Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Wright

[STATE] The People v. Wallace Gibson

Recommended Posts

"I was working my regular shift, when I saw three males scale the wall behind the gas station that leads onto John Paul street. As one of the men wearing a red tank top approached me he pulled a pistol out and aimed it towards me and my colleagues. Ordered me to stay still as I recall, his two friends ran in the gas station and then ran back out. One of them had the cash register in his hands. All three of them ran back the way they came, hopping the wall. I heard a car engine leave and that's about it... I was scared for mine and my colleagues lives."

*Andrew appears nervous when telling the story.*

 

(( @Wright

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The prosecution would like to reiterate case law on this matter where a toy gun is considered a dangerous weapon, citing United States v. Medved, United States v. Cannon, United States v. Martinez-Jimenez, and United States v. Perry:

 

"The reason provided by the courts prior is that "[a] robber who carries a toy gun during the commission of a bank robbery creates some of the same risks as those created by one who carries an unloaded or inoperable genuine gun. First, the robber subjects victims to greater apprehension. Second, the robber requires law enforcement agencies to formulate a more deliberate, and less efficient, response in light of the need to counter the apparent direct and immediate threat to human life. Third, the robber creates a likelihood that the reasonable response of police and guards will include the use of deadly force. The increased chance of an armed response creates a greater risk to the physical security of victims, bystanders, and even the perpetrators. Therefore, the greater harm that a robber creates by deciding to carry a toy gun is similar to the harm that he creates by deciding to carry an unloaded gun.'"

 

Even if this argument is to be dismissed, the defense has provided no proof of this being a toy gun, nor have they provided the alleged toy gun to the courts. It is therefore obvious a real gun was used, especially after one of Mr. Gibson's associates opened fire on police and the other threw his weapon into the bush when evading police. The defense is lying by omission to try and prove a point which will not work here.

 

Additionally, our witness has outlined to us the facts of the case: he believed it to be a real weapon, there was no indication of it being fake (orange tip, etc) and they invoked fear into the gas station attendants."

 

"Thank you, your Honor."

 

(( @ThatGuy @JameZ ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your honor, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to prove without a doubt that the firearm in question is real. The case the prosecution cited mentions how it's dangerous to utilize a toy gun for such purposes, however it does not warrant to charging the individual with possession as in conjunction with the San Andreas Penal Code.

 

Additionally, the witness is not a professional that has experience or knowledge to determine whether it was a real firearm or not and that simply asks for speculation. The defense would like to motion for a summary judgment at this point your honor."

 

(( @ThatGuy ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judgment

 

Spoiler

ybpo8xbw

SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

 

 


 

Judgment

Court of San Andreas, District of Los Santos

 

In the matter of The People vs Wallace Gibson

 

The court finds as a result of the evidence provided, especially with the landmark case McLaughlin v. United States taken into consideration;

 

The defendant is found guilty of;

  • WF001 - Drawing, Exhibiting or Using (Brandishing) a Firearm or Weapon
  • WF002 - Carrying a Unlicensed Firearm or Weapon
  • WF005 - Assault with a Firearm
  • GF006 - Armed Robbery

The defendant is found not-guilty of;

  • WF009 - Possession of Illegal Firearms/Weapons
    • (( With the distinction between possession and carrying, this is not being stacked for obvious reasons. ))

-and hereby sentenced to be released on time served and pay a fine of $10,000.

 

(( @JameZ @Wright ))

Edited by ThatGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and follow our Guidelines.