Mayor Is Barred From Testifying In Guns Suit

Discussion in 'Firearm Related News' started by GGReporter, May 24, 2008.

  1. GGReporter

    GGReporter Moderator

    At a hearing yesterday, the judge, Jack Weinstein of U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, explained his decision to keep the mayor off the witness stand by saying, "I`m not going to turn the case into a media circus for either side," according to a partial transcript.

  2. neophyte

    neophyte Wonderment :) Forum Contributor

    Mayor should Testify

    GGReporter: Sir; Chicken Squat! Mayor's started it; should stay in it to the finish. Poor Georgia boy taken on by this GREAT CITY LEADER:34:Squat.

  3. I thought one has the right to confront one's accuser in a court of law! Oh yeah, I forgit, it's Hizhonour we talkin 'bout he ain't gotta lower hisself to th level of a poor workin stiff.
  4. patrick70

    patrick70 G&G Addict

    Judge Jack Weinstein is an ANTI-GUN, GOOD BUDDIE OF MICHAEL BLOOMBERG, that's why.
  5. Are you people serious? That was a good ruling from the judge; sounds to me like he takes his job seriously.

    Think about it? Hizzoner isn't the accuser; there's no such thing in a civil trial. And it isn't the mayor's job to take the stand anyway. If he ordered the city to sue slumlords, would you expect him to personally testify, or would you expect the officials who administer the building and safety codes to testify?

    Patrick, you totally missed the point here: the Mayor WANTED to testify. He was COUNTING on testifying. He was planning to turn this into a trial by the media instead of a trial by the law, and the judge put a cork in his plans. You should be thanking that judge, not calling him names...
    Last edited: May 25, 2008
  6. patrick70

    patrick70 G&G Addict

    I read about a year ago that Judge WEINSTEIN was a big time ANTI-GUNNER and that he was tight with Bloomberg.I figured Bloomberg wanted to avoid the stand because he has performed illegal sting type operations,and its likely he will lose this case.
  7. TXplt

    TXplt Gun Toting Boeing Driver Forum Contributor

    I don't know--it could be a good ruling. I really don't trust this guy--he's the one who allowed a lawsuit to move forward despite a clear violation of the PLCAA -- he didn't let his duty to the law get in the way of his anit-gun agenda in this case. The case was later reversed upon appeal. It seems to me he has no problems legislating from the bench when it comes to anti-gun silliness--why reform now ? It could well be him properly doing his job in this particular instance; it could also be out of fear the folliness of the anti-gun sham will be exposed, hizzoner having to defend indefensible actions, hizzoner publically embarrassed, and potential charges of criminal conspiracy against hizzoner. In other words, the media coverage might not go very well for bloomer, expecially if he trips up. Maybe the judge is playing poker ?

    If bloomberg did attempt to set up straw sales (for whatever reason) he's committed a federal crime. This is wrong--it's no more OK to do this to prove a point than it's OK to hold up a bank to prove the alarm's not working properly. Although I think it unlikely--unfortunately in modern day America some priviledged few are above the law--he should be prosecuted for his actions. I wonder if this trial will bring this into the public view ?
    Last edited: May 25, 2008
  8. If there's a Prosecuter with any Balls he'll indict his honor the mayor.
    BTW, what the Hell has happened to States' Rights? If I caught a Mayor from out of State doing that in my Precinct I'd have filed on him.
  9. The judge could have serious anti-gun leanings; if I remember right, he's the one that gun people and tobacco people generally try to avoid. But that's not the same as being willing to let the Mayor use his courtroom as the stage for his political grandstanding.

    I don't think there's much doubt Bloomberg wanted to turn this into one grand photo-op for himself; he's actually proud of his shenanigans, instead of being properly ashamed. The judge quite properly pointed out that the city didn't need its chief executive officer on the stand to explain things any mid-level city official could cover, and removed him from the witness list.
    Last edited: May 25, 2008
  10. patrick70

    patrick70 G&G Addict

    Yeah,but I don't think Bloomberg wanted to take the stand in this case since he can be proven wrong in the public eye.What he did was illegal and he just wants it to go away.
  11. i hate bloomberg he is a dip crap . excuse my french .
  12. patrick70

    patrick70 G&G Addict

    Oh, he's awful.Among the worst of the anti-gunners,and Weinstein is right
    there with him
  13. No, he doesn't want it to go away, or he'd have offered the gun shop some dead-easy terms to settle the case and get it off the news. He's still bent on turning it into a publicity stunt, and that's why he was on the witness list the city submitted.

    You have to realize that he still doesn't think he did anything wrong. To him, everyone else was wrong...he lives in an out-of-touch, insulated world, and actually thinks the average American is going to be impressed with what he did, instead of being disgusted.

    And it's very rare indeed for law enforcement agencies or the officials who give them orders to be charged with a crime when they step outside their jurisdiction. Usually the worst that happens is that any criminal charges they've developed as a result get thrown out of court, and a judge gives them a lecture.

    Mind you, Patrick, I'm not saying that's the way it ought to be. Like you, I would've loved to see the good mayor and his staff get hung out to dry for their little stunt.
  14. patrick70

    patrick70 G&G Addict

    So Bloomberg is really gonna stick to his guns on this one,I stand corrected,I gotta start following this stuff more closely.Thanks for the info.