Judge Removes Prosecutor From McCloskey Case For “Criminal Prosecution For Political Purposes” – IOTW Report

Judge Removes Prosecutor From McCloskey Case For “Criminal Prosecution For Political Purposes”

Fox News

The circuit attorney for the city of St. Louis has been disqualified from prosecuting Mark and Patricia McCloskey, a local couple facing felony charges after defending their home with weapons when protesters marched through their neighborhood in June, according to reports.

The content of some campaign fundraising emails by Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner infringed on the McCloskeys’ right to receive a fair trial, Circuit Judge Thomas Clark II ruled Thursday, according to the St. Louis Post Dispatch.

Gardner’s emails suggested that by charging the McCloskeys in July, she appeared to have “initiated a criminal prosecution for political purposes,” the judge wrote, according to the newspaper. More

15 Comments on Judge Removes Prosecutor From McCloskey Case For “Criminal Prosecution For Political Purposes”

  1. “The circuit attorney for the city of St. Louis has been disqualified from prosecuting Mark and Patricia McCloskey, a local couple facing felony charges after defending their home with weapons when protesters marched through their neighborhood in June, according to reports.”

    …they marched through their YARD after destroying their GATE and directly threatened their LIVES.

    …I just LOVE how media, ALL media, never gets it quite right in a way that makes the people justifiably defending themselves look bad for…some reason…

    27
  2. In many, maybe most or even all, jurisdictions you can sue the prosecutor for malicious prosecution in cases like this.

    The McClosky’s should consult an attorney about this.

    12
  3. The peaceful protestors were just passing through? Yea right!
    Not peaceful,there to intimidate.
    With a record of violence and destruction of private and public property.

    7
  4. Oh so now she’s off for the next abusive prosecution with her credentials and position intact?
    She should be seeking employment in some new career direction preferably one that requires her wearing a paper hat.

    6
  5. AbigailAdams- They had them on trespassing only. And then decided against it and dropped all charges. Because they had a right to destroy and protest people on private property that had nothing to do with any of their problems. Oh by the way, their newly elected rep is going to congress in Jan. She organized that ‘protest’.

    4
  6. AND………………………..another DA with strikingly similar political leanings, one who is more judicious in her email practices,will take her place.

    This case is huge. If these two gun totting America loving right wingers can be sufficiently humiliated in court, and made to pay for their defending their 2nd Amendment right to protect themselves, this will go a long way is cowing the populace, taking their guns away and making them more servile.

    Sheep are much easier to govern than wolves.

    6

Comments are closed.