View Full Version : Cop’s AR-15 Dust Cover Inscription Used Against Him in Court
Amp Mangum
03-17-16, 20:00
The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said Shaver was on his hands and knees when Brailsford shot him five times inside a Mesa hotel. The gun used was a personal AR-15 assault weapon that had been approved for service use by the Mesa Police Department. However, Mesa police noted that their investigation of the shooting turned up a vulgar inscription on the rifle that doesn’t meet department policy.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/03/robert-farago/cops-ar-15-dust-cover-inscription-used-against-him-in-court/
Looks like the ejection port is correct...he is f@cked.:)
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-17-16, 20:16
The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said Shaver was on his hands and knees when Brailsford shot him five times inside a Mesa hotel. The gun used was a personal AR-15 assault weapon that had been approved for service use by the Mesa Police Department. However, Mesa police noted that their investigation of the shooting turned up a vulgar inscription on the rifle that doesn’t meet department policy.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/03/robert-farago/cops-ar-15-dust-cover-inscription-used-against-him-in-court/
Yes he is.
ETA: great minds think alike, and so do AirHaz and me.
The question is:
Would he be in the same position without that dust cover?
I'd say, probably, considering he was released without bond.
SomeOtherGuy
03-17-16, 20:26
The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said Shaver was on his hands and knees when Brailsford shot him five times inside a Mesa hotel.
It the prosecutor believes that, he should be charged with first degree murder and should not be allowed any bail, much less let out with no bail.
I have no independent knowledge of the facts, I am simply observing what is appropriate given the DA's claim.
Sounds like the victims lawyer is using the inappropriate inscription to push a civil case and try to get more $$ out if the county. Everything is fair game in civil court.
Yes he is.
ETA: great minds think alike, and so do AirHaz and me.
Lol:)
Bingo TAZ.
Hasn't been used against him yet, the families attorney mentioned it to the press, but he would not be involved at all in a first appearance - officer is being tried by the state, not the dead guy's family.
Maybe the author needs to report more accurately or, even understand how things work before making a sensational story.
As TAZ related, the defense attorney is doing some 'lawyer shit' to make the family think he is working it hard for them. If I was the plaintiff's attorney the dust cover would be fairly small stuff - I'd be looking fo anything and everything, was he wearing a tac/mil looking vest carrier, does he have tattoos, what about facebook pictures and posts, what did the guy in his academy class think of him, just to start.
Whole goal for the plantiff's attorney is to get folks thinking this guy was looking to kill someone.
Dist. Expert 26
03-17-16, 22:12
Definitely not smart to put that on a work rifle. Keep your motard stuff at home, deep in the closet where it belongs.
One day, I want to put together a cyberpunk AR15 that serves no purpose than to look like something from Ghost in the Shell tv series.
THAT SAID: Any patrol rifle I've used has been extraordinarily rack grade. Be it an M16A1, DRMO M14, Mossberg, Remington, whatever. I used EXACTLY what it came with and if I didn't get a sling with it I put in writing that I needed a department issue sling. I put nothing personal purchase on any of my equipment. My only personal gun was my unmodified stock handgun.
Every rifle was booked and logged despite some hick "carbeam" instructor on TOS 2 years back scoffing that a patrol rifle didn't need to be booked. Yeah, right. His fat ass won't be in court with me plus it was in line with fornal instruction by instructors who WILL be in court for me
Guys that put punisher skulls, curse words, and Bible verses and oorah insignia tend to look VERY BAD in court where a buncha soccer moms will see him as a Tackleberry. Especially now.
Nobody cares how hooah you are or how awesome you are. If you're in court; you're a leper.
It's hard enough explaining to the Lifetime Movies crew why a high velocity round needed to be inserted in an aggressive and dangerous subjects chest cavity and cranial vault as-is..
"Surprise Cockfag" and "Get Some" just adds more stones in your ruck on your uphill climb to acquittal (not getting a no bill was bad enough)
Yeeesh
Dist. Expert 26
03-17-16, 22:50
"Surprise Cockfag"
I about spit ice cream all over my laptop at that one.
"Surprise Cockfag" and "Get Some" just adds more stones in your ruck on your uphill climb to acquittal (not getting a no bill was bad enough)
Yeeesh
Im guessing the first would would turn it into a hate crime if the guy shot turned out to be gay.
I'm also guessing that a FS2000 would make a better Ghost In The Shell themed rifle than an AR15.
Thank you. Someone who can actually read and comprehend the English language. The lawyer for the family is making this an issue. The dept. has fired him for unauthorized modification. The shooting itself is the issue here.
Bingo TAZ.
Hasn't been used against him yet, the families attorney mentioned it to the press, but he would not be involved at all in a first appearance - officer is being tried by the state, not the dead guy's family.
Maybe the author needs to report more accurately or, even understand how things work before making a sensational story.
As TAZ related, the defense attorney is doing some 'lawyer shit' to make the family think he is working it hard for them. If I was the plaintiff's attorney the dust cover would be fairly small stuff - I'd be looking fo anything and everything, was he wearing a tac/mil looking vest carrier, does he have tattoos, what about facebook pictures and posts, what did the guy in his academy class think of him, just to start.
Whole goal for the plantiff's attorney is to get folks thinking this guy was looking to kill someone.
He works for the city of Mesa, not Maricopa County. The city will be the one paying or maybe not since he made the modification without department approval. In addition they have fired him so he is most likely on his own.
Sounds like the victims lawyer is using the inappropriate inscription to push a civil case and try to get more $$ out if the county. Everything is fair game in civil court.
Maybe you should read the requirements are for 1st degree murder.
It the prosecutor believes that, he should be charged with first degree murder and should not be allowed any bail, much less let out with no bail.
I have no independent knowledge of the facts, I am simply observing what is appropriate given the DA's claim.
Im guessing the first would would turn it into a hate crime if the guy shot turned out to be gay.
I'm also guessing that a FS2000 would make a better Ghost In The Shell themed rifle than an AR15.
I didn't like FS2000. I want an AR like the Marines used in the Mexican War of 2020 in that flashback ep of 2nd Gig.
I imagine it could be done with mostly magpul stuff. Regardless, it would only shoot IPSC targets.
One day, I want to put together a cyberpunk AR15 that serves no purpose than to look like something from Ghost in the Shell tv series.
THAT SAID: Any patrol rifle I've used has been extraordinarily rack grade. Be it an M16A1, DRMO M14, Mossberg, Remington, whatever. I used EXACTLY what it came with and if I didn't get a sling with it I put in writing that I needed a department issue sling. I put nothing personal purchase on any of my equipment. My only personal gun was my unmodified stock handgun.
Every rifle was booked and logged despite some hick "carbeam" instructor on TOS 2 years back scoffing that a patrol rifle didn't need to be booked. Yeah, right. His fat ass won't be in court with me plus it was in line with fornal instruction by instructors who WILL be in court for me
Guys that put punisher skulls, curse words, and Bible verses and oorah insignia tend to look VERY BAD in court where a buncha soccer moms will see him as a Tackleberry. Especially now.
Nobody cares how hooah you are or how awesome you are. If you're in court; you're a leper.
It's hard enough explaining to the Lifetime Movies crew why a high velocity round needed to be inserted in an aggressive and dangerous subjects chest cavity and cranial vault as-is..
"Surprise Cockfag" and "Get Some" just adds more stones in your ruck on your uphill climb to acquittal (not getting a no bill was bad enough)
Yeeesh
Once again you saved me a lot of typing. Especially the part in bold.
Looks like a naive rookie, but was still a really bad idea and I wish somebody would have stopped him.
Moose-Knuckle
03-18-16, 01:32
Yeah I'm all for the First Amendment and all but it's moronic to put all that stuff (Punisher logo, Molon Labe, Team America, insert popular moral patch mantra here ______) on your body, automobile, and or your firearms.
Hell I don't even wear firearm manufacture shirts/hats in public, no NRA stickers on my ride, etc.
Be the grey man . . .
Yeah I'm all for the First Amendment and all but it's moronic to put all that stuff (Punisher logo, Molon Labe, Team America, insert popular moral patch mantra here ______) on your body, automobile, and or your firearms.
Hell I don't even wear firearm manufacture shirts/hats in public, no NRA stickers on my ride, etc.
Be the grey man . . .
Agreed. But if I did, I would definitely be part of Team "Fvck Yo Couch."
http://milspecmonkey.com/store/patches/226-****-yo-couch.html
Moose-Knuckle
03-18-16, 01:49
Agreed. But if I did, I would definitely be part of Team "Fvck Yo Couch."
http://milspecmonkey.com/store/patches/226-****-yo-couch.html
I rock their Immediate Action drills patch in one of my safes! Good stuff . . .
http://milspecmonkey.com/store/patches/178-immediate-action.html
Thank you. Someone who can actually read and comprehend the English language. The lawyer for the family is making this an issue. The dept. has fired him for unauthorized modification. The shooting itself is the issue here.
Until the civil case happens, which is indeed initiated by the family.
Eurodriver
03-18-16, 13:56
Why do people put dumb shit on their rifles anyhow?
I don't have an inscription on any of my hammers?
I once sharpied "Mjolnir" on a one handed sledge when I was 16.
It was cool for only about like 5 minutes.
Then it just made that new hammer from sears look gay.
Does it really matter? He's white, and a cop. So he's ****ed anyway. And nope I didn't read up on the case, because its not worth it. He's guilty no matter what.
Why do people put dumb shit on their rifles anyhow?
I don't have an inscription on any of my hammers?
For the same reason they buy a gun and the first question is "what should I add/polish before shooting it"?
Or
"what crayon is best for filling in the letters on my gun"?
Or
"I'm really pissed at the one microscopic scratch I got after got to range! Must be a defective finish. Can I send it back to the manufacturer"
Or a host of other unbelievably stupid things. Grown man turn into fashionistas when it comes to firearms.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Does it really matter? He's white, and a cop. So he's ****ed anyway. And nope I didn't read up on the case, because its not worth it. He's guilty no matter what.
Does it interfere with your narrative if the guy he shot was white, or at least whitish?
Is it possible the officer was wrong, IDK.
As usual, at this point in the case, a lot of conjecture.
Does it interfere with your narrative if the guy he shot was white, or at least whitish?
Is it possible the officer was wrong, IDK.
As usual, at this point in the case, a lot of conjecture.
I honestly really didn't consider it at this point. The lawyer is a far more significant variable than the race of the person who was shot.
I honestly really didn't consider it at this point. The lawyer is a far more significant variable than the race of the person who was shot.
Unless his name is Trayvon....
There's a lot of jadedness but it does bespeak a bit of the officer when he willfully put "you're fvcked" on a dust cover of a duty weapon.
The department armorer probably gave it a cursory once over or doofus put the cover in after the fact.
And while I hate to be presumptive, his picture kinda does smack of being "that guy".
I try to give folks credit because I'd like a little credit but....yeesh
Does it interfere with your narrative if the guy he shot was white, or at least whitish?
Is it possible the officer was wrong, IDK.
As usual, at this point in the case, a lot of conjecture.
Nope it doesn't matter what color the patriot victim was. He was shot by a cop, which means he's a hero. And of course the Officer was wrong, he has been wrong the day he was sworn in.
allll righty then, nothing to see here, move along....
Primus Pilum
03-18-16, 18:32
Further proof that there is a high correlation between custom dust covers and retardation.
Eurodriver
03-18-16, 19:00
I'm going to disagree with Firefly for the first time and say this officer doesn't look like "That guy".
He looks like a kid who wanted to do the right thing, probably sucked in school, and decided to become an LEO.
I was expecting to see officer McRoids, not a kid younger than me roped up in a situation like this.
How unfortunate.
I say this unsarcastically, the officer probably got in with a bad squad. Like, toxic mentorship.
Policework and High School have a lot of similarities.
Does he look like roid rage? No.
Does he look like someone wanting to "fit in"? Yes.
And sometimes there is that pressure that leads people to overreact for fear of being labeled a coward or underreact for fear of being a loose cannon or getting balled out.
That's what I meant and should've been more specific.
He probably isn't a kill em all guy but on the same token probably had maturity issues with no guidance. And "guidance" isn't just writing people up. It's show, explain, do. Something a LOT of LE isn't wanting to do with their new guys anymore.
His actions seem not so much malice but possibly overreaction. His choice of weapon adornment shows maturity issues. Now he's in a jam.
He looks like someone who had eagerness but needed perspective and shaping.
But...that's a lot to infer from just a picture.
I don't like speculation on verdicts but at some point I see this pleading to some kind of manslaughter. Him getting fired didn't help him, the dust cover isn't helping him, he doesn't look rich enough for a good lawyer, and the more I read it looks like a hard to articulate shoot. One could argue a furtive movement but to Susie Q Juror, being on all fours is seen as submission.
Very unfortunate
Eurodriver
03-18-16, 19:58
Good post man, and excellent sums up the situation from the info we have so far.
There's a lot of jadedness but it does bespeak a bit of the officer when he willfully put "you're fvcked" on a dust cover of a duty weapon.
The department armorer probably gave it a cursory once over or doofus put the cover in after the fact.
And while I hate to be presumptive, his picture kinda does smack of being "that guy".
I try to give folks credit because I'd like a little credit but....yeesh
Rifle was his personal weapon which was approved for "duty use."
Rifle was his personal weapon which was approved for "duty use."
Nonsense, take your facts and leave! I want more speculation and degradation!!!!
Rifle was his personal weapon which was approved for "duty use."
With respect,
The department armorer probably gave it a cursory once over or doofus put the cover in after the fact.
The Dept Armorer either didn't do a full point inspection and since he signed off on it should be called to testify
OR
Officer took in an appropriate rifle, it passed muster, and at some point after the fact took it upon himself to alter his approved rifle without notifying anyone in a position to authorize rifles for duty use to determine if such alteration was in line with policy and appropriateness.
It's one or the other. Regardless, it's doing him no favors right now in criminal court and will work further against him in civil trial.
Larry Vickers
03-18-16, 21:22
I'm one that has preached against this kind of stuff for years now - even wrote a Gunfighter moment on Soldier Systems Daily about this very topic. This was not smart - life is tough; its a lot tougher when your stupid.
With respect,
The Dept Armorer either didn't do a full point inspection and since he signed off on it should be called to testify
OR
Officer took in an appropriate rifle, it passed muster, and at some point after the fact took it upon himself to alter his approved rifle without notifying anyone in a position to authorize rifles for duty use to determine if such alteration was in line with policy and appropriateness.
It's one or the other. Regardless, it's doing him no favors right now in criminal court and will work further against him in civil trial.
Wasn't really debating you or anything, just offering information which you might have missed. As I posted earlier, "I wish somebody would have stopped him" which is more or less what you are saying.
Ned Christiansen
03-18-16, 22:11
Many (maybe most) departments authorizing personal purchase don't have a chiseled-in-stone policy on what's allowed or not allowed. Of those that do I speculate that for most of them, there is little to nothing in the way of an armorer or higher authority inspecting personal purchases so see that they meet spec-- and if this is done, I am very doubtful that there are many that re-inspect every so often.
We went over this shooting in training this week and was given a cursory lowdown by someone who knows what happened. Our DA is a shooter and pro LE. He shoots at the Academy regularly and comes to our shooting competitions.
From what I've heard the officers body cam showed the guy to be so threat what so ever and the officer lit him up. Apparently it's pretty bad.
And like has been said before, the families civil lawyer is bringing this up, not the DA.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.