this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
78 points (96.4% liked)

politics

18828 readers
4644 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
78
Shot and then prosecuted: How a victim in Baltimore became a defendant (www.thebaltimorebanner.com)
submitted 1 month ago by gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In less than two years, Curtis Hunt was shot a total of 12 times.

The bullets tore through his chest and left lung. They damaged his large and small intestines. And they caused his heart to swell.

But Baltimore Police alleged that he had a gun on him both times when he was shot. And because he’s not legally allowed to have one, Hunt, 25, of Baltimore, was then prosecuted — twice.

“He already lost so much time being shot and being hurt and being injured, laying there, having to think about everything,” said his girlfriend, Hailey Scarlett, 25. “Now, he’s got to sit and look at four walls.” “He’s being punished for him being shot,” she added. “It’s not fair.”

His situation is complex. But it helps illustrate how people can be both victims and defendants in Baltimore Circuit Court — even in the same case.

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240809115914/https://www.thebaltimorebanner.com/community/criminal-justice/curtis-hunt-shooting-illegal-gun-possession-baltimore-VIE7CARBSFBZVIVLBWO43VNWTE/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] riskable@programming.dev 8 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I'm not sure what the right solution is in this situation. Clearly, the guy was violating the law by carrying guns (in two cases) yet was also the victim of gun violence. Is the article suggesting that we should let felons carry guns so they can defend themselves?

Seems to me that general gun control would be a more effective measure 🤷

Or at the very least make everyone register and insure all of their guns so they can be tracked down when gun crimes are committed. I'd even suggest that we should require all ammunition include special, unique chemical markers on the inside and make people register that whenever they purchase ammunition.

[–] hedgehogging_the_bed@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

How about disallowing evidence gathered about the victim of the crime from being used to prosecute them? Like we disallow evidence gathered without a proper warrant, theoretically.

[–] notabot@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The issue with that is a criminal can commit a crime, then have an accomplice commit a crime against them. Now when the police investigate the latter and find out about the former they can't use the evidence, so convicting the criminal of the, presumably, more serious crime becomes impossible. Create a 'crime loop' and no one can be convicted.

[–] hedgehogging_the_bed@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

The cops would prosecute the crime they gave the external evidence for. In this case the shooting of the victim, because that came to their attention as a crime. Since they wouldn't have interacted with the victim except that he got shot, the fact he had a gun on him can't be used as evidence against him. Just like if they search your car for guns, they can't seize your bank statements from the glovebox and use them as evidence for financial crimes.