tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4098620.post9200485996746174606..comments2024-03-15T04:02:42.341-04:00Comments on CrimLaw: The Right to Arm for Self DefenseUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4098620.post-78413189669116158122010-09-22T16:54:19.170-04:002010-09-22T16:54:19.170-04:00Wade - That's why the language changed from &q...Wade - That's why the language changed from "it is presumed" to "you may infer." The prosecutor must prove malice although affirmative defenses (such as self defense) can be used by the defense to push back against the prosecution's proof.Ken Lammershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15646250142814585354noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4098620.post-21625319741040653242010-09-22T15:29:33.028-04:002010-09-22T15:29:33.028-04:00Didn't the Supreme Court find that it was unco...Didn't the Supreme Court find that it was unconstitutional to require the defendant to disprove malice in Sandstrom v. Montana and a few other cases?Wadenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4098620.post-72984232403824269012010-09-11T00:40:45.693-04:002010-09-11T00:40:45.693-04:00This seems to me to be, well, nuts. It is not log...This seems to me to be, well, nuts. It is not logical to infer malice simply because someone carries arms for defense. More is required before it can be concluded that person is looking for trouble. It’s more logical to conclude that person is hoping to avoid trouble, hoping they will not need their weapon. But they also would not want to need it and not have it.<br /><br />Also, how can it be the burden of the defendant to disprove malice? If the prosecutor must prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, then the prosecutor must prove malice if it is an element. If there is any credible evidence of self defense, it should be the prosecutor’s burden to disprove it. It is so in most states, what is wrong with Virginia?TeeJawhttp://teejaw.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4098620.post-68936522170223443832010-08-30T19:23:29.249-04:002010-08-30T19:23:29.249-04:00Ken,
I had a nice reply, in which I disagree wit...Ken, <br /><br />I had a nice reply, in which I disagree with you a bit, but it was too long to just put it all here. <br /><br />So, I made it into my own blog post. If you do not like my posting the address here please just delete this comment.<br /><br />http://nobiscuit.wordpress.com/2010/08/30/great-post-on-crimlaw/<br /><br />Thanks,<br />Bad MonkeyBMNBhttp://nobiscuit.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4098620.post-63626314615634914042010-08-30T15:03:50.587-04:002010-08-30T15:03:50.587-04:00Plenty of non-gang-members carry weapons without a...Plenty of non-gang-members carry weapons without any individualized threat. If the weapon is on one's hip simply out of political beliefs or general world view, did one 'seek out' said weapon?<br /><br />Should someone who carries a weapon as a matter of course (I see Virginia is a shall-issue CCW state) have the same presumption of malice?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com