Msg ID:
2693188 |
St. Louis gun-waving couple plead guilty to misdemeanor charges +2/-1
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 10:07:16 AM
|
1 of 4
Patricia McCloskey, left, and her husband Mark McCloskey walk out of the Carnahan Courthouse in downtown St. Louis on Thursday, June 17, 2021, with their lawyer Joel Schwartz (right). The St. Louis couple who pointed guns at racial justice protesters outside the couple's Central West End mansion pleaded guilty to misdemeanors. Photo by Joel Currier, jcurrier@post-dispatch.com
div>
In this Oct. 14, 2020, file photo, Mark and Patricia McCloskey leave following a court hearing, in St. Louis. The McCloskeys, accused of waving guns at racial injustice protesters in the summer of 2020, are due back in court Friday, April 30, 2021, when a judge will consider whether to send the case back to a grand jury to decide if they should have been indicted in the first place. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson, File)
ST. LOUIS — Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who waved guns at protesters last year who marched past the couple’s Central West End mansion, pleaded guilty Thursday to misdemeanors and agreed to give up their weapons.
v>
Mark McCloskey, 64, will pay a $750 fine after pleading guilty to fourth-degree assault, a Class C misdemeanor. Patricia McCloskey, 62, must pay a $2,000 fine after pleading guilty to second-degree harassment, a Class A misdemeanor. Mark McCloskey could have faced up to 15 days in jail; Patricia McCloskey could have spent up to a year behind bars. Neither will face jail time.
v>
“This particular resolution of these two cases represents my best judgment of an appropriate and fair disposition for the parties involved as well as the public good,” the special prosecutor in the case, former U.S. Attorney Richard G. Callahan, said in a statement.
The McCloskeys also agreed to forfeit the weapons they used when they confronted a throng of protesters marching past their Portland Place mansion on June 28, 2020. The McCloskeys emerged from their home and waved guns at the demonstrators. They claimed the protesters were trespassing by entering their gated, private street.
After accepting the McCloskeys’ pleas in court Thursday, Circuit Judge David Mason denied the couple’s request that Mark McCloskey’s rifle be donated for use in charity fundraisers. The McCloskeys’ lawyer Joel Schwartz said the couple would have liked to donate the rifle to the Missouri Historical Society or “for auction to the (St. Louis) Children’s Hospital.”
Mark McCloskey, outside the Carnahan Courthouse, said “this is a good day for the McCloskeys,” expressing no remorse for his actions.
“The prosecutor dropped every charge except for alleging that I purposely placed other people in imminent risk of physical injury, right, and I sure as heck did,” he said. “That’s what the guns were there for and I’d do it again any time the mob approaches me. … In other words, I stood out on the porch with my rifle and made them back up. And that’s what I’d do again. If that’s a crime in Missouri, by God I did it, and I’d do it again.”
Patricia McCloskey declined to comment.
Mark McCloskey announced in May that he’s running for U.S. Senate.
The couple were indicted last year on charges of unlawful use of a weapon and evidence tampering, both felonies. Mark McCloskey wielded an AR-15 rifle at racial justice protesters, and Patricia McCloskey pointed a semiautomatic handgun at them as they marched past their home. The crowds entered through an iron pedestrian gate to access Portland Place on their way to former Mayor Lyda Krewson’s home in the Central West End.
The protesters, Callahan said, “were a racially mixed and peaceful group, including women and children, who simply made a wrong turn on their way to protest in front of the mayor’s house. There was no evidence that any of them had a weapon and no one I interviewed realized they had ventured into a private enclave.”
The McCloskeys told police the protesters broke the gate to get in.
Callahan was appointed to the case in February after a judge disqualified Circuit Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner and her office because of Gardner’s fundraising emails mentioning the McCloskey case.
Schwartz said Thursday that he still believes Gardner charged his clients “for political purposes.” He said he doesn’t think the case would have had the same resolution without the appointment of a special prosecutor.
“Mr. Callahan looked at this in a reasonable light, and we came up with a reasonable disposition,” Schwartz said.
A spokeswoman for Gardner did not return a phone call Thursday.
Last month, Callahan amended charges against Patricia McCloskey, adding the misdemeanor harassment charge as an alternative to unlawful use of a weapon. Callahan also dismissed the evidence tampering charge against her.
Thursday’s reduced charge against Mark McCloskey replaced the felony gun and tampering charges in exchange for his guilty plea to misdemeanor assault.
Their guilty pleas to misdemeanors will not affect the couple’s ability to own guns or run for office, Schwartz said.
The couple could face professional sanctions for their admission to misdemeanor crimes. Missouri Supreme Court rules give the court the authority to suspend or revoke the couple’s law licenses.
Gov. Mike Parson said last year that he’d “certainly” pardon the McCloskeys if they are convicted stemming from the June confrontation. Parson’s spokeswoman Kelli Jones said Thursday that “we are evaluating the situation but have yet to receive any official documents.”
|
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693198 |
The Conservative Says A Person Should Be… +1/-2
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 11:35:35 AM
Reply to: 2693188
|
Able to defend their home from a mob.
The lib says a person should let the mob overrun the home and do whatever they want to the occupants and property.
Which one are you again? The answer to this question could very well turn out to be a...
Good job Goodlibs! |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693202 |
The Conservative Says A Person Should Be… +1/-1
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 12:24:28 PM
Reply to: 2693198
|
"Able to defend their home from a mob.
"The lib says a person should let the mob overrun the home and do whatever they want to the occupants and property.
"Which one are you again?"
I was taught: Do not pull your gun unless you're going to shoot. If you're going to shoot, you must shoot to kill. I don't think that couple understood what they were doing in full.
Handling a weapon invites inadvertent discharge, especially if one is agitated- which they obviously were.
That also increases the risk of armed response. Standing in the open with a weapon when some arsehole loses his mind and opens fire (supposedly this was a mob, right?), things go south pretty quick and people die, as the phrase from The Searchers eloquently puts it:
"Jake: And now you understand. Anything goes wrong, anything at all... your fault, my fault, nobody's fault... it won't matter - I'm gonna blow your head off. No matter what else happens, no matter who gets killed I'm gonna blow your head off." |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693204 |
The Conservative Says A Person Should Be… +1/-2
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 12:30:31 PM
Reply to: 2693202
|
What are you talking about? How do you "pull" an AR-15? If the mob doesn't want to be threatened with firearms, don't be a mob that breaks into gated neighborhoods and trespass, and threaten home owners verbally or otherwise.
A homeowner has every right to have a level of force prepared to meet the level of force of the mob.
Again, a conservative would know this instinctively.
A lib would naturally resist the idea that a homeowner could use arms to defend their home.
So much for another...
Good job Goodlibs! |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693207 |
How far down this semantic drain are you going to go? +1/-1
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 12:45:38 PM
Reply to: 2693204
|
You're a 'law and order' conservative, correct? The couple were not only stupid in my opinion, they were charged and pleading guilty to various charges. I'll repeat that last- they pled guilty, admitted that their actions were against the law.
The end. |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693212 |
So You Don’t Know How To Pull An AR-15… +1/-1
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 12:55:31 PM
Reply to: 2693207
|
In this case, the defendants could have asked for a trial, and gotten off Scott free. In this country, no one is going to even impose a misdemeanor on a homeowner for defending their home.
Nor should they, right, lib? The prosecutors in this case were tyrant libs, which is redundant.
Good job Goodlibs! |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693214 |
So You Don’t Know How To Pull An AR-15… +1/-1
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 1:01:44 PM
Reply to: 2693212
|
"In this case, the defendants could have asked for a trial, and gotten off Scott free."
And perhaps they believed they could have gone to trial where the DA could charge them with everything but the kitchen sick. If frogs could fly they wouldn't bump their butts hopping- and that proves what?
Woulda, coulda, shoulda- you can present whatever fever dreams you wish- they faced real penalties and accepted responsibility.
In this country, no one is going to even impose a misdemeanor on a homeowner for defending their home.
I have to admit your ignorance is impressive if intentional- people are investigated and sometimes charged, convicted for use of a weapon in defense of their home and property. That's why "Castle Doctrine" is important, it's the start of defense in the law. |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693218 |
So You Don’t Know How To Pull An AR-15… +1/-1
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 1:05:45 PM
Reply to: 2693214
|
Ignorance of what exactly? That it is a conservative right to protect your home against a mob? I know you libz disagree with that principle, except when it comes to your home.
Good job Goodlibs! |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693221 |
So You Don’t Know How To Pull An AR-15… +1/-1
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 1:10:27 PM
Reply to: 2693218
|
"Ignorance of what exactly? That it is a conservative right to protect your home against a mob?"
Apparently you're ignorant of the law and the legal jeopardy citizens face with the threat of, or use of a weapon/lethal force in defense of property.
Again, I point out the importance of 'the Castle Doctrine' as a part of the defense should one be charged. |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693224 |
So You Don’t Know How To Pull An AR-15… +1/-2
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 1:13:13 PM
Reply to: 2693221
|
The law on the subject varies from state to state. But the conservative principle that eludes you remains.
Homeowners have every right to defend their homes from marauding (and any other) mobs.
Good job Goodlibs! |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693255 |
Again, I have to remind you that the offenders admitted their guilt. (NT) +1/-0
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 4:20:16 PM
Reply to: 2693224
|
|
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693268 |
Driveby +1/-1
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 5:14:06 PM
Reply to: 2693255
|
Good job Goodlibs! |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693320 |
"Driveby" Oh my! (NT) +1/-0
|
Author:TheCrow
6/19/2021 9:50:01 AM
Reply to: 2693268
|
|
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693217 |
"Pull" it out of the case, off the rack, from the shoulder/sling to fire +1/-1
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 1:03:38 PM
Reply to: 2693212
|
"Pull" it out of the case, off the rack, from the shoulder/sling to fire position. Semantics. |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693220 |
You Seem To Be Indicating That In Your lib… +1/-2
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 1:10:18 PM
Reply to: 2693217
|
Warped mind, if the AR-15 had a sling, it would be okay for the homeowner to have it on his person, in a sling position.
Is that the feeble lib point you are trying to make? I would never be arguing this case with a true conservative. Only one who claimed to be one, but never supported any conservative issue.
Good job Goodlibs! |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693257 |
I know what- just make something up that you can pretend I said and we'll +1/-1
|
Author:TheCrow
6/18/2021 4:21:48 PM
Reply to: 2693220
|
I know what- just make something up that you can pretend I said and we'll argue about it. You might even get some smooches from Old Guy. |
|
Return-To-Index
|
Msg ID:
2693269 |
I know what- just make something up that you can pretend I said and we'll +1/-2
|
Author:obumazombie
6/18/2021 5:15:33 PM
Reply to: 2693257
|
Was it not you who said shoulder/sling position? Or was that someone else doing a...
Good job Goodlibs? |
|
Return-To-Index
|
|