After the verdict was read, Judge Ammons gave Mr. Hines some advice.The Pistolero illustrates a case of "judicial malpractice.'
"Take that concealed weapon permit and turn it in to the Sheriff's Office - you don't need it," Judge Ammons said. "If the gun is returned to you, go sell it. You don't need it."
He's being charitable in his assessment.
9 comments:
Contemptuous court of arbitrary, and unconstitutional rule, is more like it.
All of the intended 'checks & balances' are gone. We are being ruled by the 'passions' and prejudices of men, rather than the rule of law. The True intent of the Constitution now exists only in memory and history books....
Obviously, someone should say to the judge "Find someone to give that gavel to--you don't need it." The prosecuting attorney is clearly on some kind of vendetta, as well.
What I'm curious about is the fact that apparently North Carolina law provides the judge with the power to confiscate a firearm from someone who was found not guilty of any wrongdoing. Does anyone know the wording of that particular law? Are there many other states with such laws? Of course the judge's actions are unconscionable, but perhaps the deeper problem is that he even has the power to take those actions.
Where do we pitch in to replace this guy's stolen property?
Take those judicial robes and that gavel, and shove them up your ass, judge, you don't need them. Go get yerself a nice black suit with a Sam Brown belt, black service cap, and some knee boots, black. Then Sieg Heil and get down on your knees and slobber all over a picture of your Fuhrer, Rebbeca Peters. Punk.
Wild Deuce said...
"Where do we pitch in to replace this guy's stolen property?"
I think that's a great idea. I hope to see such a fund started. I can't afford much, but if enough of us chipped in even $5 or $10 apiece, it could go a long way to a pretty nice pistola.
Sounds to me like a better investment than buying him a gun would be to help with his appeal--that's the Catch 22 the judge gave him--the gun will be destroyed unless he spends more than its worth in legal fees fighting it.
David Codrea said...
"Sounds to me like a better investment than buying him a gun would be to help with his appeal--that's the Catch 22 the judge gave him--the gun will be destroyed unless he spends more than its worth in legal fees fighting it."
I like that idea, too. Hell--we could call it the Brad Hines Defense Fund, and he can decide for himself whether to spend it on legal fees, or firearms. Either way, I would really like it to happen.
I Got ten bucks in my sweaty little palm, where to send it? Anybody else in?
Here's the website that includes contact info for his lawyer if you want to pursue this:
http://www.harnettlaw.com/
Post a Comment