Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Winnipesaukee Forums > General Discussion
Home Forums Gallery Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-25-2010, 08:04 AM   #101
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,814
Thanks: 634
Thanked 1,231 Times in 849 Posts
Default

I thought Siski was supposed to be a great attorney. Didn't I read that was who he used?
tis is offline  
Old 11-25-2010, 10:03 AM   #102
wuwu
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 35
Thanks: 27
Thanked 26 Times in 10 Posts
Default Free ward bird!

http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?...f-12890a8854f0
This says so much!
wuwu is offline  
Old 11-25-2010, 10:16 AM   #103
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
I thought Siski was supposed to be a great attorney. Didn't I read that was who he used?
It is Sisti (not Siski) and if he couldn't get Bird off from this then no one could. I have been a juror on two trials with Sisti as the defense lawyer and he is real good. His personality isn't very good and that pony tail that he has makes him look weird but he is "real good".

Last edited by Yosemite Sam; 11-25-2010 at 10:26 AM. Reason: added the word "juror'
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-25-2010, 07:38 PM   #104
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

http://www.nhinsider.com/richard-ols...ward-bird.html
MarkinNH is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MarkinNH For This Useful Post:
RailroadJoe (11-26-2010)
Old 11-28-2010, 07:38 PM   #105
SAMIAM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 2,753
Thanks: 284
Thanked 1,541 Times in 525 Posts
Default

Makes me wonder why the Moultonborough PD and county attorney even bothered to pursue this case......a respected local and cub scout leader accused by a person with a 12 year record of assault and operating a filthy and illegal dog breeding operation.I've always appreciated and backed our local PD........but now I'm wondering if they are just looking for a body count........somebody accuses you and off to jail.Pretty chilling.
SAMIAM is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SAMIAM For This Useful Post:
nicole (11-29-2010), RailroadJoe (11-29-2010), tummyman (11-28-2010)
Sponsored Links
Old 11-28-2010, 09:49 PM   #106
jeffk
Senior Member
 
jeffk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Center Harbor
Posts: 1,045
Thanks: 188
Thanked 358 Times in 202 Posts
Default Good information and discussion

First, I have been looking for more information about this and this site came through with pointers to the details in various articles. So big kudos to Winnipesaukee.com.

I cannot understand how Ward was convicted. If all he did was walk out with a gun in it's holster and pull it out to check the safety that is not threatening. This dingbat of course says she was threatened but she is far from a reliable witness. Given the he said/she said circumstances and the lack of additional witnesses doesn't the defendant get the benefit of the doubt? How could a jury in good conscience vote for conviction? Were they aware that a conviction required a minimum sentence?

I understand how the judge's hands were tried by minimum sentencing rules. How did it get to that point?
jeffk is offline  
Old 11-28-2010, 11:56 PM   #107
4 for Boating
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 192
Thanks: 1
Thanked 28 Times in 19 Posts
Default Sad State of Affairs

Independent observation with no dog in the fight,

1. Unnecessary to take a gun out when you “know” and are informed that someone is potentially lost in the area looking at a lot for sale

2. Dumb to call the police to report someone potentially overreacting when she is clearly in the wrong by getting lost and not observing the no trespassing signs in the first place

3. Completely Ludicrous penalty for what breaks down to some type of domestic dispute/argument

Possibly some past bad-blood regarding the personalities or the land in general BUT Two people overreacting and one judicial system out of control.

In the end, it pains me to think someone is in jail over the whole thing. Sad and just not right I think.
4 for Boating is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 06:51 AM   #108
jeffatsquam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: moultonborough/sandwich
Posts: 186
Thanks: 173
Thanked 77 Times in 50 Posts
Default

Good - man

bad - law

ugly - sentence
jeffatsquam is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:06 AM   #109
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Here is another Independent observation with no dog in the fight:

Below is what THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE stated as to why they upheld the conviction of Ward Bird:

“Christine Harris arranged to meet a real estate agent on March 27, 2006, at his office to view a property for sale in Moultonborough owned by Patricia Viano that Harris was interested in purchasing.

That day, she called the real estate agent to inform him she was running late and could not make the appointment. Because he could not meet her later that day, she decided to look at the property herself.

During her drive to the property, she became lost and stopped at the home of the defendant’s niece, where she asked for directions. The niece told her that the most direct route to the property was Emerson Path to Yukon Trail, and then a road to the left with a small bridge over a stream. The niece told her that if she passed a white “job trailer,” she was on the wrong property.

After Harris left the home of the defendant’s niece, the niece telephoned the defendant to warn him that Harris was going to look at the Viano property and that she might show up on his property. She also told the defendant that Harris was driving a Ford Ranger.

Harris followed the niece’s directions and drove past signs that stated “Private road, keep out” on Emerson Path and “no trespassing” on Yukon Trail. She missed the left hand turn off of Yukon Trail, drove past the white trailer, and ended up in front of the defendant’s house. She parked her car and got out. The defendant emerged from his home “screaming, get the F off my property.” He came down from his porch, continuing to yell profanities while waving a gun at her.

At trial, she testified that he pointed the gun “[t]owards” her. Harris asked the defendant whether he was the boyfriend of the woman selling the property. He repeated his command for her to leave his property.

Harris eventually climbed back into her car, mouthing “[w]hat an ass.” The defendant then walked off the porch toward her waving his gun as she backed out of the driveway.



My thoughts:

Mark Sisti (Bird’s Lawyer), or Mark Bird did not dispute the fact that Bird waved and pointed a gun at Harris (at least the Supreme Court ruling did not say that they did).

Bird’s niece telephoned the defendant to warn him that Harris was going to look at the Viano property and that she might show up on his property.

The above being said, how could the NH Supreme Court not uphold the conviction of Mark Bird of criminal threatening per RSA 631:4 (2007).
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:17 AM   #110
Belmont Resident
Senior Member
 
Belmont Resident's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Belmont NH but prefer Jackman Maine
Posts: 1,857
Thanks: 491
Thanked 409 Times in 251 Posts
Default I agree with 4 for boating.

I was told on Wednesday of this story.
Being a gun owner living out in the woods, why did the gun even come out if it was originally in a holster?
Unless the other person had a weapon he was 100% wrong when he removed the gun from a holster.
Guns are not a toy. All he had to do to make a point was have the gun holstered and visible.
If this same person had been someone with a shady background with past problems with the law many would look at it differently.
The bottom line is the law weather it is right or wrong applies to all of us not just the bad element of society.
Maybe everyone who owns a gun should be required to take a class on hand gun safety both inside and outside the home. The laws vary in both instances.
My wife is taking the classes now.
Belmont Resident is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:19 AM   #111
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,814
Thanks: 634
Thanked 1,231 Times in 849 Posts
Default

Remember though, her past as well as his past make no difference in this case. You can't bring old cases into a new case. So the issues she had with dogs could not be brought up here. The jury should not have know she had a past.
tis is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:42 AM   #112
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam View Post
My thoughts:

Mark Sisti (Bird’s Lawyer), or Mark Bird did not dispute the fact that Bird waved and pointed a gun at Harris (at least the Supreme Court ruling did not say that they did).

Bird’s niece telephoned the defendant to warn him that Harris was going to look at the Viano property and that she might show up on his property.

The above being said, how could the NH Supreme Court not uphold the conviction of Mark Bird of criminal threatening per RSA 631:4 (2007).
Who the Hell is Mark Bird ?
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:44 AM   #113
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkinNH View Post
Who the Hell is Mark Bird ?

Whoops, I should have said Ward Bird.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 08:03 AM   #114
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belmont Resident View Post
I was told on Wednesday of this story.
Being a gun owner living out in the woods, why did the gun even come out if it was originally in a holster?
Unless the other person had a weapon he was 100% wrong when he removed the gun from a holster.
Guns are not a toy. All he had to do to make a point was have the gun holstered and visible.
If this same person had been someone with a shady background with past problems with the law many would look at it differently.
The bottom line is the law weather it is right or wrong applies to all of us not just the bad element of society.
Maybe everyone who owns a gun should be required to take a class on hand gun safety both inside and outside the home. The laws vary in both instances.
My wife is taking the classes now.
Belmont Resident,
I like your logic!


Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
Remember though, her past as well as his past make no difference in this case. You can't bring old cases into a new case. So the issues she had with dogs could not be brought up here. The jury should not have know she had a past.

You are correct tis.

IMHO the jury probably knew a little bit about Harris and probably thought it really didn’t matter. The law (as written today) is the law so they had to convict Bird.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 09:19 AM   #115
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default Black and White?

This isn't as Black and White as some may think.

I'm having a hard time with this one. I keep thinking to myself Don't we all have a right to protect ourselves and our property? If this was a woman waiving a gun at a big man with a criminal background would there even have been an investigation? Ward is a big man and this was a woman on his property so now he has no right to protect himself from a woman that won't leave and is arguing with him?

So where is the line? If a man comes on my property and he is larger than me and could potentially harm or even kill me with his bare hands can I pull a gun? What if the man is the same size? What if my wife is home with the kids and a man is peering in my windows can my wife pull a gun if the man won't leave and she fears for her life? Would she go to jail for protecting herself and my children?

Ward was injured and by some accounts feeble at the time, I am going on hearsay but if it is the truth does this not even the playing field? Did he feel threatened as he was physically limited at the time? Again is it a stretch to imagine this woman was a raving lunatic? (Check prior link where the "woman" pushed a tow truck driver)

Was he right or wrong? I don't know but the punishment sure feels wrong.

Clarification: I am not nor have ever been a gun owner.
hazelnut is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 10:24 AM   #116
ITD
Senior Member
 
ITD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Massachusetts and Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,600
Thanks: 413
Thanked 591 Times in 311 Posts
Default

Apparently the gun did leave the holster, what is contested is whether the gun was "waved" in the face of the "victim", which supposedly rises to the level of felony threatening. Again, reading this story, I'll have to say that Ward shouldn't have spoken to the police without counsel,other than to say this lady was trespassing and he wanted her removed. This even in light of the fact that I'm sure he was protecting his property.

This lady was antagonistic, even by her own testimony, where she said she thought she was dealing with the brother of the landowner who was selling and didn't want the property to be sold. She stood and argued, plus apparently she was walking around looking in windows before Ward came out.

I don't know about the rest of you, but when I end up on a wrong property and the owner comes out screaming to leave, I apologize and leave, no gun necessary. (Yes this has happened to me before and it was my fault for screwing up directions). This lady sounds like a whack job, and this case should not have been prosecuted, never mind having this guy end up with a 3 year sentence.
ITD is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 11:06 AM   #117
Argie's Wife
Senior Member
 
Argie's Wife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Alton
Posts: 1,908
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 533
Thanked 578 Times in 260 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam View Post
Here is another Independent observation with no dog in the fight:

Harris eventually climbed back into her car, mouthing “[w]hat an ass.” The defendant then walked off the porch toward her waving his gun as she backed out of the driveway.”[/I]

So, Bird is waving a gun and yelling and Harris sees fit to run her mouth at him? Can you say, "poor judgement"?

I thought Bird's intent was well placed; he wanted her to go away. He didn't want to shoot - or he would have cocked the hammer or taken aim. He sent a clear message. His intent wasn't a criminal one but he's being treated like a criminal.
Argie's Wife is offline  
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Argie's Wife For This Useful Post:
jeffatsquam (11-29-2010), MarkinNH (11-29-2010), Meredith lady (12-05-2010), nicole (11-29-2010), SAMIAM (11-29-2010)
Old 11-29-2010, 12:36 PM   #118
DoTheMath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 144
Thanks: 45
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
Default

As we all know, there are three sides to every story - yours, mine and the truth. Only two people really and truly know what happened that day between Ward and Christine, clearly there is a difference in opinion amongst them.

Aside from that, regardless of what went down between them - she was told "if you get to this point, you have gone too far and you should turn around". (fair warning). Why did she keep going all the way up to his house? Why was she out of her car and snooping around looking in the windows? She was on HIS private property, looking in HIS windows - I think they call people like that "peeping tom's" - don't they? Isn't that in-and-of-itself a crime? From what I can tell there are a number of signs posted that say no trespassing, and not one that says "house for sale". What was the actual exchange between the two of them that day? If she was told she was in the wrong place and asked to leave, and did not, what reason did she give as to why she wouldn't? If your car has broken down, or if you are lost and come and ring my bell FIRST asking for help, you've got my assistance. As a husband and father, if all of a sudden I see you peering in my windows, (and I don't recognize you), I'm prob. not coming out with guns-a-blazing, but you can bet I'm coming out to see what's up (and more than likely prepared for whatever might face me). If you are on my property and it gets to the point that I ask you to leave, and you don't... we have a problem. If I continue to ask you to leave, and you don't - we have an escalating problem.

You are taught that you don't USE a gun (for self-defense) unless you feel / are in imminent danger, and it's not like the movies where you pull it to scare someone, you pull it to use it. All that said, I think that where Ward was on HIS property, and she was trespassing, she was in the wrong - period. What actually happened with the gun, only two people really know - and in my eyes, pulled, shown or "brandished", if he asked her to leave and she didn't...

So, what was said at THAT point? Did she come off as angry, hostile, did she make any threats, what did SHE say or do to make him feel "I think I'm going to call the police now"? It's all on him right now, or so it seems, what about her!? There seems to be a lot of he said / she said to this, but at the end of the day - I find it atrocious that he is where he is in all of this, and she is just out and about with what seems to be no accountability!?

Shame on the local PD for handling it like they did and shame on the judge / court for escalating it to where it is! Live Free Or Die is the state motto and yet every time we turn around, there are issues like this that refute that stance. This incident has such far-reaching repercussions, I fear what's next as this set's a terrible precedent on so many levels.
DoTheMath is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to DoTheMath For This Useful Post:
MarkinNH (11-29-2010)
Old 11-29-2010, 12:45 PM   #119
Resident 2B
Senior Member
 
Resident 2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bradenton, FL and North Shore, MA
Posts: 1,340
Thanks: 961
Thanked 304 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoTheMath View Post
Shame on the local PD for handling it like they did and shame on the judge / court for escalating it to where it is! Live Free Or Die is the state motto and yet every time we turn around, there are issues like this that refute that stance. This incident has such far-reaching repercussions, I fear what's next as this set's a terrible precedent on so many levels.
The most shameful group here is the DA's office for bringing this into court. They knew what they were dealing with and still moved forward.

Resume building at the expense of a family man defending his family and property.

Shameful!!

R2B
Resident 2B is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Resident 2B For This Useful Post:
MarkinNH (11-29-2010)
Old 11-29-2010, 02:01 PM   #120
DoTheMath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 144
Thanks: 45
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident 2B View Post
The most shameful group here is the DA's office for bringing this into court. They knew what they were dealing with and still moved forward.

Resume building at the expense of a family man defending his family and property.

Shameful!!

R2B
Agreed!!! (although not listed, I was including the whole chain of command in the fray...)
DoTheMath is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 04:31 PM   #121
Belmont Resident
Senior Member
 
Belmont Resident's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Belmont NH but prefer Jackman Maine
Posts: 1,857
Thanks: 491
Thanked 409 Times in 251 Posts
Default Correct about council.

The in house gun protection class my wife took had an attorney there who specializes in fire arm laws.
He said when the police arrive do not under any circumstances give any details but instead refer them to your attorney. You are perfectly within your rights.
Any and all information you say no matter whom is at fault may be used against you.
I feel for the family but the law is the law and we all make mistakes and it appears he unknowingly made a mistake.
To have pulled the gun out it seems like someone might have a temper.
Guns and tempers do not go hand & hand. And this is why my wife will carry a gun and not me.
Belmont Resident is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 04:47 PM   #122
ishoot308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Gilford, NH / Welch Island
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 2,045
Thanked 4,357 Times in 1,686 Posts
Default

So let me get this straight.... If I hear someone rustling outside of my house at night and I grab my handgun and run out to investigate I'm guilty of criminal threatening because it's not in a holster?? NOT!!

Holster or un-holstered has nothing to do with criminal threatening. He would of had to point it at her and or threaten to shoot her. Simply having the gun in his hand and un-holstered is not a crime or criminal threatening.

What if he had a rifle and not a handgun and he came on to his porch to confront the trespasser is that criminal threatening??... no place or way to holster a rifle...

He was well within his legal right to have a firearm in his hand while on his property.
ishoot308 is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 04:48 PM   #123
Heaven
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 485
Thanks: 116
Thanked 89 Times in 63 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck View Post
This was a jury trial, right? Twelve people listened to this case being argued and unanimously decided this gentlleman was guilty of criminal threatening. The thing I can't figure out is where the heck did they find 12 peple who thought this was criminal threatening? We can all scream at the top of our lungs about the law, and the judge, and the attorneys, but if this was a jury trial then 12 other NH citizens made the decision to to return a guilty verdict. How on earth did not one of them say "hmm... I think something iis wrong here?"

Was this somehow not a jury trial?
I think one would have had to be on the jury, or at least in the courtroom, before making a judgement.
Heaven is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 05:08 PM   #124
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,908
Thanks: 517
Thanked 557 Times in 325 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishoot308 View Post
So let me get this straight.... If I hear someone rustling outside of my house at night and I grab my handgun and run out to investigate I'm guilty of criminal threatening because it's not in a holster?? NOT!!

Holster or un-holstered has nothing to do with criminal threatening. He would of had to point it at her and or threaten to shoot her. Simply having the gun in his hand and un-holstered is not a crime or criminal threatening.

What if he had a rifle and not a handgun and he came on to his porch to confront the trespasser is that criminal threatening??... no place or way to holster a rifle...

He was well within his legal right to have a firearm in his hand while on his property.
Exactly how the gun was visually presented seems to be debated, and certainly far from clearly discernable based on what we have to go by here.

Given that this went to court, and was heard by a jury, I'm thinking there is more to it than he "unholstered it to check the safety".

If you are a responsible gun owner and pay attention to past cases and so forth, one of the first things you tend to figure out is that the person on the business end of the gun is going to perceive the situation very differently than yourself. The weapon should not be unholstered unless you actually intend to use it, and even in this case there is much room for interpretation.

IMO, the "warning" call his niece made to him probably worked against his defense. It would be one thing if this woman just showed up on his property completely randomly and out of context. However, with him having been warned that she was coming, and was looking for real estate (and not intending to harm or threaten him) it makes his rationale for making his weapon visible to her in ANY manner much more delicate.

This is certainly an area of the law that needs further clarification. IMO, a NH property owner should be free to carry and present a firearm on their own property under reasonable circumstances. Although, even with a legal right to do so, I'm not in favor of brandishing a firearm as a way of making a threat. I think it both exposes you to legal issues, and from a practical defense standpoint gives a legitimate adversary too much opportunity to react and/or present their own weapon.

A more all around practical approach to dealing with trespassers on your property is to keep the firearm in a small-of-the-back holster, with your hand on the weapon if necessary. This stance would indicate to most logical people that you have some kind of weapon at the ready, without actually revealing said weapon. I'd also recommend that if you intend to carry a weapon on your own property, or in a concealed manner in public, that you practice at a gun range with the weapon in the stored position. Being able to fluidly draw, aim, un-safety, and fire the weapon should be a smooth, continuous second-nature maneuver.
__________________
[insert witty phrase here]
brk-lnt is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 06:30 PM   #125
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Don't mean to sound like a broken record here.....but you is probably much better off running out the door with a kitchen broom and just go shake the broom at the stranger than using a gun.....guns just escalate the situation...and besides, after all is said and you go back inside....you already are all worked up....so's you might as well go sweep the floor!

No way, can you sweep the floor with a Colt .45!

Message here: carry a broom and you get to clean up! But, carry a gun and you get three to six years in a very small, steel and masonry, slammer door, prison cell!

And what does the defense attorney get....maybe a second new Mercedes just for the weekends!
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:03 PM   #126
Irrigation Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Posts: 484
Thanks: 89
Thanked 138 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Been watching and reading this for a while and have a silly question. Was this woman charged with trespassing? I have not read or heard anything about it and it would seem to me she clearly was trespassing.

Oh, and my opinion is that the punishment does not fit the crime.
Irrigation Guy is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:31 PM   #127
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,908
Thanks: 517
Thanked 557 Times in 325 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Don't mean to sound like a broken record here.....but you is probably much better off running out the door with a kitchen broom and just go shake the broom at the stranger than using a gun.
Why do you keep making this asinine comment? Had the trespasser been an actual threat with intent to harm, a broom would have been to no benefit to anyone other than Harry Potter. Your "advice" is foolhardy, repetitive, tasteless and long past its expiration date.
__________________
[insert witty phrase here]
brk-lnt is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to brk-lnt For This Useful Post:
eillac@dow (11-29-2010), ishoot308 (11-29-2010), nvtngtxpyr (11-30-2010), RailroadJoe (11-30-2010)
Old 11-29-2010, 07:35 PM   #128
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Don't mean to sound like a broken record here.....but you is probably much better off running out the door with a kitchen broom and just go shake the broom at the stranger than using a gun.....guns just escalate the situation...and besides, after all is said and you go back inside....you already are all worked up....so's you might as well go sweep the floor!

No way, can you sweep the floor with a Colt .45!

Message here: carry a broom and you get to clean up! But, carry a gun and you get three to six years in a very small, steel and masonry, slammer door, prison cell!

And what does the defense attorney get....maybe a second new Mercedes just for the weekends!
Every time I read this comment all I can think about is one of those old fashioned tombstones with the following Phrase:

"Here lies fatlazyless he came to a gunfight with a broom"

All kidding aside less you assume that every trespasser comes on your land unarmed? A trespasser is sometimes knowingly breaking the law and occasionally may be armed. So if you run out on your porch waving a broom around you may actually escalate a situation with a criminal in which they pull a gun. Then what?

I'm not saying that was the case in this situation but you are painting some mighty broad brushstrokes with that broom of yours.
hazelnut is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:36 PM   #129
ishoot308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Gilford, NH / Welch Island
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 2,045
Thanked 4,357 Times in 1,686 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Don't mean to sound like a broken record here.....but you is probably much better off running out the door with a kitchen broom and just go shake the broom at the stranger than using a gun.....guns just escalate the situation...and besides, after all is said and you go back inside....you already are all worked up....so's you might as well go sweep the floor!

No way, can you sweep the floor with a Colt .45!

Message here: carry a broom and you get to clean up! But, carry a gun and you get three to six years in a very small, steel and masonry, slammer door, prison cell!

And what does the defense attorney get....maybe a second new Mercedes just for the weekends!
Yeah right, and I am sure the Mont Vernon mother who who was recently murdered and her young daughter who barely survived the attack wishes she had a broom to defend herself and daughter against the machete wielding punks who invaded their home!!

Get real man!!
ishoot308 is offline  
Old 11-29-2010, 07:40 PM   #130
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LocalRealtor View Post
Been watching and reading this for a while and have a silly question. Was this woman charged with trespassing? I have not read or heard anything about it and it would seem to me she clearly was trespassing.

Oh, and my opinion is that the punishment does not fit the crime.
No ! This woman was not charged with anything.
I would love to here an answer from both the Moultonborough police and the Carroll County Attourney Robin Gordon as to why this was.
As I said earlier in the thread. Robin Gordon hates men and always takes the womans side. I wonder why ?
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 07:01 AM   #131
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Criminal trespass is the act of entering a property not owned by you without the permission of the owner. It can be as simple as walking into a house unannounced, or as serious as entering a home or business to commit a robbery, vandalism or other crimes. Penalties depend on the jurisdiction where the crime was committed (federal, state, local) but in general, criminal trespassing is prosecuted in most jurisdictions as a misdemeanor or a low-grade felony.

Below are the different degrees of trespassing and there penalties.

I think that Harris falls into the "Simple Trespass" category.

First-Degree
1. Generally speaking, a person commits first-degree criminal trespass when he knowingly enters and/or remains on a property or in a building knowing he is not licensed or given permission to be there by the owner or a representative. A person also commits first-degree trespass if he enters a residence or building in violation of a restraining or protective order issued by a court. The penalty for a first-time offender in many local jurisdictions is up to one year in prison and a fine, but can vary depending on where the crime occurred.

Second Degree
2. A person can be charged with a second-degree criminal trespass when he/she enters or remains in a a home or building or property knowing he/she is not licensed or allowed to be there. If convicted the penalty can be in many jurisdictions up to six months in prison and a $1,000 fine, or both.

Third Degree
3. A person who enters a property knowing he/she is not licensed or allowed to be there or enters an area that is posted or fenced in to keep out intruders can be convicted of third-degree criminal trespassing. The penalty in many jurisdictions is up to three months in prison, a $500 fine, or both.

Simple Trespass
4. A person who knowingly enters a private property but does not show any intent to harm the property or individuals can be charged with simple trespassing. The penalty in most jurisdictions is usually a summons, which does not appear on your criminal record.

Filing Charges
5. Most local police departments and law enforcement agencies consider trespassing a nuisance offense and rarely prosecute. Only when an individual violates the law more than once will police generally take action. That is not the case when an individual trespasses on property during the commission of a crime, where offender is nearly often charged with trespassing in addition to other, usually more serious charges.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 07:13 AM   #132
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Yosemite Sam,
Why do you think Harris falls under the category of "Simple Trespass" rather then say, "Third Degree Trespass" ? The property she was on illegally was clearly posted to keep intruders out. Per your own explanation of the different levels, that seems to fall clearly under the "3rd Degree" category.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 07:30 AM   #133
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkinNH View Post
Yosemite Sam,
Why do you think Harris falls under the category of "Simple Trespass" rather then say, "Third Degree Trespass" ? The property she was on illegally was clearly posted to keep intruders out. Per your own explanation of the different levels, that seems to fall clearly under the "3rd Degree" category.
Because Harris appeared to be lost and had no criminal intent when she entered Bird’s property, I think that it would be difficult to charge her with “Third Degree”.
She did trespass on posted land and I guess she could be charged with ‘Third Degree” trespassing but IMHO it would be a waste of time to do it.

I guess Ward Bird is the one who needs to make that decision.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 07:49 AM   #134
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

If any of you have ever tried to find a property location in the small, narrow, windy, wooded, unpaved roads of Moultonborough, then you know it is very easy to get lost. A 'Class 6' road is this type road's classification, and they are way down at the bottom of the list of road classes, which makes it VERY LOW CLASS. Living on a low class, Class 6 road, is not necessarily a bad thing, and probably a number of residents like it that way for its back woods privacy and livability and remote location.

These roads commonly do not get snow-plowed by the local town, are not paved, have no street lights, no water-sewer, no sidewalks, no town designated signs, and not enough room for a school bus to make a three point turn around. For signs, you typically see home-made, hand painted sign boards that get attached to a tree along the way or down by the last intersection or somewhere. Moultonborough has quite a large number of class 6 roads, and many will take you all the way down to the Lake Winnipesaukee waterfront where you can find a three million dollar mcmansion on a one acre lot that's just next door to a fifty-five year old, two bed cottage.

Best to go during daylight hours if you are unfamiliar and searching for a home address. My personal experience has been second hand shopping used sailboat, catarmaran, wood stove, or rowboat where someone bought a cottage or something and inherited an oldie-moldie boat that been up the hill beyond the garage for many years, etc, and they just want it gonzo.

Today's Nov 30 www.laconiadailysun.com has a lengthy front page article on this Ward Bird conviction and imprisonment.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 07:57 AM   #135
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
If any of you have ever tried to find a property location in the small, narrow, windy, wooded, unpaved roads of Moultonborough, then you know it is very easy to get lost. A 'Class 6' road is this type road's classification, and they are way down at the bottom of the list of road classes, which makes it VERY LOW CLASS. Living on a low class, Class 6 road, is not necessarily a bad thing, and probably a number of residents like it that way for its back woods privacy and livability.

These roads commonly do not get snow-plowed by the local town, are not paved, have no street lights, no water-sewer, no sidewalks, and no town designated signs. For signs, you typically see home-made, hand painted sign boards that get attached to a tree along the way or down by the last intersection or somewhere. Moultonborough has quite a large number of class 6 roads, and many will take you to the Lake Winnipesaukee waterfront.

Best to go during daylight hours if you are unfamiliar and searching for a home address. My personal experience has been second hand shopping used sailboat, catarmaran, wood stove, or rowboat where someone bought a cottage or something and inherited an oldie-moldie boat that been up the hill beyond their new garage for many years, etc.

Today's Nov 30 www.laconiadailysun.com has a lengthy front page article on this Ward Bird conviction and imprisonment.


You can read the LDS paper with the PDF format here....I think it is easier to read.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 08:03 AM   #136
tummyman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 675
Thanks: 172
Thanked 553 Times in 189 Posts
Default fatlazyless

Please check your facts before just posting stuff. Moultonborough has very few Class 6 roads. Most are "Private"...not owned by the town and abandoned for maintenance, etc. which is what puts them in Class 6 status. Second, these roads are plowed in winter. I don't see your comments adding a lot............ Why don't you muse on the Erica Blizzard situation. She killed a person and I believe got one month in jail. Please use your skills to argue why her sentence was fair vs. the Ward Bird punishment.
tummyman is online now  
Old 11-30-2010, 08:13 AM   #137
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Talking about Erica Blizzard, it's probably a good time to just forget about her, and leave her alone. Justice isn't perfect, but she was tried by a jury of 12 in Belknap County court in Laconia, which is her home town, and the vote was 7-5, and 8-4 on the two real serious charges. Not guilty is not guilty, and that's the way the justice system worked.

To get a conviction, it requires a jury of twelve to vote 12-0, which must be very difficult to do. Just think about what it would take to get twelve different posters on this forum to all agree similarly.

..................

Hey, that link in post #135 is terrific and is definately the best way to read the LaDaSun so thanks for that!

And, the LaDaSun article was written by someone named Michael Cousineau from the NH Sunday Times which is the Sunday edition of the Union Leader, and the Union Leader has been editorialy supporting Ward Bird.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 08:21 AM   #138
RailroadJoe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 620
Thanks: 259
Thanked 158 Times in 100 Posts
Default

The Supreme Court only needs a majority. Not all have to agree. Why not other trial using the majority?
RailroadJoe is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 08:24 AM   #139
Argie's Wife
Senior Member
 
Argie's Wife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Alton
Posts: 1,908
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 533
Thanked 578 Times in 260 Posts
Talking Capt. Obvious

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Don't mean to sound like a broken record here.....but you is probably much better off running out the door with a kitchen broom and just go shake the broom at the stranger than using a gun.....guns just escalate the situation...and besides, after all is said and you go back inside....you already are all worked up....so's you might as well go sweep the floor!

No way, can you sweep the floor with a Colt .45!

Message here: carry a broom and you get to clean up! But, carry a gun and you get three to six years in a very small, steel and masonry, slammer door, prison cell!

And what does the defense attorney get....maybe a second new Mercedes just for the weekends!
You don't watch zombie movies, do you?
Argie's Wife is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 08:29 AM   #140
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

I wonder if Bird met the following requirements for posting signs?


Under state law (RSA 635:4), the legal manner of posting calls for posting durable signs with any words describing the physical activity prohibited, such as "No Hunting or Trespassing," in letters at least 2 inches high, and with the owner's name and address. The signs may be no further than 100 yards apart on all sides of the property and shall also be posted at gates, bars and all commonly used entrances.

These are the signs that Bird has on his property:
Attached Images
  
Yosemite Sam is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Yosemite Sam For This Useful Post:
RI Swamp Yankee (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 09:09 AM   #141
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam View Post
Because Harris appeared to be lost and had no criminal intent when she entered Bird’s property, I think that it would be difficult to charge her with “Third Degree”.
She did trespass on posted land and I guess she could be charged with ‘Third Degree” trespassing but IMHO it would be a waste of time to do it.

I guess Ward Bird is the one who needs to make that decision.
She SAY's she was lost, which I don't believe for a second. She was given precise and clear directions to the property she wanted to see. She knowingly and purpesly entered private property, ignoring pricise instructions and ignoring the clearly posted signs.
I know this area. It is ONE way in and ONE way out. There is NO getting lost. for the average person with half a brain it is impossible.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 09:20 AM   #142
sa meredith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 986
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 32
Thanked 352 Times in 137 Posts
Default very late

I'm very late to this thread...and have not read the whole thing thru...so if my question has already been addressed, I'm sorry.
But, as I read this story in the UL on Sunday, all I could think is, "what is this guy hiding?" I mean, you want to take a walk on my property? No big deal. I may ask if I can help you with something, but I'm not going to point a gun at you, and ask you to get out. I may invite you in for a beer, though. Now, granted, I don't have all the facts. There is probably more to it...something like, people are always passing thru there, and he is sick of it...or something like that. But if not, what is the big deal? Why does he feel threatened?
We all like to come across like nice, friendly, NH folk...but this sort of flies in the face....no?????
sa meredith is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to sa meredith For This Useful Post:
Yosemite Sam (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 09:35 AM   #143
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sa meredith View Post
I'm very late to this thread...and have not read the whole thing thru...so if my question has already been addressed, I'm sorry.
But, as I read this story in the UL on Sunday, all I could think is, "what is this guy hiding?" I mean, you want to take a walk on my property? No big deal. I may ask if I can help you with something, but I'm not going to point a gun at you, and ask you to get out. I may invite you in for a beer, though. Now, granted, I don't have all the facts. There is probably more to it...something like, people are always passing thru there, and he is sick of it...or something like that. But if not, what is the big deal? Why does he feel threatened?
We all like to come across like nice, friendly, NH folk...but this sort of flies in the face....no?????
I'm not sure if this particular question has been raised in this thread sa. I guess it's a valid question. I mean me personally I would not have done what Mr. Bird did. There are many on this thread that agree with the statement that you have made. If it were my wife that Ward Bird waived the gun at you can bet I'd be pretty pissed off. Especially if she was only lost looking for help.

Here's the deal though. This woman was most likely NOT lost. This woman was also most likely hostile. Ward was injured and probably physically in pain and limited. Maybe he felt her aggressions warranted a threat. I don't know if we will ever know.

Let's take all of the personal information out of the equation now. Let's go back to the root of this thing. We can never know for sure what Ward was actually thinking or feeling and we will never know 100% how the woman was behaving at the time. Anything I have said has been pure speculation and all my points have been raised in order to show a particular case in which pulling out a firearm might be justifiable. Here are my critical questions that I would like to have answered:

At what point is it legal for one to pull out a firearm in order to protect themselves on their own property? Is there ANY time where this is legal? What if Ward was a woman and the trespasser was a Man? If my wife was home with my kids and a large man was peering in the windows and he wouldn't leave could she pull a gun out? Would a case like that even be prosecuted? I have raised these question in a prior post but nobody has offered an opinion.

Finally sa and this is the absolute most important question, I pose this to you FLL and anyone else that has an opinion in this case: Does the punishment fit the crime? The Judge didn't think so. Do you?
hazelnut is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 09:36 AM   #144
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sa meredith View Post
I'm very late to this thread...and have not read the whole thing thru...so if my question has already been addressed, I'm sorry.
But, as I read this story in the UL on Sunday, all I could think is, "what is this guy hiding?" I mean, you want to take a walk on my property? No big deal. I may ask if I can help you with something, but I'm not going to point a gun at you, and ask you to get out. I may invite you in for a beer, though. Now, granted, I don't have all the facts. There is probably more to it...something like, people are always passing thru there, and he is sick of it...or something like that. But if not, what is the big deal? Why does he feel threatened?
We all like to come across like nice, friendly, NH folk...but this sort of flies in the face....no?????
There is No proof or any corroborating witness's, that he ever pointed a gun at anybody. Only the woman "saying" that he waved it in her face.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 10:18 AM   #145
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazelnut View Post
Finally sa and this is the absolute most important question, I pose this to you FLL and anyone else that has an opinion in this case: Does the punishment fit the crime? The Judge didn't think so. Do you?

Yes, the punishment fits the crime if the crime is “criminal threatening under RSA 631:4 (2007)”.

IMHO I think the “Judge” should have left his personal feelings out of this.

If you would have asked me if I think Bird should have been charged with criminal threatening, my answer would be NO.
Unfortunately Bird and Harris collided and this whole thing got out of control. Bad lawyers, a bad Judge and lack of knowledge of the law/laws.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Yosemite Sam For This Useful Post:
hazelnut (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 11:24 AM   #146
NoRegrets
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hudson - NH
Posts: 408
Thanks: 233
Thanked 212 Times in 88 Posts
Default

What if the case involved a baseball bat instead of a gun. Would there be the same outcome of a trial or are we "Gun Phobic"?

If the same complaint was made, assuming it is one's word against the others. Change the weapon from a gun to a bat, knife, sword, rock, bow and arrow, spear, or anything that can be construed a threat. How would the case be handled?

I bet this thread would not exist.
NoRegrets is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to NoRegrets For This Useful Post:
ishoot308 (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 11:45 AM   #147
DoTheMath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MA / Moultonborough
Posts: 144
Thanks: 45
Thanked 43 Times in 18 Posts
Default

My question - one of many I suppose in all of this - is, did she come up and ring the bell FIRST, as most people would do when approaching a strange house? Or did, she just get out of her car and start walking around the property, looking in the windows, etc? If you come up and ring my bell, I'm certainly not coming to the door armed for bear, heck - don't want to scare the Girl Scout selling me cookies . However, if you are walking around my house and peering in my windows, I'm going to be curious and slightly on the defensive. Do I approach you with a firearm first, highly unlikely, and prob. not what Ward did either. Am I mentally - and possibly otherwise - prepared for a confrontation in the event it goes that way, likely. But it will start out with a "can I help you?" and it's up to the trespasser to answer "correctly" and progress the conversation civilly from there. Remember, you are on MY property, it is up to YOU to make nice and explain your reasons for being there in the first place. I live there, I own the place, it's my domain. You have come on to my property - with out my permission, passed a number of no trespassing signs and are poking around!? You had better be ready to talk and I had better like what you are about to say, or else (I think) we have a problem.

So, what was said between them and the timing of the events is key to all of this. However - I still maintain that he got the short end of the stick and was wronged on many levels, period!
DoTheMath is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 11:53 AM   #148
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoRegrets View Post
What if the case involved a baseball bat instead of a gun. .... Would there be the same outcome of a trial or are we "Gun Phobic"? .... I bet this thread would not exist.
You are correct...I agree with you...and for that reason the "waving a broom" which is less threatening than a bat is even a more appropriate self defense tool. Had Ward Bird had the learned NH legal sense to hold a bat or a broom down by his side in as non-threatening a manner as possible, then it's probably most likely that the Carrol County attorney would definately not have prosecuted him for felony threatening.

Most likely the tresspassing woman would not have filed a complaint in the first place....and it would be basically a non-incident......just a small faux pas!
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 11:53 AM   #149
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoRegrets View Post
What if the case involved a baseball bat instead of a gun. Would there be the same outcome of a trial or are we "Gun Phobic"?

If the same complaint was made, assuming it is one's word against the others. Change the weapon from a gun to a bat, knife, sword, rock, bow and arrow, spear, or anything that can be construed a threat. How would the case be handled?

I bet this thread would not exist.
I don't think we are getting "Gun Phobic". The law is very clear when it comes to firearms. However, it is left up to interpretation when it comes to bats, knifes, swords, rocks, bow and arrows, and spears though.

Here is what the law says about your question (and it is a good queston):

TITLE LXII
CRIMINAL CODE
CHAPTER 625
PRELIMINARY


Section 625:11
625:11 General Definitions. – The following definitions apply to this code.
I. "Conduct'' means an action or omission, and its accompanying state of mind, or, a series of acts or omissions.
II. "Person'', "he'', and "actor'' include any natural person and, a corporation or an unincorporated association.
III. "Element of an offense'' means such conduct, or such attendant circumstances, or such a result of conduct as:
(a) Is included in the definition of the offense; or
(b) Establishes the required kind of culpability; or
(c) Negatives an excuse or justification for such conduct; or
(d) Negatives a defense under the statute of limitations; or
(e) Establishes jurisdiction or venue.
IV. "Material element of an offense'' means an element that does not relate exclusively to the statute of limitations, jurisdiction, venue or to any other matter similarly unrelated to (1) the harm sought to be prevented by the definition of the offense, or (2) any justification or excuse for the prescribed conduct.
V. "Deadly weapon'' means any firearm, knife or other substance or thing which, in the manner it is used, intended to be used, or threatened to be used, is known to be capable of producing death or serious bodily injury.
VI. "Serious bodily injury'' means any harm to the body which causes severe, permanent or protracted loss of or impairment to the health or of the function of any part of the body.
Source. 1971, 518:1, eff. Nov. 1, 1973.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 12:03 PM   #150
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default Broom defense sweeps New Hampshire safe!

Yes, a gun unlike a knife has pretty much just one purpose, while a broom has both a broom handle on one end and a straw broom end at the other so it is perceived to be much less threatening. One can say something like; "While sweeping the floor, I heard a tap-tap-tap on the window so I stepped outside to see who was there?" if a county attorney decides it is reasonable to throw the book at you for defending yourself with a broom.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 12:11 PM   #151
DickR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 696
Thanks: 4
Thanked 234 Times in 150 Posts
Default Reasonable doubt?

Hazlenut said: "We can never know for sure what Ward was actually thinking or feeling and we will never know 100% how the woman was behaving at the time."

He's right, of course. But neither could the jury know, for sure. Wouldn't that uncertainty have constituted "reasonable doubt," preventing a conviction?

Should Ward be released? - yes, we think so.

Was he an "unintended consequence" of a perhaps poorly crafted law? - yes, we think so.

Did the case get out of hand, driven by personalities? - yes, we think so.

Can we really resolve the case on this forum, knowing less than what presumably the jury knew? - probably not.
DickR is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to DickR For This Useful Post:
MarkinNH (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 01:06 PM   #152
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
You are correct...I agree with you...and for that reason the "waving a broom" which is less threatening than a bat is even a more appropriate self defense tool. Had Ward Bird had the learned NH legal sense to hold a bat or a broom down by his side in as non-threatening a manner as possible, then it's probably most likely that the Carrol County attorney would definitely not have prosecuted him for felony threatening.

Most likely the tresspassing woman would not have filed a complaint in the first place....and it would be basically a non-incident......just a small faux pas!
I have lived in NH for 40+ years and I have Never heard that holding a bat or a broom was considered "the learned NH legal sense" as a defense tool. I am not sure of just what that term is supposed to mean. Does the term actually exist, or is it something you just conjured up in your own little mind ?
Maybe we should issue all our soldiers and law enforcement personnel brooms and take away their firearms. I am sure they will feel much safer ! I am also sure that the mere presence of someone brandishing a broom will surely stop all the bad guys and girls in their tracks !!
I can guarantee you that if you show up uninvited and unwelcome on my privately posted property and start wandering around unannounced, it won't be a useless bat or a broom I will be holding when I come out to find out who you are and what the hell you want !!
The reasons for which I say that and mean it are simple. I don't know you ! I don't know what your intentions are ! and you could easily be armed !
Am I going to take a chance and just assume your there to pick flowers and come prancing out with a useless broom as you suggest ? I Don't Think So !!!
You will hopefully never give me a reason to let you know it's there but it will be there.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 01:25 PM   #153
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,520
Thanks: 1,035
Thanked 637 Times in 359 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Yes, a gun unlike a knife has pretty much just one purpose
And if I may be so stupid as to ask, what one purpose is that?
Pineedles is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 01:42 PM   #154
sa meredith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 986
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 32
Thanked 352 Times in 137 Posts
Default my questions/ opinions..

Maybe my real question is this...does anyone in this forum know this person, and his land? I guess I was curious if at some point he has been invloved with a land dipute with neighbors, and is therefore trying to prevent any sale of abutting property. Therefore protecting his privacy or property value. That might make more sense. If he is trying to somehow block a sale, I can understand his hostility toward a potential buyer.
Or even if he is just known to locals as a "grumpy old man"...things like this might make the situation a bit more understandable.
Someone here must know...
As to other issues brought up here...specifically, when would I think it OK to pull a gun. I would say, I guess if someone is trying to force their way into the house, unannounced, without knocking...I'm shooting, never mind "pulling the gun". Fire away.
But, for someone passing thru my property, unannounced or otherwise. As long as there are no unusual circumstances (like they are holding a weapon, or appear to be mentally/emotionally deficient) I don't think I'd consider self defense. Unless I asked them to stay put, and they continued toward me. Or somehow began acting erractic. But if they asked directions, or said they were just passing thru...no problem.
If I had asked this guy directions, or some simple question about some land I thought he might be familiar with, and he kibeyed out, and pulled weapon, I'd call him an ***** as well. If I thought he had pointed the weapon at me, I'd call the police as well.
Anyway...someone must know...is this just grumpy old man syndrom?
sa meredith is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 02:04 PM   #155
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

sa meredith,
I have known ward for close to 20 years. A grumpy old man he is not. As far as there being some kind of land dispute, I am not aware of one.
The side of the mountain where Ward and his family live, has been in his wifes family for as long as I have lived in the lakes region. I used to help my father check the electrical connections on the lift towers every winter when Wards father in law operated the ski slope.
There good decent hard working people.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 02:17 PM   #156
sa meredith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 986
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 32
Thanked 352 Times in 137 Posts
Default Oh my god!!!!

So, as stated earlier, I knew very little about the case, but posted a couple of times anyway..but have now done some research...
HE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE OPENED FIRE!
I know who this woman is...I live in the same town where she was constantly bothered by neighbors about her house/trailor. Anyone who has an even mild affection for animals would want this woman gone. When she was in the news a few years back, I took a drive by her place, just to see what all the fuss was....HOLY CHRIST... how could anyone live like the that. The smell alone, FROM OUTSIDE, was simply unbearable. And, yes, she is very abrasive. A very confrontational person...at least this is what is common knowledge in town. I have never had any dealing with her directly. I believe they removered 50 some odd animals from her home. Obviosly neglected. Heart breaking...just heart breaking. Many could not be saved. Many people donated to save some of them thru surgury etc... most were adopted.
Anyway...this is a stange person, to be sure....
I retract any negative comments I may have made about Bird...in a million years, I would not want this woman around me...no where near.
I have no doubt there are two sides to this story...
In case you are interested:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1...d-with-assault
sa meredith is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sa meredith For This Useful Post:
ishoot308 (11-30-2010), MarkinNH (11-30-2010), RailroadJoe (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 02:29 PM   #157
brk-lnt
Senior Member
 
brk-lnt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Down Shores
Posts: 1,908
Thanks: 517
Thanked 557 Times in 325 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sa meredith View Post
But, as I read this story in the UL on Sunday, all I could think is, "what is this guy hiding?"
I doubt he's hiding anything, I think he just wants to be left alone and does not appreciate unwelcome people wandering around on his property. Maybe a bit of an anti-social attitude, but one I think he is entitled to if it's what suits him.
__________________
[insert witty phrase here]
brk-lnt is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to brk-lnt For This Useful Post:
MarkinNH (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 03:29 PM   #158
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sa meredith View Post
So, as stated earlier, I knew very little about the case, but posted a couple of times anyway..but have now done some research...
HE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE OPENED FIRE!
I know who this woman is...I live in the same town where she was constantly bothered by neighbors about her house/trailor. Anyone who has an even mild affection for animals would want this woman gone. When she was in the news a few years back, I took a drive by her place, just to see what all the fuss was....HOLY CHRIST... how could anyone live like the that. The smell alone, FROM OUTSIDE, was simply unbearable. And, yes, she is very abrasive. A very confrontational person...at least this is what is common knowledge in town. I have never had any dealing with her directly. I believe they removered 50 some odd animals from her home. Obviosly neglected. Heart breaking...just heart breaking. Many could not be saved. Many people donated to save some of them thru surgury etc... most were adopted.
Anyway...this is a stange person, to be sure....
I retract any negative comments I may have made about Bird...in a million years, I would not want this woman around me...no where near.
I have no doubt there are two sides to this story...
In case you are interested:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1...d-with-assault


I read the article that you posted and found an interesting statment that came from a couple by the name of Jeffrey and Kay Bird. They live/lived near Harris when she was having a problem with the animals and police.
Does anyone know if they are related to Ward Bird?

This is what the article said:

Jeffrey and Kay Bird, who have been living a few doors down from Harris for nearly 14 years, said yesterday that they have never had a problem with Harris, but feel sympathy for the animals locked away in her home.
"A lot of people have had problems with her, but we've never had a bad word with her," Jeffrey Bird said, sitting on his shaded front porch. Kay Bird said, "I feel sorry for her, but she hasn't abided by the rules."
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 05:14 PM   #159
Resident 2B
Senior Member
 
Resident 2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bradenton, FL and North Shore, MA
Posts: 1,340
Thanks: 961
Thanked 304 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam View Post
I read the article that you posted and found an interesting statment that came from a couple by the name of Jeffrey and Kay Bird. They live/lived near Harris when she was having a problem with the animals and police.
Does anyone know if they are related to Ward Bird?

This is what the article said:

Jeffrey and Kay Bird, who have been living a few doors down from Harris for nearly 14 years, said yesterday that they have never had a problem with Harris, but feel sympathy for the animals locked away in her home.
"A lot of people have had problems with her, but we've never had a bad word with her," Jeffrey Bird said, sitting on his shaded front porch. Kay Bird said, "I feel sorry for her, but she hasn't abided by the rules."
YS,

So what!

I know of a basketball player that played in Boston years ago who liked animals. His first name is Larry. I wonder if there is a connection there?

I see no importance at all in whatever you are trying to connect.

R2B
Resident 2B is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 05:24 PM   #160
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident 2B View Post
YS,

So what!

I know of a basketball player that played in Boston years ago who liked animals. His first name is Larry. I wonder if there is a connection there?

I see no importance at all in whatever you are trying to connect.

R2B
You're right....Silly me
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 07:09 PM   #161
twoplustwo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 456
Thanks: 51
Thanked 39 Times in 21 Posts
Default ditto

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkinNH View Post
sa meredith,
I have known ward for close to 20 years. A grumpy old man he is not. As far as there being some kind of land dispute, I am not aware of one.
The side of the mountain where Ward and his family live, has been in his wifes family for as long as I have lived in the lakes region. I used to help my father check the electrical connections on the lift towers every winter when Wards father in law operated the ski slope.
There good decent hard working people.
Ditto most of that. The parcel in question is still in the family, and yes there have been family disputes over it's sale as it was intended to always be in the family. The volatility of those disputes has always originated on the other side, not from Ward and Ginny.

I've known Ward, Ginny and their kids for almost as long as MarkinNH has, and they are wonderful people. I would not hesitate for a moment to let my children hang out up there.
twoplustwo is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to twoplustwo For This Useful Post:
MarkinNH (11-30-2010)
Old 11-30-2010, 08:20 PM   #162
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pineedles View Post
And if I may be so stupid as to ask, what one purpose is that?
Most handguns are expensive, high quality design, high quality steel, precision made mechanisms that are capable of repeatedly firing hundreds and even thousands of rounds, and get treated accordingly by their owners. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the butt of a handgun handle would ever get used as a hammer, or that the barrel would get used as a prybar. Basically, a handgun gets used for its' one and only intended purpose and that is to fire a bullet. And yes, it is much more likely "to have a gun and not need one, than to need one and not have one" which strongly alludes to having a handgun for self defense without ever firing a round, which is still based on the gun's single purpose which is to fire a round.

A knife is indeed a very different type of a weapon, because by its' design a knife can be used for a number of non-weapon uses such as slicing an apple, scraping an old state inspection sticker off a windshield, or opening up the top on a can of tuna fish if you had no can opener.

Here's a simple question for you? If you needed to remove a state inspection sticker from a windshield would you ever use your Colt 45 as a scraper tool? Sure, it is probably possible to find a corner edge on a handgun to work as a scraper but would you ever honestly be doing that?
.................

Growing up in Massachusetts, I learned to differentiate between the concept of self-protection when inside one's dwelling, ie house, apartment, condo, etc, and self-protection when on one's land. It is my view that the justice system in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire take a dim view on showing a hand gun when out on one's land, but do indeed take a much less negative view on showing or pointing a handgun when inside one's dwelling as a defensive action.

As I see by reading through all these posts it does not appear that this concept of differentiating the use of a handgun when inside your house as opposed to outside on the land has been discussed. That was always a primary issue in Massachusetts to be considered when thinking about the legal system and the appropriate law and how it thought along the issue of self-defense for inside and for outside. In Massachusetts, I'm pretty sure it makes a big difference.

..................

"You watch zombie movies, do you?" ... Argie's Wife

Yes, I'm a long time, big fan of zombie movies! And back in 1974 I got to play the lead role in a little seen movie: "The Cockroach that Ate Cincinnati." Thanks for asking.......such a memory! ..

Last edited by fatlazyless; 11-30-2010 at 08:55 PM.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 11-30-2010, 10:06 PM   #163
RI Swamp Yankee
Senior Member
 
RI Swamp Yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Kingstown RI
Posts: 688
Thanks: 143
Thanked 83 Times in 55 Posts
Default


Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
.... And back in 1974 I got to play the lead role in a little seen movie: "The Cockroach that Ate Cincinnati." ....
The song The Cockroach That Ate Cincinnati was released in 1974
........

The movie The Cockroach That Ate Cincinnati was released in 1996
95 min - Comedy | Sci-Fi

Storyline
The Cockroach That Ate Cincinnati is about rock & roll, hero worship, hallucinations, drugs, madness, myth, rebellion and the search for individual integrity in a world on the brink of cultural and physical self-destruction. Written by Michael McNamara

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115919/

*** sigh ***
__________________
Gene ~ aka "another RI Swamp Yankee"
RI Swamp Yankee is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 07:48 AM   #164
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,814
Thanks: 634
Thanked 1,231 Times in 849 Posts
Default

Poor Ward Bird is not the only one who got a crazy sentence. Did you hear about the 27 year old guy in NJ (I think it was) who had 2 legal guns in his car and is spending 7 years in prison. How do these judges come up with these sentences. Yet the Supreme Court just ruled that an illegal who used his own name but another's ss number to get a job didn't do anything wrong. Could it be it is politically incorrect to blame an illegal for anything??? Give me a break. (Not to go off topic but just to show how unfair things are sometimes.)
tis is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 08:36 AM   #165
JDeere
Senior Member
 
JDeere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 295
Thanks: 74
Thanked 52 Times in 25 Posts
Default I am not saying he should have received 3 years

I guess I like many of you I only know the story about what happened from other people who claim to know what happened. The version I heard was the Bird was recovering from hernia surgery and not something more serious. I am told he is a large man and hernia surgery or not I very, very much doubt that this woman posed any type of threat to Bird. Finally, I have no idea what type of gun he had but many guns do not have a safety, regardless I do not find it credible that he removed the gun to check the safety.
I am not a believer in mandatory sentencing however Bird flat out was wrong to remove his gun with the implied threat of deadly force when there was no reason whatsoever for him to believe his life was in and danger.
So, before you all bash me I am not saying he should have received 3 years in prison but on the other hand does anyone want people “waving” a gun just because someone ignoramus trespassed on your property?
JDeere is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 08:54 AM   #166
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

When people have an injury and have the pain of healing and recovery it can easily alter their usual good judgement as to how they react to other people. Basically, sometimes people just get cranky and do something dopey.

All things considered, based on his life history, a much more just sentence would be to let Ward go free. No shots fired, no harm done, no big deal, everybody has a temper and sometimes their temper may show its' bad side especially when recovering from a medical operation.

It is incredibly unfair that Ward is stuck away in a prison cell for what may or may not have happened considering there is no personal injuries here.......no bruises, no blood, no marks, no scrapes, NO NOTHING!

And, let's not forget the big impact of the huge legal expense for Ward to get to this place legally. Hiring a defense attorney is very expensive, with all payments up-front, and having this whole event drag out from 2006 must be very difficult.

The whole Carrol County legal process here is a BIG STINKER!

Had I been sitting on that jury, and I usually like to disagree with people, I would have held out as one vs eleven, and not been swayed just to get the trial over and done with. It just takes one out of eleven to get a 'no decision' aka a 'hung jury' which ends the trial with no finding of guilt and may lead to a second new trial.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 09:12 AM   #167
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
I guess I like many of you I only know the story about what happened from other people who claim to know what happened. The version I heard was the Bird was recovering from hernia surgery and not something more serious. I am told he is a large man and hernia surgery or not I very, very much doubt that this woman posed any type of threat to Bird. Finally, I have no idea what type of gun he had but many guns do not have a safety, regardless I do not find it credible that he removed the gun to check the safety.
I am not a believer in mandatory sentencing however Bird flat out was wrong to remove his gun with the implied threat of deadly force when there was no reason whatsoever for him to believe his life was in and danger.
So, before you all bash me I am not saying he should have received 3 years in prison but on the other hand does anyone want people “waving” a gun just because someone ignoramus trespassed on your property?
The surgery he was recovering from was for a Ruptured Abdominal Aorta !
There is No proof that he "pulled the gun out" to imply a threat. Only the womans say so, that he waved it in her face.
You obviously no Very Little about firearms ! Short of revolvers, Most All modern firearms have safety's. I find it quite credible that he removed the gun from the holster to check the safety as he reentered his house. It would have been a conscious act of a responsible gun owner. I own and actively carry and I frequently check the status of my weapons safety.
There is also No proof that he "waved a gun" again, only this womans say so. His word against hers.
Read the letters on this website from people who know Ward Bird, http://freewardbird.org/
there is even one letter that will give you some history of what kind of person this Christine Harris really is and there is also the recent post from "sa meredith" who has personal knowledge of this woman.
Do some research and reading up on this woman and decide for yourself if you think she was really a credible person who was being honest and truthful with her testimony or is it possible she would have said anything to cover her a$$ and make everybody believe she was a poor innocent victim.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 09:30 AM   #168
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,520
Thanks: 1,035
Thanked 637 Times in 359 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Most handguns are expensive, high quality design, high quality steel, precision made mechanisms that are capable of repeatedly firing hundreds and even thousands of rounds, and get treated accordingly by their owners. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the butt of a handgun handle would ever get used as a hammer, or that the barrel would get used as a prybar. Basically, a handgun gets used for its' one and only intended purpose and that is to fire a bullet. And yes, it is much more likely "to have a gun and not need one, than to need one and not have one" which strongly alludes to having a handgun for self defense without ever firing a round, which is still based on the gun's single purpose which is to fire a round.

A knife is indeed a very different type of a weapon, because by its' design a knife can be used for a number of non-weapon uses such as slicing an apple, scraping an old state inspection sticker off a windshield, or opening up the top on a can of tuna fish if you had no can opener.

Here's a simple question for you? If you needed to remove a state inspection sticker from a windshield would you ever use your Colt 45 as a scraper tool? Sure, it is probably possible to find a corner edge on a handgun to work as a scraper but would you ever honestly be doing that?
.................

Growing up in Massachusetts, I learned to differentiate between the concept of self-protection when inside one's dwelling, ie house, apartment, condo, etc, and self-protection when on one's land. It is my view that the justice system in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire take a dim view on showing a hand gun when out on one's land, but do indeed take a much less negative view on showing or pointing a handgun when inside one's dwelling as a defensive action.

:
Fire a bullet is an acceptable answer. At least you didn't say kill. However, I have many guns that not a single bullet has been fired from the muzzle and I don't intend to do so ever. They are collector issue guns. They will appreciate in value much more if they are not used for what you call, their one and only purpose. So, these firearms are non-weapons, imo.

Sorry for getting off topic. I believe Ward Bird was wrongly convicted and pray for his release.
Pineedles is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Pineedles For This Useful Post:
MarkinNH (12-01-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 09:56 AM   #169
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,474
Thanks: 1,516
Thanked 1,582 Times in 807 Posts
Default Perfect Summation

Quote:
Originally Posted by DickR View Post
Hazlenut said: "We can never know for sure what Ward was actually thinking or feeling and we will never know 100% how the woman was behaving at the time."

He's right, of course. But neither could the jury know, for sure. Wouldn't that uncertainty have constituted "reasonable doubt," preventing a conviction?

Should Ward be released? - yes, we think so.

Was he an "unintended consequence" of a perhaps poorly crafted law? - yes, we think so.

Did the case get out of hand, driven by personalities? - yes, we think so.

Can we really resolve the case on this forum, knowing less than what presumably the jury knew? - probably not.
I don't know how to sum it up any better than this!
VitaBene is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
MarkinNH (12-01-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 10:01 AM   #170
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,474
Thanks: 1,516
Thanked 1,582 Times in 807 Posts
Default Lesson Learned

I will add one further comment- never, ever make a statement to the Police without legal counsel.

NEVER!!
VitaBene is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
wuwu (12-01-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 10:05 AM   #171
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
I don't know how to sum it up any better than this!
Yes, some how I missed that post and I highly agree with you and DickR. Thank you for quoting him.
Several times I have told myself to just stay away from this thread, that I have said all I can and I am doing nothing more then arguing and repeating myself. Next thing I know, I am here running my mouth and posting again.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 10:14 AM   #172
sa meredith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 986
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 32
Thanked 352 Times in 137 Posts
Default couple thoughts

Couple of final thoughts for me...(in case you missed it, check out the link in post 156)
I'm curious, after reading about Bird's day in court, why the Harris woman's previous indiscretions with the law, and her history of mental instability, were not allowed to be entered. They are indeed so relevant. Here is a woman, who I know to very abrasive and confrontational, who has refused, in the past, to comply with an officer of the law, that had a search warrant in hand.
That smacked a tow truck driver trying to remove her two illegal cars from her trailor.
Who thought living in a trailor with 50 dogs was an "OK" thing.
Who has a history of acting, let's say..."a little off".
Bird probably realized pretty quickly her elevator didn't go all the way up, and wondered what her deal was.
Further more...and this is compete speculation...I seriously question her ability to enter into any finacial agreement to buy property.
So..adding everything together...perhaps she went there with some sort of agenda. Seems like simply math in the court of common sense.
sa meredith is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 12:21 PM   #173
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,814
Thanks: 634
Thanked 1,231 Times in 849 Posts
Default

It's not allowed sa meredith.
tis is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 12:44 PM   #174
nvtngtxpyr
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 32
Thanks: 28
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Don't talk to police

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
I will add one further comment- never, ever make a statement to the Police without legal counsel.

NEVER!!
Excellent advice VB. Take the time to view the attached if you want to know why.

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
__________________
As you slide down the banisters of life
may the splinters never point the wrong way.
nvtngtxpyr is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 01:14 PM   #175
jeffatsquam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: moultonborough/sandwich
Posts: 186
Thanks: 173
Thanked 77 Times in 50 Posts
Default

Go to the laconia citz. for today's letters to the editor.

Letter from Gorden Blise re. Ward Bird.

He has had dealings with Chirstin (the combat-en) Harris
jeffatsquam is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 01:48 PM   #176
hazelnut
Senior Member
 
hazelnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,348
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 508
Thanked 462 Times in 162 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffatsquam View Post
Go to the laconia citz. for today's letters to the editor.

Letter from Gorden Blise re. Ward Bird.

He has had dealings with Chirstin (the combat-en) Harris
Here it is for the less inclined:

Editor, The Citizen:

I have been following the recent events concerning the terrible travesty of justice concerning Moulntonborough resident Ward Bird. While I do not know Mr. Bird and have never met him, I feel I must speak out on his behalf.

From what I have read Mr. Bird has always been an outstanding citizen of our Lakes Region Community, a hard working man, who takes care of his family, pays his taxes, a man who can be trusted and always tries to do the right thing. He is now sitting in jail for exercising his constitutional right to protect his home and property against an intruder.

As it so happens I know the person who was the cause of this entire injustice. A few weeks before the incident on Mr. Bird's property I met this woman as part of a potential business deal and tried to work with her to meet the goals she was trying to attain. I can tell you for a fact that I quickly found out she was delusional, who was not thinking or acting in any way rational. She became angry and made accusations that were unfounded and absurd and I quickly broke off all dealings with her. After talking with other colleagues in my field I learned that others have had dealings with her before she came to me. They coined her with the nickname "the crazy lady". This incident I had with her occurred just a few weeks before her encounter with Mr. Bird.

As I understand things this woman has since been incarcerated for an animal cruelty conviction. I sincerely hope she is receiving the help she needs for mental health issues as I know she was clearly in need of that kind of assistance.

Also I believe none of these facts about her could be brought out at Mr. Bird's trial and she was portrayed as a poor innocent lady who was lost and had simply wandered onto his property by mistake. I do not believe that is true given what I know about this woman.

We all know that Amendment Two of the Bill of Rights in our Constitution states: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." But we also know that we are a nation of laws, and to allow everyone to brandish weapons against our fellow citizens at a whim would not be logical. So the states pass laws that regulate how citizens can use weapons under various circumstances. I understand that this is necessary otherwise chaos would reign and we would all be walking around armed all the time feeling we need this protection to defend ourselves. But clearly a man has a right to protect his home, family, and property, against an intruder whose motives are unclear. This is part of the core values of our American way of life.

I am not a lawyer, and I do not know all the specific details of the encounter Mr. Bird had with this woman, but from everything I have read, and what I know, I believe that Mr. Bird was unfairly convicted and incarcerated. After all, while a firearm was shown it was never fired and nobody was hurt in any way.

If a crime was committed, does this punishment fit? I think not.

I am calling on Governor Lynch to look into this matter immediately, and to free Mr. Bird, overturn his conviction, clear his record and bring him home to his family for the Christmas Holliday. Also to look into the laws that led to this man's unjust incarceration and rewrite them to allow the citizens to protect that which is ours, and those that we love.

I call on all the citizens of this great state to call their representatives and demand they put pressure on Governor Lynch to do the right thing. I feel so strongly about this that if he does not move to free Mr. Bird the citizens of this state ought to move for immediate impeachment. We must send a message to our elected officials that we the citizens have right to protect our families, and property and nothing less will be acceptable. LIVE FREE OR DIE.

Gordon Blais

Meredith
hazelnut is offline  
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to hazelnut For This Useful Post:
brk-lnt (12-01-2010), ishoot308 (12-01-2010), MarkinNH (12-01-2010), nicole (12-01-2010), NoBozo (12-01-2010), RailroadJoe (12-01-2010), Resident 2B (12-01-2010), RI Swamp Yankee (12-02-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 02:17 PM   #177
ishoot308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Gilford, NH / Welch Island
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 2,045
Thanked 4,357 Times in 1,686 Posts
Default

Gordon Blais couldn't have stated it any better!! He pretty much summed it all up.

Dan
ishoot308 is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 03:54 PM   #178
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hazelnut View Post
As it so happens I know the person who was the cause of this entire injustice. A few weeks before the incident on Mr. Bird's property I met this woman as part of a potential business deal and tried to work with her to meet the goals she was trying to attain. I can tell you for a fact that I quickly found out she was delusional, who was not thinking or acting in any way rational. She became angry and made accusations that were unfounded and absurd and I quickly broke off all dealings with her. After talking with other colleagues in my field I learned that others have had dealings with her before she came to me. They coined her with the nickname "the crazy lady". This incident I had with her occurred just a few weeks before her encounter with Mr. Bird.

As I understand things this woman has since been incarcerated for an animal cruelty conviction. I sincerely hope she is receiving the help she needs for mental health issues as I know she was clearly in need of that kind of assistance.

Gordon Blais

Meredith
I'm sorry but I just don't get it.....Why would a realtor who is affiliated with a well respected real-estate agency such as Maxfield Real Estate, Inc. make such slanderous remarks about one of his former clients. Also why would he make statements about what his colleagues think about Harris.

I don't know anything about the Code of Ethics for realtors, but there must be something written about client confidentiality.

I think if I owned Maxfield Real Estate, Inc., Mr. Bais would have some explaining to do.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 04:01 PM   #179
VitaBene
Senior Member
 
VitaBene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 3,474
Thanks: 1,516
Thanked 1,582 Times in 807 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam View Post
I'm sorry but I just don't get it.....Why would a realtor who is affiliated with a well respected real-estate agency such as Maxfield Real Estate, Inc. make such slanderous remarks about one of his former clients. Also why would he make statements about what his colleagues think about Harris.

I don't know anything about the Code of Ethics for realtors, but there must be something written about client confidentiality.

I think if I owned Maxfield Real Estate, Inc., Mr. Bais would have some explaining to do.
Sam,

He never identifies himself as a Realtor nor which company he is affiliated with. We don't even know if it is RE deal. He actually goes out of his way to call it a business deal and not a RE deal.

Her whackiness is a matter of public record, so no slander there.
VitaBene is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to VitaBene For This Useful Post:
RI Swamp Yankee (12-02-2010)
Old 12-01-2010, 04:08 PM   #180
ITD
Senior Member
 
ITD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Massachusetts and Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 2,600
Thanks: 413
Thanked 591 Times in 311 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
Sam,

......

Her whackiness is a matter of public record, so no slander there.

My thought exactly....
ITD is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:24 PM   #181
Resident 2B
Senior Member
 
Resident 2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bradenton, FL and North Shore, MA
Posts: 1,340
Thanks: 961
Thanked 304 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VitaBene View Post
Sam,

He never identifies himself as a Realtor nor which company he is affiliated with. We don't even know if it is RE deal. He actually goes out of his way to call it a business deal and not a RE deal.

Her whackiness is a matter of public record, so no slander there.
He is not listed on Maxfield's site as an agent either. My place has been for sale and the contract just ended. I like honest people that stand up for what they think is right. If he was with Maxfield, I was going to give him my listing.

R2B
Resident 2B is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:31 PM   #182
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident 2B View Post
He is not listed on Maxfield's site as an agent either. My place has been for sale and the contract just ended. I like honest people that stand up for what they think is right. If he was with Maxfield, I was going to give him my listing.

R2B
http://www.luxuryrealestate.com/prof...2-gordon-blais
Attached Images
 
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:40 PM   #183
Resident 2B
Senior Member
 
Resident 2B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bradenton, FL and North Shore, MA
Posts: 1,340
Thanks: 961
Thanked 304 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Sam,

Thanks!

I'll contact him. I did not see him on their main site.

R2B
Resident 2B is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 05:42 PM   #184
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Resident 2B View Post
Sam,

Thanks!

I'll contact him. I did not see him on their main site.

R2B
You are welcome and good luck.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 06:01 PM   #185
JDeere
Senior Member
 
JDeere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 295
Thanks: 74
Thanked 52 Times in 25 Posts
Default Gawd

Does anyone own a Glock? Great gun....no safety.

Where any of you who are so adamant about this at the trial? Better yet where you there? I was not.

I hate to agree with anything FLL has to say but I too would not have convicted Bird.
JDeere is offline  
Old 12-01-2010, 06:23 PM   #186
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Does anyone own a Glock? Great gun....no safety
Sometime about two months ago, the LaDaSun had a photograph and article of the then candidate Jeannie Forester either holding or taking aim or something with her pink colored Glock pistol, and she went on to win the race and become State Senator (elect) Jeannie Forester for the district that includes Meredith and Center Harbor.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 08:05 AM   #187
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Does anyone own a Glock? Great gun....no safety.
http://www.alpharubicon.com/leo/glockpistols.htm 4th paragraph down.

"As for the rumors of a lack of safety, they were based on the fact that Glock handguns were one of, if not the first, semi-automatic handguns designed with no external safety lever. However, there are more safeties on a Glock handgun than there are on any revolver. The Glock handguns all have three safety mechanisms: 1) the trigger safety, 2) the firing pin safety, and c) the drop safety. The only way a Glock handgun will fire is for the trigger to be pulled fully to the rear. The Glock is neither a technically true Single Action, nor a Double Action. Glock calls its action the "Safe Action", which is close to a Double Action. The rumors of a lack of safety also stem from the integration of polymer into the receivers."

The following comes directly from Glocks website !

TRIGGER SYSTEM
The “Safe Action” system is a partly tensioned firing pin lock, which is moved further back by the trigger bar when the trigger is pulled.
When the trigger is pulled, 3 safety features are automatically deactivated one after another. When doing so, the trigger bar is deflected downward by the connector and the firing pin is released under full load. When the trigger is released, all three safety features re-engage and the GLOCK pistol is automatically secured again.


TRIGGER SAFETY
As the first of the three GLOCK “Safe Action” safety features, the trigger safety prevents inadvertent firing by lateral forces on the trigger. Releasing the trigger will automatically reactivate the safety

FIRING PIN SAFETY
The GLOCK firing pin safety is a solid hardened steel pin which, in the secured state, blocks the firing pin channel, rendering the igniting of a chambered cartridge by the firing pin impossible. The firing pin safety is only pushed upward to release the firing pin for firing when the trigger is pulled and the safety is pushed up through the backward movement of the trigger bar. Releasing the trigger will automatically reactivate the firing pin safety

DROP SAFETY
In the line of duty it may happen that a loaded pistol is dropped on the floor. Contrary to conventional pistols, the GLOCK drop safety prevents unintentional firing of a shot through hard impact. When the trigger is pulled, the trigger bar is guided in a precision safety ramp. The trigger bar is deflected from this ramp only in the moment the shot is triggered.

The internet is a Wonderful tool.
MarkinNH is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MarkinNH For This Useful Post:
brk-lnt (12-02-2010)
Old 12-02-2010, 09:24 AM   #188
JDeere
Senior Member
 
JDeere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 295
Thanks: 74
Thanked 52 Times in 25 Posts
Default

Please. There is NO SAFETY on a GLOCK that you turn on or off. The "safety’s built into the trigger. Pull the trigger and that is it....bang!
>>
As for guns with true safety I would assume (as I do) with those that have one that I keep the safety on. Why would I take it off unless I was prepared to fire?
>>
Some of you are a bit gullible. Do you really believe that he was convicted beyond all reasonable doubt if he did not brandish the weapon? Cleary some of you know nothing about guns or guns laws but you sure do like to spew your opinions.>>
> >
The argument is not if Bird should or should not be in jail. The argument is over the mandatory sentencing. Should the Judges hands be tied? I do not believe in mandatory sentencing but that is the law. I also believe in people rights to own a gun BUT with that right comes a profound responsibility. Bird it appears breached his responsibility. Superior Court and Supreme Court agreed. >>

If you look you will not find a "safety" but you will see a double trigger. One must depress the first trigger to fire................but theyre is nothing to check, turn on or off. So, since we are down this road what was Bird carrying for a gun?
JDeere is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 10:10 AM   #189
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Let me re quote you Exact comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Does anyone own a Glock? Great gun....no safety.
You clearly stated that a Glock has no safety ! I believe I have proved otherwise.

I also believe that if you read how the multiple internal safety's of a Glock work you will see that you Do indeed turn them off / on through the squeezing and releasing of the trigger. It may not be in the form of the traditional external button or lever but you certainly turn the safety"s Off and On.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Do you really believe that he was convicted beyond all reasonable doubt
ABSOLUTELY !! Where are the witness's or the evidence to back up the Crazy Lady's "say so" ? There doesn't seem to be any proof to back up the Lady's claim. The local police did what they had to at the time, due to the womans claim then that joke of a county attorney bought the Lady's whole cock and bull story and chose to pursue this case when it clearly should have been drooped. This whole mess literally screams of reasonable doubt !

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Cleary some of you know nothing about guns
With over 40 years of owning, collecting, reloading, target practicing, skeet and trap shooting, hunting etc. I believe I can comfortably hold my own in most conversations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
The argument is not if Bird should or should not be in jail
It most certainly is ! Just because You believe he belongs in jail doesn't not make it written in stone. The judicial system very clearly failed it's duty's in this particular case. Unfortunately it happens.
You are correct about the argument over the mandatory sentencing. In this particular case the mandatory sentence does not fit the supposed crime. This is why so many people are now pushing to change this particular law.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 10:14 AM   #190
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Slightly off-topic with this...but a very colorfull sidenote.....Is there any chance that someone could post a photo of a pink colored Glock just like what State Senator Jeannie Forester has.....a Glock in designer pink....like wow....can you get bullets in matching pink too?
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 10:16 AM   #191
MarkinNH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 392
Thanks: 177
Thanked 146 Times in 76 Posts
Default

Let me re quote you Exact comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Does anyone own a Glock? Great gun....no safety.
You clearly stated that a Glock has no safety ! I believe I have proved otherwise.

I also believe that if you read how the multiple internal safety's of a Glock work you will see that you Do indeed turn them off / on through the squeezing and releasing of the trigger. It may not be in the form of the traditional external button or lever but you certainly turn the safety"s Off and On.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Do you really believe that he was convicted beyond all reasonable doubt
ABSOLUTELY !! Where are the witness's or the evidence to back up the Crazy Lady's "say so" ? There doesn't seem to be any proof to back up the Lady's claim. The local police did what they had to at the time, due to the womans claim then that joke of a county attorney bought the Lady's whole cock and bull story and chose to pursue this case when it clearly should have been drooped. This whole mess literally screams of reasonable doubt !

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
Cleary some of you know nothing about guns
With over 40 years of owning, collecting, reloading, target practicing, skeet and trap shooting, hunting etc. I believe I can comfortably hold my own in most conversations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDeere View Post
The argument is not if Bird should or should not be in jail
It most certainly is ! It is merely one of the aspects of this whole mess. The judicial system very clearly failed it's duty's in this particular case. Unfortunately it happens. The county attorney bought the Lady's song and dance and turned right around with prejudice and sold it to the jury.
You are correct about the argument over the mandatory sentencing. In this particular case the mandatory sentence does not fit the supposed crime. This is why so many people are now pushing to change this particular law.
I believe that we will just have to agree to disagree on this matter.
MarkinNH is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 01:27 PM   #192
RI Swamp Yankee
Senior Member
 
RI Swamp Yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Kingstown RI
Posts: 688
Thanks: 143
Thanked 83 Times in 55 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sa meredith View Post
.... I'm curious, after reading about Bird's day in court, why the Harris woman's previous indiscretions with the law, and her history of mental instability, were not allowed to be entered. They are indeed so relevant. ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
It's not allowed sa meredith.
I guess that is what I find as strange about the NH legal system. In RI certain things are allowed if they pertain to the witness state of mind, that is, the ability tell the truth, make rational decisions and present true factual testimony. Based on what I have read about her background, any 3rd rate defense attorney in RI would have ripped her apart even if 2/3 of her background was not allowed in court.
__________________
Gene ~ aka "another RI Swamp Yankee"
RI Swamp Yankee is offline  
Old 12-02-2010, 08:18 PM   #193
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Today's December 2 www.concordmonitor.com has an editorial, "Clarify the Criminal Threatening Laws," on Ward Bird's arrest for felony threatening that takes a look at the NH law and some of the legal thinking behind it........and a lot of follow up comments.......pretty interesting stuff......which will probably lead to more disagreements over his guilty verdict.
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 07:32 AM   #194
tis
Senior Member
 
tis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,814
Thanks: 634
Thanked 1,231 Times in 849 Posts
Default

The Court is a strange place. They don't allow a lot of things in testimony, even things that are totally relevant in most people's opinion. They are not allowed for various reasons, many of which I would certainly question.
tis is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 08:40 AM   #195
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tis View Post
The Court is a strange place. They don't allow a lot of things in testimony, even things that are totally relevant in most people's opinion. They are not allowed for various reasons, many of which I would certainly question.

Let’s say that the jury heard testimony about all the bad things that Harris did in her life time. Would that have made a difference as far as the verdict is concerned?

Maybe and maybe not.

“Maybe” because no one wants the bad guy to win and the good guy to lose.

“ Maybe not” because it appears that Bird admitted to the police that he did have a gun and did something with it during the confrontation with Harris.

IMHO I think if we could read the police report it would help us understand how Bird was convicted of felony criminal threatening.

I think that if it was just a matter of he said she said, Mr. Bird would not be in jail right now.

Last edited by Yosemite Sam; 12-03-2010 at 09:11 AM.
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 05:29 PM   #196
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Below is the link to the video of THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE hearing about the verdict of THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE V. Ward Bird.

Notice how the Supreme Court Justices ask questions about the law/laws that sent Bird to jail. If they couldn’t understand them how did the jury figure them out?????

http://www.courts.nh.gov/pastsession...20090372va.asx
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 05:44 PM   #197
JDeere
Senior Member
 
JDeere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 295
Thanks: 74
Thanked 52 Times in 25 Posts
Default

I will stand by my stating that you know nothing about guns or you would not be arguing such a silly point. Glock does not have a safety that I can turn on or off. You are simply arguing semantics. I could not remove a Glock from my holster and check the safety. Period!
No responsible person pulls a gun out of their holster to check the safety. Do you have any idea what type of gun Bird was carrying? Who knows if it even had a safety.
You do not seem to know much of the “story” or history of the family, land for sale etc.
Does Bird belong in jail? Based on the law yes, he does. Do I have sympathy for the guy? Yes, because maybe it is a stupid mistake some of us could have made. Then again you do not simply pull out a gun because someone has trespassed. He was wrong, not MPD, and not the courts and he paid a very high price for it.
JDeere is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 05:56 PM   #198
fatlazyless
Senior Member
 
fatlazyless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,148
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 267
Thanked 895 Times in 648 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Sam View Post
Below is the link to the video of THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE hearing about the verdict of THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE V. Ward Bird.

Notice how the Supreme Court Justices ask questions about the law/laws that sent Bird to jail. If they couldn’t understand them how did the jury figure them out?????

http://www.courts.nh.gov/pastsession...20090372va.asx
Terrific public service of you to find this video/audio and post a working link here.....now if only my 'puter had working audio. Wonder if either the Laconia or Meredith libraries have working audio on their public 'puters?

And, wonder what is the length of this State of NH vs Ward Bird video/audio?
fatlazyless is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 06:03 PM   #199
Yosemite Sam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lakes Region
Posts: 395
Thanks: 81
Thanked 95 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatlazyless View Post
Great public service of you to find this video/audio and post a working link here.....now if only my 'puter had working audio. Wonder if either the Laconia or Meredith libraries have working audio on their public 'puters?

And, wonder what is the length of this State of NH vs Ward Bird video/audio?
It is 31 minutes long.

Do you have Headphone jacks on your computer?
Go to your favorite walmart store and buy some speakers that hook to your headphone jacks.

Have fun!!
Yosemite Sam is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 06:48 PM   #200
RailroadJoe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 620
Thanks: 259
Thanked 158 Times in 100 Posts
Default

I just watched the video of the Supreme Court hearing and realize the stupidity of our law. Over and over it was satated "A non deadly force" yet they ruled it okay. Too bad we can not have people who look at justice being logical and sensible.
I still can not understand why the woman got away with out a trial
RailroadJoe is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.61733 seconds