Gunshop employee charged

[scumdog]

Whats the bet its a setup

I was talking to another gundealer the other day and he was telling me that a number of years ago the Auckland Police took the father, Ray, to court over some rifles he imported. He fought them and won the case.

We all know that the police have long memories and what is the bet that someone higher up is trying to make a name for themselves by getting back at the father through the son.

From what I heard the Police took this current case to Wellington and it was dropped.

I bet it is the Auckland Police's own prosecution department that is trying this case not the jJustice Dept in Wellington.

Another case of dictatorial rule by those who are supposed to serve the public.

The paranoia will eat you up.

[Pixie]

The cops know they can't get a conviction, but they just charge anyone who defends themselves out of sheer spitefullness.

Only thing you can do if you find yourself in this position, the victim of some thug, is follow the Kahui principle. Say nothing whatsoever to the police and IMMEDIATELY get a lawyer. because no matter how innocent you are, NZ Police policy is always to clobber the victim.

It's worse than pure vindictiveness.It's a defactor penalty-the cost of defence.
The Kahui principle only works if you have the correct depth of tan

[Finn]

The Kahui principle only works if you have the correct depth of tan

Either that or you need to be a maori.

[Swoop]

...a number of years ago the Auckland Police took the father, Ray, to court over some rifles he imported. He fought them and won the case.

Totally correct statement.
Ray also has some damn good lawyers on call.

[spudchucka]

Yep.... poor bugger should get acquitted based on the facts todate.... keeping in mind none of us were there and we don't know the whole facts.

Should be self defence - the same defence used by police when they have to slot someone with a 9mm. Fearing death or GBH of self or another person.

The issue may be the level of force used and how the threat is portrayed in court by the lawyer representing scumbag he shot (i.e. the crown in this case... how ironic).

He's charged with unlawful possession, he isn't charged with an offence actually related to the sooting itself, just the possession of the weapon.

[spudchucka]

So a nutcase coming at you with a machete doesn't give you the right to defend your self. Fucking bullshit.

Of course it does. He hasn't been charged with assault, attempted murder or any other such offence, which indicates that the force used was reasonable in the circumstances. Section 48 of the Crimes Act applies and therefore he isn't criminally liable for the harm caused to the machette guy.

His problem lies in explaining why he had a semi auto pistol and ammunition for it in his immediate proximity when the law requires that guns and ammo are stored separately and that stored firearms are not able to be fired.

[spudchucka]

Do we know for a fact that it was pre-loaded and waiting use under the counter, or was it loaded as part of a customer demo when the numpty with the machete came into the store?

Why would it be loaded as part of a customer demo? Was he just going to pop off acouple of rounds into the back wall to show his customer how the weapon functions?

If he was doing something like that shouldn't it be done at a range instead of the public counter of a shop?

[spudchucka]

If the Police can decide to not charge Heather Simpson for electoral offences because it's "in the public interest to NOT do so", then it's in the public interest to not charge Carvell and send a message to thieving scumbags that burglary is a high-risk occupation.
Typical gutless arse-covering behaviour.

Not charging him would send a message that its acceptable to leave loaded semi auto pistols laying around your shop, which in my mind would not be in the public interest at all.

People are losing sight of the fact that the charge he faces is not related to the actual shooting of the scum bag. It is simply a matter of a gun owner meeting his obligations under the Arms Act.

[McJim]

Not charging him would send a message that its acceptable to leave loaded semi auto pistols laying around your shop, which in my mind would not be in the public interest at all.
.

I think it was a revolver...I also think the Crown have decided to prosecute rather than it being a police decision.

But what would I know..I'm just a dirty immigrant and the village idiot to boot.

[crazybigal]

i think its more a case of the media twisting the story.
All we heard about was the shooting not the gun and how it was kept.

Not charging him would send a message that its acceptable to leave loaded semi auto pistols laying around your shop, which in my mind would not be in the public interest at all.

People are losing sight of the fact that the charge he faces is not related to the actual shooting of the scum bag. It is simply a matter of a gun owner meeting his obligations under the Arms Act.

[adiddy]

Whats the bet its a setup

dont think it is a dai, guy i met not long ago shared a cell with the meatloaf who went strolling in with the machete! said he was a real hoon

[adiddy]

Why would it be loaded as part of a customer demo? Was he just going to pop off acouple of rounds into the back wall to show his customer how the weapon functions?

If he was doing something like that shouldn't it be done at a range instead of the public counter of a shop?

now from what I heard, was that he had been just giving people a demo of the hand gun ... the dude with the machete walked in after the other "cusstomer " had just left

[Patrick]

If it was revenge, spitefulness, setups, whatever, they would have done him for attempted murder too, but for making those claims.... Pfffttttt.... I expected better but then remembered where I was...

Keep it simple... it is not a case of self defence or about the shooting.

The problem here was that he had access to loaded gun when he shouldn't have, end of story.

It has nothing to do with the fact he shot anyone with a machete... why did he have access to a loaded gun? Who else may have had access to it? The machete man too perhaps??

[Patrick]

now from what I heard, was that he had been just giving people a demo of the hand gun ... the dude with the machete walked in after the other "cusstomer " had just left

Giving a demo with a loaded gun???? Just asking for trouble...like the gun salesman giving a demo for the Terminator in the movie....

[Ixion]

If it was revenge, spitefulness, setups, whatever, they would have done him for attempted murder too, but for making those claims.... Pfffttttt.... I expected better but then remembered where I was...

,,

Attempted murder would have been a jury trial. I understand that he has no right to trial by jury for the charge laid. So it is about the most serious thing they could throw at him without the risk of a jury coming back with a condemnation of the police.