If you read this forum regularly, you already know that the issue of modified guns comes up quite often. The issue typically escalates into some, erm, warmer responses, if not outright heated ones. So here's Commonwealth of PA v. Jensen, which is non-precedential, yet nonetheless interesting. The TLDR version is: The defendant below and appellant here, shot the woman with whom he was living. He claimed it was an accident. The trial court did not find him credible, at least in part because he had modified the trigger on the AR with which he shot her. The trial court apparently thought this undermined his claim that the shooting was accidental, given his 'intricate' knowledge of the firearm.