Nine jurors wanted to acquit a Farmington Hills man charged with shooting a fellow motorist during a road rage episode April 12, but three could not be persuaded and a mistrial was declared Monday after jurors said they were deadlocked.The three men and nine women had been deliberating since Aug. 10 in the case of Carl Mintz, 28, who is accused of shooting Faith Said, 20, of Commerce Township in the elbow during the altercation on Orchard Lake Road. Prosecutors charged Mintz with assault with intent to do great bodily harm, a 10-year felony.
What happened is this:
Said and another man, angry that Mintz had been hitting his brakes ahead of them, got out and approached Mintz at a red light.This is the dilemma that every gun owner risks. When confronted with a dicey situation, should you pull out the gun and shoot or not. Even the jury, after hearing all the testimony and looking at all the evidence, could not decide if Mintz had acted inappropriately. I find that a little surprising. If he only "thought" the other guy was reaching for a gun and was wrong, I would think that would get a conviction every time. There must be more to it.Mintz testified that Said spit on him and threatened to harm him. He thought Said was reaching for a weapon so he shot him in the arm. Said was treated at a hospital.
Maybe, Said, who was threatening Mintz and spitting on him, was such a nasty character that the jury sided with Mintz. Who knows?
The point is made clear though, most people are not capable of handling a gun responsibly in a dangerous situation. The very act of hitting the brakes when someone is tailgating, which is what this sounds like, is an act of aggression. The proper action in a case like that is to pull over or turn the corner and make a detour. The gun owner who has such a short fuse as to let his ego get in the way when a 20-year-old kid is following too closely, is not qualified to carry a gun and is a danger to himself and others.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Clearly his driver's licence should be revoked and he should never be allowed to own a car again.
ReplyDeleteAnybody who disagrees is just contributing to the epidemic of road rage that contributes to the deaths of 100 people on our dangerous roadways every day.
"The very act of hitting the brakes when someone is tailgating, which is what this sounds like, is an act of aggression. The proper action in a case like that is to pull over or turn the corner and make a detour. The gun owner who has such a short fuse as to let his ego get in the way when a 20-year-old kid is following too closely, is not qualified to carry a gun and is a danger to himself and others."
ReplyDeleteDid you totally misread this? Said and his companion were the road rage aggressors. Said and his accomplice jumped out of their car and approached Mintz.
"The point is made clear though, most people are not capable of handling a gun responsibly in a dangerous situation."
ReplyDeleteSo much for using "some", MikeB? Or are you projecting again?
Did you totally misread this? Said and his companion were the road rage aggressors.
ReplyDeleteIn MikeB's defense, it sounded as if both sides were aggressors. Said was driving aggressively behind Mintz. Mintz break-checked him, which is a pretty stupid move if your goal is to avoid confrontation. And finally Said and accomplices got out of the car and assaulted Mintz. Three mistakes led up to the shooting. If I was to be a juror on this case, I'm not sure how I would side. I would certainly need to hear more evidence.
Jadegold's Law: Gunloons will always make the worst possible decision at the worst possible time.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous observed, "So much for using "some", MikeB? Or are you projecting again?"
ReplyDeleteoops. guilty again.
Jadegold's Corrolary: Jadegold is full of shit so take his laws with a grain of salt.
ReplyDelete