Concealed Carry Overkill?

Status
Not open for further replies.
At the distances under consideration (lets say 15 feet to 50 yards) the real factor with eather pistol or carbine is the shooter's skill.

One time many years ago in the last (20th) century when combat games were new and generally unregulated by rules...
I was at an informal match where they were making up stages on-the-fly. The Match Director came up with this one.

A pick-up truck was parked parallel to the firing line with the driver’s door open. A Ruger Mini-14 carbine was lying on the seat, chamber cleared/magazine out. Some 80 yards down range on a stand an 8 to 10-inch steel disk had been placed in a vertical line to the truck. About 8 yards down the line to the right; two silhouette targets were placed out at about 10 and 15 yards down range from the firing line.

Each competitor was to:

1. Run up to the truck’s open door, grab the carbine and magazine, and then insert the magazine and chamber the first round.

2. Leaning over the truck’s hood they were to engage the plate until they either knocked it down or ran out of ammunition.

3. When this was done one way or the other they were to remove the carbine’s magazine, clear the chamber, and put both back on the seat.

4. Then run down along the firing line, to where the silhouettes were placed and engage each with two shots (or more as necessary) using their handgun.

5. The winner would be whoever made the required hits in the shortest time.

6. Optionally, if a competitor chose too do so, they could ignore the carbine and engage the plate using their handgun. Given the distance, the stage designer suggested this would be foolish too attempt.

On that particular day I was using a Colt Government Model .45 loaded with 200-grain semi-wadcutters @ about 850 FPS. I was the only competitor who chose to take on the plate with my handgun, and I knocked it down with one shot. Doing the rest was a piece of cake, and because of the time factor I easily won the stage.

Had this been a real shooting I would have gone for the carbine, stayed behind the truck for cover, and engaged all three targets with it. But games are games, right???

My last comment is intended to reflect on the stage designer and those that seem to imply that a handgun’s effective range should be measured in feet, not yards, and not Sam1911 or David E who I presume might have done things differently.
 
See, now that's a great example of exactly the kind of stage, problem, and discovery I'm talking about. And it also shows off why the question gets so muddy.

What if you'd started with the carbine in your hands? But why WOULD you start with the carbine in your hands? You don't normally walk around with a carbine in your hands, and unloaded in the truck, is a realistic place and condition for one to be.

And, yes, the question of the shooter's individual, personal, skill with either type of weapon (and or the specific weapon to be used) plays a huge part.

But shoot...make the distance between the truck and the 2nd firing station far enough and the shooters' athleticism starts to be more important than either other concern! (An issue we see sometimes in various gun games where being fleet of foot can separate the winner from the runners up.)
 
Sam, I think you're adding extra variable elements unnecessarily.

Fuff, I have always championed using handguns, including snubbies, for long range shooting. Most people don't think the gun itself is capable of making a long range hit. Your match director being one of them.

It's easier to shoot a rifle well, but I might hesitate picking up a strange rifle I'd never fired to solve a situation if I had my own handgun on me.

Maybe this should be its own thread.
 
Marb4
May I ask why you feel under firepowered with 10 rounds? Whats your threat scenario like?
 
I still fail to see how a "bottom feeding defense lawyer" would be grilling you about a shooting. The paranoia surrounding the legal ramifications in the gun culture is unreal.
 
I still fail to see how a "bottom feeding defense lawyer" would be grilling you about a shooting.

It does happen occasionally, usually in a civil action brought for wrongful death or injury. Perhaps it should be better said as "Petitioner's Attorney." I know because on a few occasions I testified as an expert witness, or was consulted by one side or the other concerning technical issues.

Not all attorneys are despised “bottom feeders,” just the ones on the wrong side. :cuss: :D
 
I still fail to see how a "bottom feeding defense lawyer" would be grilling you about a shooting. The paranoia surrounding the legal ramifications in the gun culture is unreal.

Seriously? Let me provide one of many examples I've witnessed in court. Homeowner sitting in his living room watching TV, suddenly the door opens and a black male walks into his hallway, homeowner draws one of the two weapons he was carrying and shoots the suspect 3 times, injuring him but not fatally. Now, we'll probably never know the truth, but the suspect claimed he was invited to a party through a second person and was told to just come on in when you get there, and that he was given the wrong address. The Grand Jury asked the homeowner why he was carrying two guns in his own home, even asked him "what he was paranoid of"? In the criminal trial the homeowner was grilled by the Defense Attorney about his "fascination with guns", and had subpoenaed him for a complete list which was read in court. He was forced to explain to the Jury why he had purchased each weapon and was especially questioned over his possession of an AR-15 and an SKS rifle. The suspect was only convicted of criminal trespass and a huge civil suit is brewing against the homeowner......which he'll probably lose.:banghead:

LD
 
If I’m reading this correctly, wouldn’t the attorney doing the grilling be the “Prosecutor” or “State’s Attorney,” rather then the “Defense Attorney,” who should have been representing the accused defendant?
 
Posted by Lawdawg45: Let me provide one of many examples I've witnessed in court. Homeowner sitting in his living room watching TV, suddenly the door opens and a black male walks into his hallway, homeowner draws one of the two weapons he was carrying and shoots the suspect 3 times, injuring him but not fatally. Now, we'll probably never know the truth, but the suspect claimed...

In the criminal trial the homeowner was grilled by the Defense Attorney about his "fascination with guns", and had subpoenaed him for a complete list which was read in court.

The suspect was only convicted of criminal trespass and a huge civil suit is brewing against the homeowner......which he'll probably lose...

What evidence did the shooter produce to justify his having used deadly force? Did he mount a defense of justification on the basis of self defense? Was he successful?

I presume that you did mean to refer to the prosecutor rather than the "defense attorney".
 
LD:
In your area is Grand Jury testimony available for use in the criminal, or civil trials? In other words, is your Grand Jury a sealed trial, used to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial?

Is the person being examined represented by council, that would be an attorney?

Did the defense attorney object to the homeowner's being grilled on the number, or make of firearms he possessed?

What was the reason the homeowner used for justification of the use of deadly force?

What was the guy who was shot charged with by the District Attorney?
I wonder about this, since if criminal trespass was all he's convicted of, it sounds like the D.A. bought the story.

How did the front door open? Magic? Broken down?

You say you witnessed the trial, so details please.

How did you draw witnessing the Grand Jury hearing, and the criminal trial?

Why, as likely a court officer can't you get the proper titles of the attorneys
in the action correct?

I've always enjoyed your posts, and blogs in the past. Consistently getting the titles for the attorneys involved wrong brings your credibility into question for those of us who have worked in the court system.

What is the jury pool like for this area? You might answer these questions in PM, since this is getting into the murky area of politics and not really a part of what the guidelines want us to discuss in the forms.

"I’m fairly new to the concealed carry world and have recently settled on a Glock 26 (standard 10 round mag) as my carry weapon. Very comfortable, easy to conceal, and easy to shoot. Anyway, I felt pretty well armed and protected with this until I started reading a lot of posts online regarding concealed carry. I constantly read about back up guns (BUGs I guess they’re called), guys carrying two, three, or even four hi cap spare magazines, etc and I can’t help but wonder, where these guys are going that they’re going to need that much firepower? Am I just naïve feeling safe with my "baby Glock" or should I start arming up?"

For the OP:

In reviewing this question I think the following facts are relevant:
You will shoot badly when attacked. LEO is 30% hit average, at 7 yards or less, IIRC. You will be attacked at night, or in dim light, 70% of the time.
You will be attacked by 2-3 persons 70% of the time. Your attackers will likely be high on some sort of drug, or drunk, around 9 out of 10 times, or more.

I would look at situations that put you in such conditions, and do all I can to avoid them. If you can't do that, and some people can't, then I would start considering arming yourself in a manner that at least gives you a reasonable chance of survivial in such situations.

A 26, loaded with one magazine, would give you one shot on each attacker if 3 guys attack you. NOT good odds, but better then a sharp stick.

What are the odds you can reload in that situation? When it happened to me, not good. It was at point blank range. However, I did not have a gun to respond with.
 
I’m fairly new to the concealed carry world and have recently settled on a Glock 26 (standard 10 round mag) as my carry weapon.
I think with that, plus a spare magazine and quality carry gear, you will be well armed. :) If there are social or dress occasions where for whatever reason this is unsuitable, you can always add or substitute different guns.
 
@ Old Fuff

I responded to a gun fight call at a motorcycle gang clubhouse.

I had a M-4 in the trunk [ we did not have in car racks then ] and the call made note that an officer was outside and directly in line of fire so he could cover the shot/wounded victim/perp.

I drove as fast as I could and was the first marked unit on scene,I did not take the time to access the best weapon I had = M-4.

I was a firearms instructor and I was VERY happy that we had the M-4's but I had to cover the door of the bldg AND another suspect on the ground that had not yet been secured .

It worked out well,but I still see that in hindsight I should have taken out a real gun to a gun fight.

And yes,I shoot at 25 and 50 yards with the handgun.
 
If youre highly concerned about the possibility of being grilled by a defense attorney, I'd hate to see the precautions you take against lightning strikes and shark attacks...
 
It worked out well, but I still see that in hindsight I should have taken out a real gun to a gunfight. It worked out well, but I still see that in hindsight I should have taken out a real gun to a gunfight. And yes,I shoot at 25 and 50 yards with the handgun.

I presume this is in reply to my post #201, where I related where during a stage in a combat (game) match I used a pistol to drop a steel plate @ 80 yards rather then a Ruger Mini-14, and then go on with a .45 pistol.

Again I will emphasize that this was a game, and I was following the rules and conditions set by the Match Director. While facing no real risk I gambled that I had the skill and experience to hit the plate and then go on to win the stage. I then proceeded to prove I was right.

However I then said this:

Had this been a real shooting I would have gone for the carbine, stayed behind the truck for cover, and engaged all three targets with it.

Which I’m sure you would have also done, if your carbine had been more accessible. Because it wasn’t you did what you had to. Hopefully your superiors learned a lesson and moved the carbine to a better location.

My position, learned from a number of individual with extensive experience, is to use the best weapon for the purpose that is available. At 15 yards it might be a handgun, if there were no extenuating circumstances. This simply because it could be employed quicker, without a limited field of view in which to pick up the sights. On the other hand in the situation you described we’d both agree that the carbine was the way to go.
 
LD:
In your area is Grand Jury testimony available for use in the criminal, or civil trials? In other words, is your Grand Jury a sealed trial, used to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial?

Is the person being examined represented by council, that would be an attorney?

Did the defense attorney object to the homeowner's being grilled on the number, or make of firearms he possessed?

What was the reason the homeowner used for justification of the use of deadly force?

What was the guy who was shot charged with by the District Attorney?
I wonder about this, since if criminal trespass was all he's convicted of, it sounds like the D.A. bought the story.

How did the front door open? Magic? Broken down?

You say you witnessed the trial, so details please.

How did you draw witnessing the Grand Jury hearing, and the criminal trial?

Why, as likely a court officer can't you get the proper titles of the attorneys
in the action correct?

I've always enjoyed your posts, and blogs in the past. Consistently getting the titles for the attorneys involved wrong brings your credibility into question for those of us who have worked in the court system.


What is the jury pool like for this area? You might answer these questions in PM, since this is getting into the murky area of politics and not really a part of what the guidelines want us to discuss in the forms.

"I’m fairly new to the concealed carry world and have recently settled on a Glock 26 (standard 10 round mag) as my carry weapon. Very comfortable, easy to conceal, and easy to shoot. Anyway, I felt pretty well armed and protected with this until I started reading a lot of posts online regarding concealed carry. I constantly read about back up guns (BUGs I guess they’re called), guys carrying two, three, or even four hi cap spare magazines, etc and I can’t help but wonder, where these guys are going that they’re going to need that much firepower? Am I just naïve feeling safe with my "baby Glock" or should I start arming up?"

For the OP:

In reviewing this question I think the following facts are relevant:
You will shoot badly when attacked. LEO is 30% hit average, at 7 yards or less, IIRC. You will be attacked at night, or in dim light, 70% of the time.
You will be attacked by 2-3 persons 70% of the time. Your attackers will likely be high on some sort of drug, or drunk, around 9 out of 10 times, or more.

I would look at situations that put you in such conditions, and do all I can to avoid them. If you can't do that, and some people can't, then I would start considering arming yourself in a manner that at least gives you a reasonable chance of survivial in such situations.

A 26, loaded with one magazine, would give you one shot on each attacker if 3 guys attack you. NOT good odds, but better then a sharp stick.

What are the odds you can reload in that situation? When it happened to me, not good. It was at point blank range. However, I did not have a gun to respond with.

I'll address your cornucopia of questions in a separate post, but let me clear up some basic confusion from you and others. When a suspect is arrested and charged (like the example I quoted) the person representing him in criminal prosecution is a Defense Attorney, and his main job is to make the suspect look like an angel and the witness like a crazed maniac. I'm not sure where the confusion is with you, others, and the Moderator?

LD
 
LD:
In your area is Grand Jury testimony available for use in the criminal, or civil trials? In other words, is your Grand Jury a sealed trial, used to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial?

Is the person being examined represented by council, that would be an attorney?

Did the defense attorney object to the homeowner's being grilled on the number, or make of firearms he possessed?

What was the reason the homeowner used for justification of the use of deadly force?

What was the guy who was shot charged with by the District Attorney?
I wonder about this, since if criminal trespass was all he's convicted of, it sounds like the D.A. bought the story.

How did the front door open? Magic? Broken down?

You say you witnessed the trial, so details please.

How did you draw witnessing the Grand Jury hearing, and the criminal trial?

Why, as likely a court officer can't you get the proper titles of the attorneys
in the action correct?

I've always enjoyed your posts, and blogs in the past. Consistently getting the titles for the attorneys involved wrong brings your credibility into question for those of us who have worked in the court system.

What is the jury pool like for this area? You might answer these questions in PM, since this is getting into the murky area of politics and not really a part of what the guidelines want us to discuss in the forms.

"I’m fairly new to the concealed carry world and have recently settled on a Glock 26 (standard 10 round mag) as my carry weapon. Very comfortable, easy to conceal, and easy to shoot. Anyway, I felt pretty well armed and protected with this until I started reading a lot of posts online regarding concealed carry. I constantly read about back up guns (BUGs I guess they’re called), guys carrying two, three, or even four hi cap spare magazines, etc and I can’t help but wonder, where these guys are going that they’re going to need that much firepower? Am I just naïve feeling safe with my "baby Glock" or should I start arming up?"

For the OP:

In reviewing this question I think the following facts are relevant:
You will shoot badly when attacked. LEO is 30% hit average, at 7 yards or less, IIRC. You will be attacked at night, or in dim light, 70% of the time.
You will be attacked by 2-3 persons 70% of the time. Your attackers will likely be high on some sort of drug, or drunk, around 9 out of 10 times, or more.

I would look at situations that put you in such conditions, and do all I can to avoid them. If you can't do that, and some people can't, then I would start considering arming yourself in a manner that at least gives you a reasonable chance of survivial in such situations.

A 26, loaded with one magazine, would give you one shot on each attacker if 3 guys attack you. NOT good odds, but better then a sharp stick.

What are the odds you can reload in that situation? When it happened to me, not good. It was at point blank range. However, I did not have a gun to respond with.

Let me see if I can spare bandwidth with a concise response. You do realize that I was commenting on 2 different trials.....Grand Jury vs criminal? GJ trials are merely recommendations to charge or not, and details are generally not sealed. The homeowner was represented by private council at this hearing. This particular case, I was involved in and present in all proceedings. The homeowner's residence was unlocked and he claimed he "feared for his life because of the large number of weapons in his house", he had envisioned an elaborate plot to kill him and steal his collection valued at around $30,000, but this was neither proved or disproved in court. The Castle Doctrine was used repeatedly. The question of the gun list was brought up in the criminal trial by the suspects Defense Attorney, the PA did object, but it was allowed by the Judge. The question of "why 2 guns" was actually raised by a Grand Jury member at the end of the proceeding when the Jury was asked if there were any other questions that hadn't been asked. The County Prosecutor declined charging the homeowner, basically saying that the homeowners actions fell under the letter of the law, but weren't necessarily needed (my paraphrase). The pending civil case will be a nightmare for the homeowner.

LD
 
Posted by Lawdawg45: The homeowner was represented by private council at this hearing [Grand Jury].
That's most unusual. Where did this happen?

When a suspect is arrested and charged (like the example I quoted) the person representing him in criminal prosecution is a Defense Attorney, and his main job is to to make the suspect look like an angel...
Yep.

...and the witness like a crazed maniac.
Assuming that the witness is a witness for the prosecution or plaintiff, the defense attorney will try to discredit the testimony of the witness.

The question of the gun list was brought up in the criminal trial by the suspects Defense Attorney...

...In the criminal trial the homeowner was grilled by the Defense Attorney about his "fascination with guns", and had subpoenaed him for a complete list which was read in court. He was forced to explain to the Jury
That would clarify the confusion, were it not for this:

The County Prosecutor declined charging the homeowner, basically saying that the homeowners actions fell under the letter of the law,..
Then why was there a criminal trial?

I'm not sure where the confusion is with you, others, and the Moderator?
It lies in your concern for what the defense attorney would ask the defendant to explain. The questions were intended to support the defendant's case. Why worry about them?
 
Kleenbore,

As my info says, I'm in Indiana. Not sure why you're surprised that a person appearing before a Grand Jury is entitled to legal representation, especially private counsel? Can you imagine being represented by the DA's Office, then having a charging recommendation returned by the Grand Jury? The pool of Public Defender's is commonly seen as a group of sub-par or washed up Attorney's, and having appeared before this Jury myself, private counsel is not discouraged. The original charge against the suspect was residential entry, criminal trespass, assault (in Indiana this need not involve physical contact), and there was some chamber discussion of RICO charges, but they never developed.

Now if we could return to the heart of my posts here. The fact is that after the trigger is pulled, a long chain of justification and accountability issues are raised, from the investigating Officer, Prosecuting Attorney, Grand Jury, Criminal Jury, and finally in some cases a civil Jury. This forum and others does a first rate job of informing a person what weapon to buy, which ammo, which holster, which concealment clothing, and practice methods, but information on post shooting is rarely presented.;)

LD
 
Bought a G26 when they first came out. Used it as a BUG for my issue G17. Found I would only drop a few points on qualification compared to the G17. Was required to use a 9mm. .40 would be OK with me, too.

Not carrying a gun for work anymore. Added a +2 Glock mag bottom for 13 shots. Carry in the appendix position IWB. Seems to me the baby Glocks are the best for CCW where its hot, under a T-shirt. Would probably opt for a 19 or 23 under a jacket.

Generally carry a spare mag when out on the road, but not around town. Had a recent incident in FL where a CCW was forced to fight some BGs in a fast food place. He won but fired all 7 shots out of his 45. Said he was going to get an extra mag.

Also carry a Surefire 6P. Found that a light is very handy for a lot of things. The 6P can be used to blind and distract a perp, too.

Due to the recent shooting in the movie, I am considering adding a laser to the G26. Had one on the G17 and it did give an advantage indoors. Always worried a bit about this scenario as I am a bit of a film buff. A few people at the doors and you could become part of a captive audience.

For concealed carry, the size of the pistol is always a consideration. The G26 is the smallest pistol that I can make good hits with. With a good IWB holster it will disappear under a loose shirt.
I use the one from Andrews Custom Leather. Use of a good holster cannot be overstressed. It must hold the pistol on you under any conditions. Remember that you may be in a scuffle and those cheap holsters that rely on belt pressure can easily fail.

JMHO.
 
Posted by Lawdawg45: As my info says, I'm in Indiana. Not sure why you're surprised that a person appearing before a Grand Jury is entitled to legal representation, especially private counsel?
Well, because one is not represented by counsel before a Grand Jury in any jurisdiction of which I am aware.

And that appears to be the case in Indiana, also, as indicated here.

The key goal of the grand jury indictment process is to review the evidence supplied by the prosecution and to find out whether or not there is sufficient probability to advance forward with an indictment per the provisions of the Fifth Amendment.

An indictment is a formal accusation of a felony that is delivered by the grand jury proceedings after carefully taking into consideration the evidence that has been introduced by the prosecutor.....

If you have gotten a Grand Jury Indictment in Indianapolis, you need to have a lawyer represent you in your case. [(but)]....

...
Just as before, because you can’t be represented by a attorney in the grand jury room, your counsel is capable of a great deal to defend your interests in such ways as ....

The fact is that after the trigger is pulled, a long chain of justification and accountability issues are raised, from the investigating Officer, Prosecuting Attorney, Grand Jury, Criminal Jury, and finally in some cases a civil Jury.
Yes, indeed.

This forum and others does a first rate job of informing a person what weapon to buy, which ammo, which holster, which concealment clothing, and practice methods, but information on post shooting is rarely presented.
Actually, the subject comes up quite frequently.

This is posted among the stickies in ST&T.

So is this.

We often refer members to this.

This, published by one of our esteemed members, is on our recommended reading list. Book mark it and study it.
 
Well, because one is not represented by counsel before a Grand Jury in any jurisdiction of which I am aware.

And that appears to be the case in Indiana, also, as indicated here.



Yes, indeed.

Actually, the subject comes up quite frequently.

This is posted among the stickies in ST&T.

So is this.

We often refer members to this.

This, published by one of our esteemed members, is on our recommended reading list. Book mark it and study it.

I can't speak for your un-named state, but you perceive that because counsel cannot be present in the room during questioning, that representation isn't allowed. Routinely, counsel and client meet several times prior to the hearing and discuss the potential charges and responses. The link you provided also overwhelmingly suggested representation, not really sure why you included that link. Tell me why you wouldn't want legal representation/advice at a hearing that could potentially return an indictment against you:confused:

LD
 
Last edited:
The problem with discussing legal issues in this forum is they are state specific, as are the laws.
Here is a website that goes into the variety of functions grand juries have been used for, and in what states how they are used:
http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/stategj/stateg.htm
Click on the function button, and start reading. 25 states don't require grand juries to file charges. That is a task, and determination given to the District Attorney, usually an elected official.

These issues become political, because the court systems are run by elected officials, as a general rule. They then become specific to the area you are in, due to jury demographics, political trends in the area, etc.

My understanding is most grand jury testimony is sealed, and inadmissable
in the following court proceedings. YMMV.

I do wonder why this person has a problem, since The Castle Doctrine
in your state does protect home owners from invaders, and following civil suits?

I think the question arises in that most Grand Jury hearings do not allow counsel present in the court room. That does differ from being represented.
However, to some representation means present in court to help with testimony.
 
I can't speak for your un-named state, but you perceive that because counsel cannot be present in the room during questioning, that representation isn't allowed.
Poorly worded on my part. I meant to say that one cannot be represented by an attorney in the grand jury room.

The state is Indiana. I know of none that differ, among those in which Grand Juries exist.

Routinely, counsel and client meet several times prior to the hearing and discuss the potential charges and responses.
Yes, of course.

Tell me why you wouldn't want legal representation/advice at a hearing that could potentially return an indictment against you.
I would certainly like to have an attorney present, but I would have to settle for having my attorney advise me beforehand.

The link you provided also overwhelmingly suggested representation, not really sure why you included that link.
Because you had said "the homeowner was represented by private council at this hearing."

One can and certainly should retain an attorney before a Grand Jury hearing begins, but one should not expect to have the attorney present during the proceedings.

What the attorney can do during the pre-indictment stage is outlined in the link:

The counsel of a knowledgeable criminal defense attorney who specializes in Indianapolis Grand Jury Indictment proceedings, attention in the pre-indictment stage of the case can assist you in many ways, including the following:

* Clear up your role in the investigation: are you a witness, a subject, a person of interest or even the main target?

* Give you advice about your grand jury testimony or production of documents, records and other evidence

* Reply to your specific questions regarding the right against self-incrimination, which includes whether or not to “plead the Fifth”

* Avoid the mistakes that can result in obstruction of justice charges

* Begin a parallel investigation of the facts that will help persuade the prosecution to downplay your own part in the alleged offenses

* Discourage the prosecution from trying to get the most serious possible charges against you

Back to the point:
  • A defendant should worry about what he may be asked by a prosecutor or by a plaintiff's attorney, if he or she elects to take the stand in a defense of justification, but the defense attorney's questions will be designed to further the defendant's case.
  • Yes, the suspect's (or defendant's) choice of armament, training record, and Internet postings can influence minds during the legal process, up to and including criminal and civil trials; however, I would not expect the fact that a defendant has practiced shooting at targets at a particular distance to put a defendant at a material disadvantage.
 
The problem with discussing legal issues in this forum is they are state specific, as are the laws.
Here is a website that goes into the variety of functions grand juries have been used for, and in what states how they are used:
http://campus.udayton.edu/~grandjur/stategj/stateg.htm
Click on the function button, and start reading. 25 states don't require grand juries to file charges. That is a task, and determination given to the District Attorney, usually an elected official.

These issues become political, because the court systems are run by elected officials, as a general rule. They then become specific to the area you are in, due to jury demographics, political trends in the area, etc.

My understanding is most grand jury testimony is sealed, and inadmissable
in the following court proceedings. YMMV.

I do wonder why this person has a problem, since The Castle Doctrine
in your state does protect home owners from invaders, and following civil suits?


I think the question arises in that most Grand Jury hearings do not allow counsel present in the court room. That does differ from being represented.
However, to some representation means present in court to help with testimony.
I did fail to mention that the suspect was unarmed, not even a pocket knife, and he was 100lbs soaking wet. The court felt that his presence in the home didn't necessarily present a life threatening danger, and his Defense Attorney did a respectable job of making the homeowner look fanatical.........with plenty of ammunition provided from the homeowner.

LD
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top