Marine Amputee Acquitted On Gun Possession Charges

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    37,832
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    Story is a litte late but those DC rats shold burn!!!!
    He is a freaking war veteran who lost BOTH legs and was going to get medical tratment in DC. If it was not for guys like him, those DC rats would not have the freedoms they so love to trample on.

    ---

    By Keith L. Alexander
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, January 14, 2009; Page B01

    After being deadlocked twice, a D.C. Superior Court jury yesterday acquitted a Marine amputee on felony charges of gun possession stemming from an arrest while he was on the way to Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
    In the 2006 incident, Cpl. Melroy H. Cort, 24, and his wife, Samantha, were en route from their home in Columbus, Ohio, to Walter Reed. Cort's legs had been amputated above the knees when he was wounded by a makeshift bomb in Ramadi during his third tour of duty in Iraq.
    The couple's car got a flat tire, forcing them to pull over at a car repair shop in the 5000 block of Georgia Avenue NW. While there, Cort said, he reached into the glove compartment, removed a 9mm pistol and put it in his jacket pocket.
    A witness who noticed Cort handling the gun called police, who arrested and handcuffed Cort while he was sitting in his wheelchair. He was charged with three counts of carrying a pistol without a license, possession of an unregistered firearm and possession of ammunition. He spent the night in the D.C. jail before returning to Walter Reed.
    He was assigned a public defender, who encouraged him to plead guilty. But Cort refused, because a felony on his record could cost him his military benefits. So he decided to represent himself.
    "I had to fight for myself," he said yesterday. "I wasn't going to plead guilty and lose everything."
    During his trial, which began Friday before Judge Lynn Leibovitz, the two arresting officers testified that Cort had thrown up his hands and told them he had a gun in his pocket when they approached him.


    Taking the stand in his defense, Cort tried to tell his personal story: How he enlisted in the Marines in 2004 after graduating from Ohio's Wright State University with a business degree. How he went to Iraq in 2004 and 2005, when he was was critically injured. How he was fitted with prosthetic legs and honorably discharged in 2007.
    But Leibovitz ordered him to discuss only the case at hand.
    Cort, who said he had a permit to carry the gun in Ohio, said he had it with him because he had moved out of his house in anticipation of an extended stay at Walter Reed.
    He said his commanding officer had advised him to take the gun to the armory on Walter Reed's base as soon as he arrived.
    Cort said 12 rounds of ammunition were in his car trunk, but police said the ammunition was in the gun's clip.
    Although acquitting him of the gun charges, the jury found Cort guilty of possessing ammunition, a misdemeanor. He was sentenced to time already spent in the D.C. jail.
    Cort, his wife and their 3-month-old daughter, Charlott, now plan to drive home to Columbus, where Samantha Cort is in real estate. Cort said he plans to appeal the verdict and tend to his family.
    "I just plan to take care of my daughter," Cort said.




    SOURCE:
    Marine Amputee Acquitted On Gun Possession Charges - washingtonpost.com
     

    mikea46996

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 28, 2009
    1,750
    38
    Winamac
    WTF!!!!!

    I can't even tell you how pissed off I get about this!!!

    He is a ****ing vet!!! He gave his legs for this country!!

    He is arrested and charged because he is armed?? WTF he is permanently disabled because of the lost of his legs for this country. I think they should had him back his service rifle and tell him to have a good day. Not only is he less able to protect himself, his wife, and his daughter because of the injury but he had to defend himself against his own government, the same one he lost his legs for..

    I am going to stop now before I get put on notice again cause I feel my langauge is gonna get bad.
     

    jeremy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 18, 2008
    16,482
    36
    Fiddler's Green
    I think the Prosecutor, and his superiors should all be thrown in jail for this outrage! On second thought they should be put on a wall and shot for this kind of abuse of power and authority!
    :twocents: YMMV
     

    cordex

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jun 24, 2008
    818
    18
    Just another low life prosecutor looking for an easy conviction to add to his percentages.
    While I'm not one to make political hay out of misfortune, that prosecutor (and more importantly the Marine who refused to quietly plead guilty) did a fine job of demonstrating how gun laws are not intended to protect innocent people.
     

    Bigum1969

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 3, 2008
    21,422
    38
    SW Indiana
    Why in the hell did the LEOs even arrest him? They could've simply informed him of the law, made sure he complied and let him go on his way. What in the hell were they thinking?
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    37,832
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    Why in the hell did the LEOs even arrest him? They could've simply informed him of the law, made sure he complied and let him go on his way. What in the hell were they thinking?

    Because this occurred in Washington DC! He was on his way to the hospital for long term therapy and his commanding officer told him to take his weapon so that it could be stored in the armory while he was in treatment. THE ONLY REASON HE STOPPED BEFORE GETTING TO THE HOSPITAL WAS BECAUSE OF A FLAT TIRE AND SOMEONE SAW HIM WITH HIS GUN!

    The person that "screamed MWG" I think also has no love for this country like the rest of the people involved in trying to jail thus marine. The guy is in a wheelchair because he gave "1/2" is body in defense of our country and these ba*** try to put him in jail!

    <<let me just stop and go work on my garden plans before I boil over in anger over this again.>>
     

    Coach

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Trainer Supporter
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Apr 15, 2008
    13,411
    48
    Coatesville
    This is indeed a sad state of affairs. It is hard to say we have a second amendment when things like this can occur.
     

    Frank_N_Stein

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    79   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    10,239
    77
    Beech Grove, IN
    Why in the hell did the LEOs even arrest him? They could've simply informed him of the law, made sure he complied and let him go on his way. What in the hell were they thinking?

    Because with most LE agencies officers have no discretion when it comes to whether or not to arrest when someone is committing a felony. If it would have just been the LEO and the Marine with no outside witnesses, the LEO could have let it slide. With an independent witness it changes things.

    That being said, I would have a hard time locking up a Marine (especially a war vet with missing limbs), or any other service member for that matter. Unfortunately if that Marine is committing a felony in my presence, arrest is usually my only option. I have given numerous Vets breaks on things ranging from traffic violations to criminal misdemeanors and I will continue to do so. I'm not trying to justify what the officer(s) did, just giving my :twocents:
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    Because with most LE agencies officers have no discretion when it comes to whether or not to arrest when someone is committing a felony. If it would have just been the LEO and the Marine with no outside witnesses, the LEO could have let it slide. With an independent witness it changes things.

    That being said, I would have a hard time locking up a Marine (especially a war vet with missing limbs), or any other service member for that matter. Unfortunately if that Marine is committing a felony in my presence, arrest is usually my only option. I have given numerous Vets breaks on things ranging from traffic violations to criminal misdemeanors and I will continue to do so. I'm not trying to justify what the officer(s) did, just giving my :twocents:

    Let me begin by clarifying that I am not a LEO. With that said, yes, I understand that with an independent witness, you have little choice but to take the man with you. Would officer discretion allow you to take him to the armory to properly secure his weapon in accorance with Peaceable Journey and his CO's orders? Doing so, no felony would have been committed, as his "peaceable journey" was interrupted incidental to his trip.

    Thoughts?

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    Bigum1969

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 3, 2008
    21,422
    38
    SW Indiana
    Let me begin by clarifying that I am not a LEO. With that said, yes, I understand that with an independent witness, you have little choice but to take the man with you. Would officer discretion allow you to take him to the armory to properly secure his weapon in accorance with Peaceable Journey and his CO's orders? Doing so, no felony would have been committed, as his "peaceable journey" was interrupted incidental to his trip.

    Thoughts?

    Blessings,
    Bill

    I know in my heart of hearts there are LEOs that would've done just what you suggest, BOR. By implementing your solution, you satisfy the idiot (:noway:) who called the police in the first place and lend a hand to someone who has paid dearly for his country.
     

    Frank_N_Stein

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    79   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    10,239
    77
    Beech Grove, IN
    Let me begin by clarifying that I am not a LEO. With that said, yes, I understand that with an independent witness, you have little choice but to take the man with you. Would officer discretion allow you to take him to the armory to properly secure his weapon in accorance with Peaceable Journey and his CO's orders? Doing so, no felony would have been committed, as his "peaceable journey" was interrupted incidental to his trip.

    Thoughts?

    Blessings,
    Bill

    I can't speak for how much discretion officers in DC have, but I would imagine that anything related to gun laws is enforced without question or alternative solutions. Since carrying a handgun without a license (with no previous conviction) is a misdemeanor in Indiana, I am sure that had this situation occurred here, discretion would have allowed him to continue his "peaceable journey."
     
    Last edited:

    Frank_N_Stein

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    79   0   0
    Nov 24, 2008
    10,239
    77
    Beech Grove, IN
    I know in my heart of hearts there are LEOs that would've done just what you suggest, BOR. By implementing your solution, you satisfy the idiot (:noway:) who called the police in the first place and lend a hand to someone who has paid dearly for his country.

    There are many LEOs that would have done what I suggested, but unfortunately some of those many are bound by law or rules & regulations that prevent them from making that decision. And most idiots that call the police are satisfied when you haul someone away in the back of a squad, even if you are just using it as cover to get them where they need to be and not taking them to the poke.
     

    agentl074

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 5, 2008
    1,225
    36
    There are many LEOs that would have done what I suggested, but unfortunately some of those many are bound by law or rules & regulations that prevent them from making that decision. And most idiots that call the police are satisfied when you haul someone away in the back of a squad, even if you are just using it as cover to get them where they need to be and not taking them to the poke.
    :yesway:
     

    jeremy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 18, 2008
    16,482
    36
    Fiddler's Green
    I firmly understand the hands of the LEOs are restricted as to what they are allowed to do. I personally lay the blame of this useless and dishonorable act at the feet of the DA they could have chose to let this be swept under, but they did not. Shame on them. Ass hats!
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    37,832
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    jermey you need to understand that this occurred in DC. The most ANTI-2A place in the entire country! To them the only good gun is no gun. Those bas*** have no love for the United States Constitution. They are TRAITORS to our country and somehow government over the capital of the free world.
     

    agentl074

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 5, 2008
    1,225
    36
    Women handle my gun very well :rockwoot: Thats GUN control :D:laugh: :yesway:
    ... in regard to the illegal firearm laws in ... jurisdictions - Heller V. DC - when are they going to learn?
     
    Top Bottom