Oregon Michael Strickland, guilty of 21 counts

[CoastRange57]

If there ever was a truly shi* thread this is it.

In fear for his life ??? Horsesh*t.

In all the pictures he clearly had a chance to run from any perceived threat that would have required him to draw a weapon. All this has done is take balanced arguments for concealed carry away.

 

[3MTA3]

Oh Jesus, where do I begin?

First, lets stop with the "Yup, like I sez, Portland is just anti-gun, yup yup yup."

I knew that little punk when he was a kid, back in the early '80's, up in Alaska. He once flame-threw his sister with a giant squirt-gun, causing her severe burns on her arm.

I even called up the Portland Deputy DA, giving her what background I knew on Strickland, letting her know that although I was a hard 2nd Amend. supporter, I felt that Strickland shouldn't be anywhere near firearms, and should be put away.

This is in addition to the physical threat he represented at PCC campuses, and in front of KBOO radio (Yeah, a community hippie station, but if you want radiation monitoring updates the next time Japan goes nuclear, you might want to tune-in to them).

I always knew that little punk would make the news.

Obvious troll ignored. Bye-bye obvious troll

 

[Koda]

In what context?

There are lots of variables, but in general, under ORS, if the party is attempting to disengage and there is no unlawful force being used against you, then you do not have a right to use deadly force against them. You can use force to make an arrest and any reasonable force including deadly force, but it's a jury/judge who ultimately decides if it was reasonable and we see how that went.

Plain English: if bad guy stops being a threat, you shouldn't shoot him. This assumes you know he's no longer a threat, which takes mental processing and such.

Every state in the US has areas where one action would be considered reasonable and another part of the state where it wouldn't. DA's and Judges interpret the law different or we wouldn't end up with case law. I hope Stickland and the OFF take this to the Appeals Court and the to the Oregon Supreme Court if needed. I'd like to point out that trial courts don't make case law, another judge in another trial can look to another case for an opinion, but it's not case law that all trial judges are instructed to follow.


The Multnomah County Sheriff may be a political hack, (I don't know), but he's an elected Sheriff, not an appointed by the city council one.

Oregon is not a "Stand your ground state", nor is it a "Duty to retreat" state. It's that in between where force must be objectively reasonable. Case law at one time made it into a duty to retreat state and then that was struck down by a different set of case law which took away the duty to retreat. You have no duty to retreat, but if you don't get ot be the primary aggressor either.

In the context of this case, they were attacking Strickland because he was walking away.

 

[TheShanMan]

Didn't have time to read all posts but after the first few pages and last few I gotta say I'm so disappointed in what I'm reading from supposedly 2A proponents. This was a travesty. I will be donating to OFF to support an appeal: Vendetta

 

[Cigarlvr313]

It is amazing the level of ignorance of some posters here who had no idea what happened at the event or the trial. By the way, there was no jury. Knowing NOTHING, countless "gun" people are eager to throw another gun owner under the bus. This is shameful.

Thank you for all that you and OFF do my friend. You are 100% correct and you know as well as I do if the shoe were on the other foot "they" would want you in their corner. Keep up the excellent work.....I support your efforts and thank you for all you do. Best of luck in the coming battles.

 

[tionico]

I believe in self defense walking down a street and having some put me or my family in jeopardy is a perfect example of time for self defense. Walking up to someone antagonizing then pulling a gun when they respond is not self defense. My actions in the second situation caused the problem and escalated it. Strickland knew the demonstrators knew who he was and I bet knew how they would respond
It's the equivalent of having Rosie O Donnell show up at a Trump rally she would have been as welcomed as Strickland was. It is amazing to me that one person could have prevented this and every other official is wrong.

walking up the street and up to someone and antagonizing them then pulling a gun is one thing, walking up the street and being accosted by a signficant number of angry, masked people threatening, armed with poles, etc, shoving you, pushing you, making verbal threat, now all that is something entirely different.

Neither yuo nor I were there.... but from what I've seen and heard, the second above is fairly accurate.

WHY are these troublemakers out there intimidating and threatening folks anyway? It was precisely this sort of individuals and group that caused a few billion damage in Portland, trashed fifteen or twenty cars at a dealership, beat up quite a number, broke into ahd raided businesses, broke huge glass windows, threw firebombs, molotov cocktails.... drove others off the street....

as I asked above, how much farther should Mr. Strickland have allowed things to go before the situatioin was "there"? This is a serious question needing an answer, not a rhetorical questioni to blow off. WHERE IS THE LINE? I don't want to find out, nor to get arrested and tossed away should I be forced to defend myself against some of these mob creeps. Remember, too, a large number of these louts were imported specifically for these riots. I haven't heard, but out of the hundred plus arrected, HOW MANY are from the immediate Portland area, how many from more than a hundred miles away? What is there story as to how they got to Portland? Many were "hired" and their transportation and lodging paid for by..... SOMEONE.

I also asked earlier.. have ANY of the ten or so easily identified "victims" been charged with their own assault upon this man? Unwanted touching is assault.. they DID push and shove him,, physical contact, definitely unwanted. Apparently they did not back down until he produced his weapon. One more case of a Defensive Gun Use where the weapon was not fired, yet acheived the desired effect.... the "dialing down" of a very threatening situation.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

I attended a Law seminar at Threat Dynamics in Tualatin this past weekend.
Andrew Branca taught us the law of self defense according to Oregon and Washington.

Trial court convicted Mr Strickland of various violations of the law.
Indictment
I recall hearing sentencing will happen in May
Appeals court will not re-try the case.
It searches for errors made during the trial.
If the appeals court finds for Mr Strickland, he will be re-tried.

How was the class? Did you take the simulator? Did Andrew Branca give any opinion about the Strickland case?

Good to know about the Appeals Court. Errors made during the trial? As in procedures or rights to a fair trail denied? Let's see DA and media tainting the jury pool. Refusal for a change of venue. Not a jury of his peers. The judge sealing the defendants point of view video recording. The surprise expert witness for the state allowed to testify at the END of the trail without the defense being able to dispose him, and finally the judge handing down a verdict with no deliberation within 60 seconds of the surprise expert witness vacating the stand clearly indicating that he had already made up his mind in advance!!!

 

[woody06]

Po box 556
Can by, Or97013

Go to the link above, click about, then contact

Thanks. Check will go out in tomorrows mail.

 

[Who The F R U]

When the hell was the last time someone actually faced a jury of their peers.
Or was it just some random Azholes that got chosen.

If you don't know what the word actually means google it.

Man I'm mad at this guy and the whole situation.

* No other option *
At the point I'm going to pull its going all the way.
Not going to be a good day for anyone.

Alot of guy's get tough guy syndrome when they carry but I don't know if this was one of them.
Why was this guy even down there?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

When the hell was the last time someone actually faced a jury of their peers.
Or was it just some random Azholes that got chosen.

Having been twice on a jury ... it is not "some random Azholes the got chosen."
We were asked questions by both lawyers and it not unlike a job interview.
They ( the lawyers) obviously wanted certain folks on the jury ...but it was anything but random.

Oddly enough both times for me ... I'm pretty sure my experiences in the Army and with firearms were among the reasons that caused me to be selected.
Andy

 

[Goosebrown]

Michael Strickland is the Jack Kavorkian of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

His sentence maybe harsh, but he provoked this 100%. He is sleeping in the bed he made.

 

[etrain16]

Having been twice on a jury ... it is not "some random Azholes the got chosen."
We were asked questions by both lawyers and it not unlike a job interview.
They ( the lawyers) obviously wanted certain folks on the jury ...but it was anything but random.

Oddly enough both times for me ... I'm pretty sure my experiences in the Army and with firearms were among the reasons that caused me to be selected.
Andy

From what I've read, his attorney passed on the jury trial as during jury selection a question was asked about whether folks liked guns or thought people should carry them and, as I recall, a full 1/3 of the potential jurors indicated they had an issue with guns and with carrying. Since they can only waive so many jurors, it appeared unlikely they were going to get a fair jury trial. Unfortunately it appears they got an activist judge trying the case, so bad news. It sucks that a change of venue request was rejected. Considering the bias that appears to have been present, I would hope that alone would be cause for an appeal - he couldn't get a fair trial in that setting. I am hoping for this and hope it backfires on Portland/Multco.

Side note on the jury thing. I've been summoned 4 times for jury duty, twice while Clackamas County still required you to serve for 1 month at a time (calling in each day to see if you have to report). To date, I've never served on a trial, nor even been taken in to be questioned for jury selection. As far as I know, jury duty involves sitting in a waiting room for hours then going home

 

[Andy54Hawken]

As far as I know, jury duty involves sitting in a waiting room for hours then going home

It can ... and that is boring ( bring a book )
But ....
If you get a trial ... then it gets interesting.

I went both times to trial and we the jury had to decide someone's fate.
Not something I "enjoyed" but would do again ...As it is my duty.
I would hope the people who have this duty look at all aspects of the issue they are deciding.
One needs to be willing to hear all points of view and put aside personal likes and dislikes to be as impartial as they can be.
Andy

 

[etrain16]

It can ... and that is boring ( bring a book )
But ....
If you get a trial ... then it gets interesting.

I went both times to trial and we the jury had to decide someone's fate.
Not something I "enjoyed" but would do again ...As it is my duty.
I would hope the people who have this duty look at all aspects of the issue they are deciding.
One needs to be willing to hear all points of view and put aside personal likes and dislikes to be as impartial as they can be.
Andy

Everyone deserves, has a right to, a fair trial. If there is any suspicion that a bias exists heavily to one side or another in a jury pool or it's suspected that bias is present in the court/judge itself, then a change of venue request should be immediately approved. Denying it in this case, I believe, denied him his right to a fair trial.

I also think too many folks have a hard time understanding and being truly impartial. I think that's evidenced by some of the strongly put opinions in this thread. There are at least 2 sides to every story, we should at least be able to talk about it and debate it before our minds are fully made up.

I hold out hope for an appeal, I think he deserves it, especially based on how this whole thing went down.

 

[etrain16]

I was also going to point out that a fair trial is possible in this area. Look at the Bundy's - they were found not guilty to the surprise of just about everyone. But that wasn't a Multco court, that was US District Court - and I don't know how they get their jury pool for those trials - I'm guessing the pool is pulled from more than Multnomah county? Anyone know?

 

[JRuby]

I have served on the Multinomah grand jury for a whole month a very long time it seemed. Heard about 123 cases. If it doesn't make it through the grand jury it normally will not get tried. So before a case goes to trial it has been reviewed at least once. Meaning a group of five people weighed in on it and the jury hears the case. That is unless the individual waves his rights.

Never really want to set in another grand jury we saw the worst of mankind. It was an eye opener

 

[tionico]

When the hell was the last time someone actually faced a jury of their peers.
Or was it just some random Azholes that got chosen.

If you don't know what the word actually means google it.

Man I'm mad at this guy and the whole situation.

* No other option *
At the point I'm going to pull its going all the way.
Not going to be a good day for anyone.

Alot of guy's get tough guy syndrome when they carry but I don't know if this was one of them.
Why was this guy even down there?

from what I've seen on this, out of the pool of 30 possibles, the first nine were adamantly against fireararms and the right to carry. Defence counsel decided that would not make a fair jury and opted for judge only. Of course, in Portland its some pathetic odds of getting a fair judge when it comes to anything gun related. This one MUST go to appeal, there are a number of things that weren't right... they moved for a change of venue to get it out of the Portland cesspool.. motioin denied. That is a RIGHT, whenever an accused FEELS he can't get a fair trial in one court, to get it moved to another. It is a routine thing. This corrupt judge had his mind made up he was gonna "teech thet boah uh LESSun.


You claim he had plenty of opportunity to "get out of there". Reading more of the story and analisis of the videoa, he HAD turned to get away, out into a more open arera where he'd not be so trapped. THAT is when some of the aggressors flanked him, some on each side, tried to come round in front to (apparently_ impede his escape. When they continued closing in, he drew..... Something else... NOWHERE is anyone REQUIRED to retreat from a place where he is lawfully entitled to be.. as in, public sidewalks in downtown Portland. As to "why was he there", well, the guy is a reporter. Something was happening, he wanted to report on what was happening. What's "wrong" with that?
Personally, I haven't been in downtown Portland since the election. The way things have been going, I might not be there for a while. Seems the gorillas have escaped the zoo and are on the rampage.

 

[Who The F R U]

Having been twice on a jury ... it is not "some random Azholes the got chosen."
We were asked questions by both lawyers and it not unlike a job interview.
They ( the lawyers) obviously wanted certain folks on the jury ...but it was anything but random.

Oddly enough both times for me ... I'm pretty sure my experiences in the Army and with firearms were among the reasons that caused me to be selected.
Andy

______________________________________________________________________
So you knew , worked or were an acquaintance or in the same social / professional circle?
That is Peer.
Not some one who gets a letter for Jury duty that was the point. You were the random guy.

 

[rick benjamin]

How was the class? Did you take the simulator? Did Andrew Branca give any opinion about the Strickland case?

Good to know about the Appeals Court. Errors made during the trial? As in procedures or rights to a fair trail denied? Let's see DA and media tainting the jury pool. Refusal for a change of venue. Not a jury of his peers. The judge sealing the defendants point of view video recording. The surprise expert witness for the state allowed to testify at the END of the trail without the defense being able to dispose him, and finally the judge handing down a verdict with no deliberation within 60 seconds of the surprise expert witness vacating the stand clearly indicating that he had already made up his mind in advance!!!

The Simulator
Was my first exposure, very impressed. Shoot, don't shoot. Pepper Spray. Critique
The Class
Filled with OR WA case facts
Mr Branca didn't comment on the Strickland issues, case still open, no trial transcripts to consult.
Was careful to speak of LAW, not PERCEPTIONS of LAW.
Used many examples from the George Zimmerman case.
The Prosecutor can say ANYTHING ex "HIS GUN HAD A ROUND IN THE CHAMBER!" Fact, legal, but with intensity could have swayed jury to believe it was somehow wrong.
Judge chooses what evidence to include or exclude, chooses Jury instructions.
Zimmerman's cost. He observed that even though the defendant was found not guilty,
It broke Zimmerman, PTSD, finance, marrage.

My brain is in process sorting all the many facts.

 

[rick benjamin]

Lessons from Zimmerman