Guilty verdict in stray bullet death

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Prion

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2008
Messages
767
Location
New England
Guilty verdict in stray bullet death

Published: May 22, 2010

BURLINGTON (AP) — A jury has found a Vermont man guilty of involuntary manslaughter for the stray-bullet death of a St. Michael's College professor.

After more than seven hours of deliberations on Friday, the jury convicted 40-year-old Joseph McCarthy, of Essex, in the September 2008 death of neighbor John Reiss. Police never determined who in the group of men firing weapons on a backyard range fired the fatal bullet. Prosecutors said McCarthy was reckless in setting up the range and should be held liable.

WCAX-TV reported that prosecutor Justin Jiron told jurors in Vermont District Court on Friday that someone sitting to eat dinner shouldn't have to worry that they'll be shot dead out of nowhere.
 
Along with the right to bear arms comes the duty to do so responsibly. If his recklessness, or lack of taking the proper precautions, resulted in the death in any way, the homeowner was rightfully convicted. Sad, but one must suffer the consequences for his actions.
 
That's when Jansch says another man's wild machine-gun style spray of bullets turned McCarthy's acceptable shooting area into a danger zone.

"(McCarthy) could not have known that Rambo was going to show up at his shooting range that day!" Jansch said.
Click to expand...

http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=12498741


There is a certain segment of the population that wants to shoot full auto, or bump fire their semiauto's. With these spray and pray types, you are better served keeping them off your range.

Case in point.
 
There is a certain segment of the population that wants to shoot full auto, or bump fire their semiauto's. With these spray and pray types, you are better served keeping them off your range
Click to expand...

i find that an overly broad generalization, and quite insulting.

there is nothing wrong with shooting a FA weapon, and it is not inherently dangerous.

like anything to do with a gun the person shooting it is the responsible person, the gun is not to blame.
 
You are always responsible for where your rounds go. If someone shoots another person beit intentionally or unintentionally then that person should be held accountable for their actions.
 
i find that an overly broad generalization, and quite insulting.

there is nothing wrong with shooting a FA weapon, and it is not inherently dangerous.

like anything to do with a gun the person shooting it is the responsible person, the gun is not to blame.
Click to expand...

I agree - people with larger capacity weapons are not the problem. Stupid people with any weapon - that's the problem.
 
Rapid fire was not the problem here. The man's 'range' had the neighbor's house 200yds directly down range. It was only a matter of time before ricochet or flyer went over the berm. Essex, VT is one of the more heavily populated towns in the state.

These men showed incredibly poor judgement in the location and construction of their range and grossly underestimated the power of rifle rounds. Sadly, not all firearms enthusiasts are saints with high Stanford-Binet scores.
 
They should have to tie the bullet to the shooter, and the shooter should be found guilty of manslaughter. YOU are responsible for YOUR bullet. YOU should not be responsible for SOMEONE ELSE's bullet.
The property owner should be found liable in civil court, not guilty in criminal court.


`
 
Something similar happened here in Iowa a few months back, shooter didn't check behind what he was shooting at. Ended up killing his buddy who was taking a squat behind the bushes. Killed him, but was ruled an accident.
 
BeerSleeper said:
They should have to tie the bullet to the shooter, and the shooter should be found guilty of manslaughter. YOU are responsible for YOUR bullet. YOU should not be responsible for SOMEONE ELSE's bullet.
The property owner should be found liable in civil court, not guilty in criminal court.


`
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure.

Seems to me if someone has a shooting range there is a reasonable expectation that it has been designed and constructed safely.

Do you do a full inspection of every range you go to before shooting?
 
They should have to tie the bullet to the shooter, and the shooter should be found guilty of manslaughter. YOU are responsible for YOUR bullet. YOU should not be responsible for SOMEONE ELSE's bullet.
The property owner should be found liable in civil court, not guilty in criminal court
Click to expand...

Interesting legal theory. Apparently not supported in this case.

Killing College Professors eating supper at their dinner table. What a wonderful way to support gun rights. Not!

Pontificate about rights, justice and the law, but society will find a way to erase those who are too dangerous, or are a bloody nuisance.

Want to lose the ranges you use and the guns you shoot?: just allow idiots to kill more innocents downrange.
 
This is very odd.

After more than seven hours of deliberations on Friday, the jury convicted 40-year-old Joseph McCarthy, of Essex, in the September 2008 death of neighbor John Reiss. Police never determined who in the group of men firing weapons on a backyard range fired the fatal bullet. Prosecutors said McCarthy was reckless in setting up the range and should be held liable.
Click to expand...
:confused: I can see this in a civil suit because he was the property owner and constructor of the range. But the criminal charge? Whoever actually fired the fatal bullet should have been the one charged.
 
Whoever actually fired the fatal bullet should have been the one charged.
Click to expand...

Determining that isn't always possible. Tie the bullet to a specific weapon? Sure. But when's the last time you went shooting with a group of friends and didn't pass stuff around? If four different people shot the weapon, who gets charged? The weapon owner? That's as bad as arbitrarily charging the range owner. I feel that if they couldn't specifically prove who fired the fatal shot, then criminal charges shouldn't have been brought.
 
Fella's;

And I completely agree with BeerSleeper and Lone Haranguer. I do bellieve that the American jurisprudence system had as a founding ethic that better a hundred criminals go free than an innocent man be imprisoned. And no, that's not a direct quote, but it is the essence of the thought.

Most assuredly, the range owner should have to answer in civil court. However, if he could not be directly tied to the lethal bullet there is no way he should be convicted of a criminal violation. I would certainly hope that he appeals & the original conviction is overturned. The fact that he was convicted shows how far down the slippery slope we've slid into the nanny-state mentality.

900F
 
And the civil "wrongful death" lawsuit(s) may now begin, I presume? Because I would now probably have my attorney go after everyone in that group of shooters (if I was the widow or remaining family members) to see who had the "deepest pockets"... and while I know that won't bring anyone back from the dead, it might help compensate for... I don't know, kids college funds? (if the deceased had any kids or grandkids)

Wondering when the range was built in regards to the neighbors home (prior to, afterwards, etc)? Not that it really matters at this point.

Every bullet has an attorney attached to it (so the saying goes) or at least ready to spring into action.
 
If I understand it right, the range owner was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter because of inappropriate location and/or design of his private range resulting in the death of a person outside the range. Was any part of this result due to the fact it was a private range? If the range had been constructed for the purposes of a business, would I be correct to imagine that there were would have been extensive building control procedures to follow resulting in either official approval or denial of a permit? And if a permit had been issued, would the owner have been sheltered from criminal charges in the event of this incident?
 
trust but verify

the range i frequent most punches your badge 'MG' after you have qualified for machine gun shooting.its a 5 hour class. letting another shoot your gun--and we are a very sharing bunch, we have an unwritten procedure:
load one round so they can hold & feel the gun. than two; than 3. if they keep 3 on the berm, well than, load em up. if they even go too high on the berm, i and most others will find a polite reason to put the gun down for awhile.

safety 1st
safety 2nd
safety 3rd
fun 4th

this death was the result of the owner allowing untested others the use of his property
but for most--poor planning/location of his range.

a terrible price has been paid all around.
 
That's when Jansch says another man's wild machine-gun style spray of bullets turned McCarthy's acceptable shooting area into a danger zone.

"(McCarthy) could not have known that Rambo was going to show up at his shooting range that day!" Jansch said.
Click to expand...

What a load of garbage. As noted above, the neighbor's house was down range. The backstop was a loose jagged rock wall 1-2 feet tall. After that, sparse trees. Foam targets were placed on the ground in front of tree stumps. The range would not be safe for a pellet gun.
 
However, if he could not be directly tied to the lethal bullet there is no way he should be convicted of a criminal violation
Click to expand...

I would hold to that unless the range owner was criminally negligent in placement AND/OR design in their range as to make such an accident a near certainty. I shoot at the licensed range off the interstate. I can say I have never gone down to the end of the range and inspect the backstops and/or done an analysis on it to make sure it is capable of stopping the particular round I am firing that day.

What I know, the range is licensed, it has guidelines on what calibers they allow and I trust that it has been constructed so that proper use (i.e. I don't expect the ceiling to stop rounds) does not result in a fatality outside the building. Particularly because I PAY to use the range for just that reason.
 
The homeowner constructed the range negligently.

A responsible (but novice shooter) could well have fired that shot not knowing residences were down range.

If the shooter could see the residence downrange then he too should be accountable for the shooting.

If this were a public range that had been constructed with a Wal-mart parking lot behind it and Joe Bloe sends one over the top, who would be responsible?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Officers Acquitted In Sean Bell Shooting!!!
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Justin
Justin
P
  • Locked
Bridport man shot in backyard by target shooter
Replies
6
Views
780
Art Eatman
A
W
  • Locked
KY: Jury acquits man in fatal shooting
Replies
10
Views
998
BAB
B
W
  • Locked
(CO) Woman cleared in death of boyfriend 08-26-03
Replies
0
Views
6K
WAGCEVP
W
MarkDido
  • Locked
Jayson Williams - Not Guilty
Replies
6
Views
402
WT
W
Back
Top