the law as it is written is sadly misinformed.
Dun I expected more from you than a comment like that.

Anyone that has wached a jury knwos that they don;t alwasy follow the judges or even the evidence. Remember Bobbit and simpson?

 

[pappy1]

Anyone who believes a jury can disregard the law as it is written is sadly misinformed.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... ation.html

yes they can nullify!
How common is it for them to do it?
Judicial acceptance of nullification began to wane, however, in the late 1800s. In 1895, in United States v Sparf, the U. S. Supreme Court voted 7 to 2 to uphold the conviction in a case in which the trial judge refused the defense attorney's request to let the jury know of their nullification power.

Courts recently have been reluctant to encourage jury nullification, and in fact have taken several steps to prevent it. In most jurisdictions, judges instruct jurors that it is their duty to apply the law as it is given to them, whether they agree with the law or not. Only in a handful of states are jurors told that they have the power to judge both the facts and the law of the case. Most judges also will prohibit attorneys from using their closing arguments to directly appeal to jurors to nullify the law.

Recently, several courts have indicated that judges also have the right, when it is brought to their attention by other jurors, to remove (prior to a verdict, of course) from juries any juror who makes clear his or her intention to vote to nullify the law.

From your posted link

 

[VanC]

Anyone who believes a jury can disregard the law as it is written is sadly misinformed.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/project ... ation.html

yes they can nullify!
How common is it for them to do it?
Judicial acceptance of nullification began to wane, however, in the late 1800s. In 1895, in United States v Sparf, the U. S. Supreme Court voted 7 to 2 to uphold the conviction in a case in which the trial judge refused the defense attorney's request to let the jury know of their nullification power.

Courts recently have been reluctant to encourage jury nullification, and in fact have taken several steps to prevent it. In most jurisdictions, judges instruct jurors that it is their duty to apply the law as it is given to them, whether they agree with the law or not. Only in a handful of states are jurors told that they have the power to judge both the facts and the law of the case. Most judges also will prohibit attorneys from using their closing arguments to directly appeal to jurors to nullify the law.

Recently, several courts have indicated that judges also have the right, when it is brought to their attention by other jurors, to remove (prior to a verdict, of course) from juries any juror who makes clear his or her intention to vote to nullify the law.

From your posted link

Nullification is uncommon these days and, yes, the legal profession discourages it, but it still happens. Hopalong's post implied that a jury can NEVER disregard the law. That is simply untrue.

 

[usernametaken]

Carrying a weapon on school property is a felony even if you have a PERMIT.
Thus even though you felt threatened you would be in direct violation of the law and not have a legal right to be carrying a gun and could and should be charged with homicide if you killed the person,

So it is better to let someone kill you than be in violation of the law and you should be charged with homicide if you don't let them kill you. :shock:

I'm going to have to think on that. :roll:

I don't know Ryder - that Louisiana law thing is a different world. Whatever, however it works in 49 states, I think you guys do it different anyway.

 

[usernametaken]

I don't know much about jury nullification - I do know juries have refused to convict because of the punishment mandated not fitting the circumstances.

There is something else that happens in Court too - I don't know what you call it but it happened here once. The judge overturned the finding of the jury.

2 former employees sued the country club for age discrimination. They won with the jury. But attorneys for the country club clearly showed they had other older people working at the country club, that one of the 2 was caught red-handed stealing and the other was fired for attitude, which was documented in repeated warnings. Pretty clear that the community at large hates the country club :lol: but the judge overturned the jury's decision and rightly so in that case.

 

[GMN]

I'm just wondering what you hope will happen in court, what do you want the result of going to court to be? Do you want the Principal to lose his job? Monetary gain? Etc?

GMN

 

[Running Arrow Bill]

IMO you should have called "911" as soon as the alleged idiot started hitting your car. Stay put...let him keep hitting car...

Assuming story is true...guess the school employee shortage is real...hire anyone that is still moving... :shock:

 

[fit2btied]

IMO you should have called "911" as soon as the alleged idiot started hitting your car. Stay put...let him keep hitting car...

Assuming story is true...guess the school employee shortage is real...hire anyone that is still moving... :shock:

Education is like any other profession - there are lots of people in many professions that shouldn't be! When my brother had his bypass surgery he had some fantastic care. He also had one doctor and a couple nurses that shouldn't be allowed around any people, let alone sick people! I've seen a few WallyWorld greeters that are always sour and hateful. I've known some teachers that shouldn't be allowed around kids! As a teacher, I've heard lots of these kinds of wild stories. If it is even remotely or partially true, this guy should be hung out to dry! I just have a tendency to be skeptical. We don't have a lot of problems with the kids in our school. We have more problems with their parents! And most of them were problems when they were in school. It's a cycle that some people don't care to get out of, it's all they know! For every 100 of these stories I've heard, 95 have no merit whatsoever, 4 are exaggerated to unbelievable extremes, and 1 is legitimate. In those legitimate cases I've known, the culprit should be, and always has been, handed the maximum punishments and had their state certifications revoked! Having been on the end of some false accusations and being from the Show Me state, I guess I just need to hear the fat lady sing!

 

[Ryder]

Carrying a weapon on school property is a felony even if you have a PERMIT.
Thus even though you felt threatened you would be in direct violation of the law and not have a legal right to be carrying a gun and could and should be charged with homicide if you killed the person,

So it is better to let someone kill you than be in violation of the law and you should be charged with homicide if you don't let them kill you. :shock:

I'm going to have to think on that. :roll:

I don't know Ryder - that Louisiana law thing is a different world. Whatever, however it works in 49 states, I think you guys do it different anyway.

Jury duty-been there, done that. Don't get me started.

 

[I luv herfrds]

Hope you get what you are after. Satisfaction.

pappy1 in my state if you feel like you are threatened with bodily harm you are within your rights to defend yourself, but you must be ready to prove it. Most of the people who posted that they would have pulled their gun and have a CWP would have just had to flash the gun and it would have stopped the attack. That is the point they were making.

 

[fit2btied]

Hope you get what you are after. Satisfaction.

pappy1 in my state if you feel like you are threatened with bodily harm you are within your rights to defend yourself, but you must be ready to prove it. Most of the people who posted that they would have pulled their gun and have a CWP would have just had to flash the gun and it would have stopped the attack. That is the point they were making.

Having a gun on school property in Missouri is illegal, even with a CWP. Unless you are a law enforcement officer, flashing one will get you an overnight stay at the Steel Bar Bed and Breakfast, transportation included!!!

 

[pappy1]

Hope you get what you are after. Satisfaction.

pappy1 in my state if you feel like you are threatened with bodily harm you are within your rights to defend yourself, but you must be ready to prove it. Most of the people who posted that they would have pulled their gun and have a CWP would have just had to flash the gun and it would have stopped the attack. That is the point they were making.

Having a gun on school property in Missouri is illegal, even with a CWP. Unless you are a law enforcement officer, flashing one will get you an overnight stay at the Steel Bar Bed and Breakfast, transportation included!!!

My point exactly, ! It makes no difference of you feel threatened or not you are in violation by even having it on school property.

 

[rattler]

Hope you get what you are after. Satisfaction.

pappy1 in my state if you feel like you are threatened with bodily harm you are within your rights to defend yourself, but you must be ready to prove it. Most of the people who posted that they would have pulled their gun and have a CWP would have just had to flash the gun and it would have stopped the attack. That is the point they were making.

Having a gun on school property in Missouri is illegal, even with a CWP. Unless you are a law enforcement officer, flashing one will get you an overnight stay at the Steel Bar Bed and Breakfast, transportation included!!!

Same here you take a gun on school property they will put your butt under the jail no questions asked.

rattler

 

[I luv herfrds]

Rather sad day when you cannot protect yourself no matter where you are. Remember that is the first thing Hitler did, removed the right to have a gun. History repeats it's self.

Little story for you guys told to me by a friend years ago. He was traveling with his family and went to pass a slower moving car. other car sped up so he couldn't pass, so he slowed down to drop behind him, other guy slowed down and started playing a cat and mouse game with him on the highway. Another car was heading towards him. He told his wife to lean back. He picked up his .357 and pointed it at the other driver, who then proceed to slam on his brakes. He safely got back in the correct lane and the other drive stayed far away from him. His two little kids were in the back seat.

 

[ALX.]

Rather sad day when you cannot protect yourself no matter where you are. Remember that is the first thing Hitler did, removed the right to have a gun. History repeats it's self.

Little story for you guys told to me by a friend years ago. He was traveling with his family and went to pass a slower moving car. other car sped up so he couldn't pass, so he slowed down to drop behind him, other guy slowed down and started playing a cat and mouse game with him on the highway. Another car was heading towards him. He told his wife to lean back. He picked up his .357 and pointed it at the other driver, who then proceed to slam on his brakes. He safely got back in the correct lane and the other drive stayed far away from him. His two little kids were in the back seat.

2 Questions -

1.Where did ole Adolph do the disarming thing?

2.And what would your hero have done if the other guy had a Mac 10 and was just as big a loser?

 

[show steer up]

I'm just wondering what you hope will happen in court, what do you want the result of going to court to be? Do you want the Principal to lose his job? Monetary gain? Etc?

GMN

Hi sorry it's been so long since I've logged in.
I have been tied up with my son's medical problems.
He fractured his neck in October and it has been a long healing process that has taken more time and emotional support than I could ever imagine.
He is doing great and is done with his every day physical therapy appointments and is now off all pain medication and back to his normal self.
He broke his neck diving into the public pool, head first off the high dive. From the story he told the Dr's, he and a bunch of other young boys thought this was a cool thing to do.
I was not at the pool to witness this act but my ex was and he said it all happened so fast. Before he or any of the life guards could stop the boys, seven had taken the plunge, mine being number seven. I'm just thankful that no child was killed and that the pool now has a very strict policy about diving off their diving boards.
The pool has posted signs that now say no diving head first and all kids that wish to use the high dive have to talk with the life guards before their first dive. Hopefully this will help our local young teens, think before they dare each other. You would think common sense would have kicked in before these boys decided to do this, but I guess at the ripe age of 13 common sense was the last thing on their little minds.
Anyways……….. All the boys now realize what do fuses they are and vow not to ever do it again. I just hope my son lives through the next dumb stunt he pulls.
You would think he would be more cautious about his life, I just don't get it.

On the other hand getting back to the original thread:

I have since found out that the principal is no stranger to pushing his weight around.
The superintendent has told him on several occasions to watch his temper. All infractions have been dealt with internally through the school system. I am the first to take it to this level. My hope is that this will force the school to take his position away from him and if they don't it will make it easier for the next person to do so.
From what my attorney has told us, the most we can expect the court to deliver as a punishment is a hundred dollars in fines and make him pay for the court cost of around thirty dollars.
Since this is his first offence of this nature he should not see any jail time. The question I asked was will this show up on his criminal record?
The attorney said yes.
Apparently this is all the other side was worried about, that this would go on his record. Sooooooooo. If we win in this court our attorney said the other side already stated that they will appeal and take it to a higher court. The big question was how far are the kids and I willing to go with this case.
The kids and I decided to take it all the way and do whatever it takes.
Our attorney is the city attorney and is willing to take this case all the way for us.
Sooooooooo wish us luck because Dec. 12 is just around the bend.

 

[sanchez]

I'm just wondering what you hope will happen in court, what do you want the result of going to court to be? Do you want the Principal to lose his job? Monetary gain? Etc?

GMN

Hi sorry it's been so long since I've logged in.
I have been tied up with my son's medical problems.
He fractured his neck in October and it has been a long healing process that has taken more time and emotional support than I could ever imagine.
He is doing great and is done with his every day physical therapy appointments and is now off all pain medication and back to his normal self.
He broke his neck diving into the public pool, head first off the high dive. From the story he told the Dr's, he and a bunch of other young boys thought this was a cool thing to do.
I was not at the pool to witness this act but my ex was and he said it all happened so fast. Before he or any of the life guards could stop the boys, seven had taken the plunge, mine being number seven. I'm just thankful that no child was killed and that the pool now has a very strict policy about diving off their diving boards.
The pool has posted signs that now say no diving head first and all kids that wish to use the high dive have to talk with the life guards before their first dive. Hopefully this will help our local young teens, think before they dare each other. You would think common sense would have kicked in before these boys decided to do this, but I guess at the ripe age of 13 common sense was the last thing on their little minds.
Anyways……….. All the boys now realize what do fuses they are and vow not to ever do it again. I just hope my son lives through the next dumb stunt he pulls.
You would think he would be more cautious about his life, I just don't get it.

On the other hand getting back to the original thread:

I have since found out that the principle is no stranger to pushing his weight around.
The superintendent has told him on several occasions to watch his temper. All infractions have been dealt with internally through the school system. I am the first to take it to this level. My hope is that this will force the school to take his position away from him and if they don't it will make it easier for the next person to do so.
From what my attorney has told us, the most we can expect the court to deliver as a punishment is a hundred dollars in fines and make him pay for the court cost of around thirty dollars.
Since this is his first offence of this nature he should not see any jail time. The question I asked was will this show up on his criminal record?
The attorney said yes.
Apparently this is all the other side was worried about, that this would go on his record. Sooooooooo. If we win in this court our attorney said the other side already stated that they will appeal and take it to a higher court. The big question was how far are the kids and I willing to go with this case.
The kids and I decided to take it all the way and do whatever it takes.
Our attorney is the city attorney and is willing to take this case all the way for us.
Sooooooooo wish us luck because Dec. 12 is just around the bend.

Do him a big favor, get the local media involved. After that I'm sure it will cause enough uproar to create change..

 

[Lammie]

Is the school defending him? I should think they could cut their losses and fire him. They certainly don't need that liability around. I am sure he has a lawyer through the educator's union. But I should think that the school would not want to keep him around. I would holler loud and long. Loud and long. Don't just go away. There are news stations around here that would love to get their hands on that.