But there are still gun grabbers
even in my great state, including Delegate Joe Morrissey, who made news the
other day brandishing an AK-47 on the floor of the House of Delegates. You can watch video footage of it here:
As you can see, while brandishing
the gun, he actually put his thumb over the trigger. In fact, I believe I see it wiggling over the
trigger which makes any responsible gun owner get the willies. Now, he says it was unloaded, and it was
always pointed upward, but that is still simply bad gun safety and indeed
might even be illegal. Still in and
of itself, mosty it was just a silly stunt, akin to David Gregory waving that
magazine around on national television.
And that got people digging a little
deeper into Mr. Morrissey’s background, and let’s just say its, um,
colorful. From the Daily
Caller:
[W]hile Morrissey
introduced a gun-control bill Thursday aimed at reducing criminal violence in
Virginia, he has a history that involves physical violence of another kind.
Morrissey paid a man
$500,000 in 2007 to settle a 2002 court judgment against him, related to a 1999
physical assault.
According to legal
brief filed by the victim’s attorneys, Morrissey shouted, “I’m going to kill
you. I’m going to beat your head in,” before beating the victim and “smash[ing]
his head into the corner of a brick wall.”
The 2003 revocation
of Morrissey’s law license followed that courtroom reckoning, but by then his
disciplinary record in the legal profession was already a lengthy one.
After he applied for
the reinstatement of his law license, the Virginia State Bar listed a litany of
Morrissey’s misdeeds when it published his petition.
It forced him to
attend legal ethics training after he represented a criminal defendant in the
same case in which he had previously prosecuted him. Another reprimand came for
engaging in a fist fight with a defense attorney whose client he was
prosecuting.
In 1999, the bar
suspended Morrissey’s law license again, this time for three years, after he
made “public statements about the identity, testimony or credibility of
prospective witnesses” in a federal court case.
Morrissey was
convicted on two counts of contempt of court in that case, and sentenced to 90
days in jail plus three years of probation. The U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia also disbarred him, effectively denying him future
access to plead cases in federal court.
In a separate case
that contributed to that suspension of his law license, Morrissey was cited for
contempt in Chesterfield County, Va. after he directed an angry outburst at a
judge during a sentencing hearing.
After he was
released from jail, Morrissey violated the terms of his probation by
“attempting to circumvent the conditions of probation and lying to [his]
probation officer,” according to the Virginia State Bar. As a result, he spent
an additional 90 days in jail and his law license was formally revoked.
The bar issued a
recommendation to the Supreme Court of Virginia in May 2011, arguing that
Morrissey’s petition for reinstatement should be denied. The court disagreed,
ruling in December 2011 that he could have his law license back after ten years
of disbarment.
Indeed, you can read that recommendation,
here. It was indeed unanimous. I suggest you read the whole lurid
thing. You will really be surprised that
the Virginia Supreme Court reinstated him after all he had done. And it adds some things you might not
know. For one, he has been convicted of
assault and battery following one of his fist-fights. Most lawyers, of course, would perk their
ears up upon hearing that, making you wonder if it was legal to possess such a
firearm after such a conviction.
Well, under 18 U.S.C. §924 of the
US Code, it is illegal for a violent felon (among other categories of persons)
to posses a firearm, but a violent felon is defined in relevant part as a
person convicted of an offense “punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding
one year.” As of today, assault and battery
in Virginia carries a possible punishment of no more than a year. So literally it misses the cut off by a split
second, meaning that if the possible term of punishment was for one
split-second more than a year he would have been disqualified from ever
possessing a gun again.
And there is speculation that he
may or may not have been concealing that weapon, which is of course legal if he
has a concealed carry permit. But there
is some room for doubt on this point. On
one hand, people who have been convicted of any
assault and battery are barred from obtaining a concealed carry permit... if
the conviction was in the last three years.
But on top of that, there is also this restriction:
An individual who
the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, based on specific acts by
the applicant, is likely to use a weapon unlawfully or negligently to endanger
others. The sheriff, chief of police, or attorney for the Commonwealth may submit
to the court a sworn written statement indicating that, in the opinion of such
sheriff, chief of police, or attorney for the Commonwealth, based upon a
disqualifying conviction or upon the specific acts set forth in the statement,
the applicant is likely to use a weapon unlawfully or negligently to endanger
others. The statement of the sheriff, chief of police, or the attorney for the
Commonwealth shall be based upon personal knowledge of such individual or of a
deputy sheriff, police officer, or assistant attorney for the Commonwealth of
the specific acts, or upon a written statement made under oath before a notary
public of a competent person having personal knowledge of the specific acts.
In other words, the statute has
lots of specific and well-drawn examples of people they will not allow a
concealed carry permit for, and in case
they missed anything, they have this too.
Because sometimes a person is dangerous, but they don’t fall into the
various neat categories of dangerousness.
And if you go through that entire report from the disciplinary
committee, you will know that he really doesn’t sound like the kind of guy who should
be granted a concealed carry permit. In
addition to the two fist-fights—one of which was in a courtroom during a
criminal trial—he has also been disciplined for outbursts in court and even threatening
a judge. Yes, really. I
tracked down the threatening claim and here’s what happened. Apparently a judge was very harsh on one of
his subordinates when he was working as a Commonwealth’s Attorney (what we call
a District Attorney in Virginia) and there was apparently a dispute that
resulted in this letter:
Dear Mr. Driscoll:
Let me break in for a
moment. Driscoll is a judge. Moving on:
It has been brought
to my attention, by several individuals, that you were both highly critical of,
and abusive towards, Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney, [S.B.], Monday morning,
June 17, 1991.
I am omitting the name of the
Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney involved.
I don’t want to embarrass the man more than necessary. Moving on:
Apparently, during
the case of Commonwealth v. Silva, you severely rebuked Mr. [B.] for not having
Sargeant material available. Additionally, I was told that you used your
position (i.e. substitute Judge) to generally criticize the Richmond
Commonwealth's Attorney's Office.
Please be advised
that on his own volition, Mr. [B.] drove to Henrico County on Friday, June 14,
1991 in order to obtain one packet of Sargeant material. Additionally, he
called the Southside Clerk's Office on two occasions to get the second packet
of Sargeant material. Unfortunately, the Southside Clerk's office was unable to
get the Sargeant material to Mr. [B.] as quickly as Mr. [B.] would have liked.
Accordingly, your criticism of Mr. [B.], including your caustic and derogatory
remarks from the bench, were entirely uncalled for.
Mr. [B.], former Law
Clerk for Justice Poff on the Virginia Supreme Court, was described by everyone
in the Court Room on June 17 as thoroughly prepared, extremely competent and
most courteous. He did not deserve your verbal lambasting.
In the future,
should you have any criticism of this Office or specifically, one of My [sic]
Assistant Commonwealth's Attorneys, you are directed to set up an appointment
with Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney, William H. Parcell, III so that you can
voice your complaints in a more professional manner.
Finally, five police
officers and one attorney observed the colloquy between you and me in the
Courtroom. Although I was unfailingly courteous to you, it was evident to
everybody that you were trying to bait me—perhaps so you could hold me in
contempt. Please be assured Mr. Driscoll
that if that behavior ever, ever, happens again, I will not be so kind as to
merely draft you a letter of indignation.
Sincerely yours, /s/
Joseph D. Morrissey Joseph D. Morrissey Commonwealth's Attorney
(Emphasis added.) Now that italicized line might be a threat to
do something legal, such as filing disciplinary charges against the judge in
question, or something to that effect.
But it’s plainly a threat, and therefore troubling.
So reading all of that above, plainly
this was almost “performance art” where Mr. Morrissey very successfully
advocated for stricter gun laws, by brandishing a gun in an unsafe manner, and having
a background that would make any person nervous about letting him have a gun.
Or you can take Glenn Reynolds of
Instapundit’s spin, describing this as “Further support for my theory that
these people favor gun controls because they assume that others are as unstable
as themselves[.]” That might be it, too.
But if he is an argument against
free gun ownership, there is something in his background that equally makes one
believe that we must have the right to bear arms. But that will be the subject of the next
post.
---------------------------------------
My wife and I have lost our jobs
due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an
attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up
to ten years. I know that claim sounds
fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these
claims using documentary and video evidence.
If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin
accountable, please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right. And thank you.
Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing,
mostly for snark and site updates. And
you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent
History here.
And you can read a little more about my novel, here.
---------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
I have accused some people,
particularly Brett Kimberlin, of
reprehensible conduct. In some cases, the conduct is even
criminal. In all cases, the only justice I want is through the
appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system. I do not want to see vigilante violence
against any person or any threat of such violence. This kind of conduct is not only morally
wrong, but it is counter-productive.
In the particular case of Brett
Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him. Do not call him. Do not write him a letter. Do not write him an email. Do not text-message him. Do not engage in any kind of directed
communication. I say this in part
because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want
that to happen to him.
And for that matter, don’t go on
his property. Don’t sneak around and try
to photograph him. Frankly try not to
even be within his field of vision. Your
behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to
mention trespass and other concerns).
And do not contact his
organizations, either. And most of all, leave his family alone.
The only exception to all that is
that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with
contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might
report. And even then if he tells you to
stop contacting him, obey that request. That
this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that
a person asks you to stop and you refuse.
And let me say something
else. In my heart of hearts, I don’t
believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above. But if any of you have, stop it, and if you
haven’t don’t start.
No comments:
Post a Comment