Expert witness talks about use of "Tactical" designs in court

[glistam]

I have great respect for Marc MacYoung, and I read this article a long time ago. But there is one major flaw to this general assertion:

MacYoung is an expert witness, but I don't see anywhere in this article or anywhere else where he actually witnessed a knife's tactical design resulting in prosecution and/or conviction where it otherwise would not have if it had been a more mundane design. He might be an expert on fighting, but speculation is speculation. Unless someone can show me otherwise, he is just guessing with no more to go on than any of us are.

Personally I have been reading knife case-law from as far back as 1978. I have yet to see the "tactical" design of a knife offered as evidence in cases of assault or murder that may or may not have been self-defense. In fact, I almost never see such a matter come up in illegal weapon carry cases. In a local case in my state called In Re Melanie B, the defendant was prosecuted for a butter knife on school grounds. All they cared about was "a knife is a knife." The charges were dropped because Melanie was able to demonstrate that she did not possess it with intent as a weapon, but rather as a tool (a makeshift prybar). In another case, In Re Julianna, the defendant stabbed the vic in the heart with a Applegate Fairbairn folder, claiming self-defense. The court gave a rat's --- that she used a combat folder with a dagger-like blade. The knife design never even came up according to the transcripts. All they cared about was she stabbed an unarmed assailant lethally when she ample opportunity and numerous options to have avoided the fight in the first place.

If my life is in danger and all I have is my BM Bedlam, I would not hesitate for a second.

 

[simplemind22]

Best post on the thread so far! The reason I mentioned case law is due to the fact that actual cases are the only true examples of this theory in action.

Now Marc is not the only one who has mentioned the design in court concept. Hock Hockheim has mentioned it as well. If you have any info on him I would invite the input.

Now, going back to 1978, how many of these types of cases have you reviewed? I'm just curious on the breadth of your research.

I defense of Marc and hock I do wonder why they would mention these concepts if they rarely have influence in the final disposition of a case?

Thanks for your post.

 

[glistam]

It's possible Marc really is basing this on first-hand observation. It's just not clear that he actually did. He might have a real life example to offer and I just have not come across it. I'm just playing skeptic (i.e. show me evidence or don't say it). I merely express my skepticism because of hearing so many "legal opinions" from people who's expertise amounts to watching 3 seasons of Law and Order coupled with random comments from police officers, rather than state's attorneys.

As for my own work, I have long lost count of how many cases about knives I have read. Some are published case law, some are primary cases that I read the transcripts for, and a few I literally sat in the courtroom as they happened. I admit I tend to focus more heavily on my home state of Maryland, but at some point I have read at least one knife law case for each of the 50 states and several federal ones.

Based on that sample, one thing I definitely can say with certainty is that this theory of MacYoung and Hochheim's depends a lot on the state. Some states have pretty clear laws, with little room for the "tactical design" even entering into the equation even if murder is involved. Maryland is a lot like that. And some state have extremely vague laws where the cop, DA, judge and jury all have to make a judgement call. I believe it was a Louisiana case (or neighboring state, I forget) where it was determined that a knife was of an offensive design merely for having cross-guards. And places like Wisconsin where the knife simply being sharp and pointy is enough to satisfy that it's a dangerous weapon (State v Ronnie Malloy, 2005).

 

[HeavyHanded]

As for my own work, I have long lost count of how many cases about knives I have read. Some are published case law, some are primary cases that I read the transcripts for, and a few I literally sat in the courtroom as they happened. I admit I tend to focus more heavily on my home state of Maryland, but at some point I have read at least one knife law case for each of the 50 states and several federal ones.

I've spent literally hours upon hours reading SD and general weapons possession and use cases as made available by the U of B online legal library and any other NY case dispositions of same from a number of sources. I have yet to come up with a single recorded instance where the characteristics of the "weapon" were pivotal to the case, though I would be very grateful of ANY links.

Intent and justification are 99% of how the thing will play out, notwithstanding the quality of counsel. The closest I have ever heard of where the charge was upped from manslaughter to 2nd degree murder involved the use of a long nailfile slammed hard enough into a man's sternum that it pierced his heart. Court agreed with the prosecution that it amounted to an amount of force that a reasonable man would have expected to cause a fatality. Defense argued that nobody would expect a nail file to kill a grown man. FWIW, the nail file was taken right off the shelf in the convenience store where the killing took place. Defendant was found guilty.

 

[HeavyHanded]

"I believe it's accepted an LEO might use a knife in SD, while in most states carrying a knife with intent to use it as anything but a tool will get you arrested. Especially on duty, the game changes."

I don't agree with you.

Ordinary person may use a knife in self defense as well. Now, if the knife is an OTF or 5 inch combat folder, than you may be charged with some other crime depending on your locality. But once you are in situation where deadly force is necessary, you can use whatever is available to you at the moment, be it baseball bat, crowbar, brick, or a knife.

I am not aware of a single state where it is legal (at least without additional permitting of some sort) to carry a knife with intent to use it as a weapon. Generally the law is written that it is illegal to carry with intent to use unlawfully against another person, and then the legal precedents establish that carrying as a weapon equals intent to use unlawfully. Should you be thrust into a situation where deadly physical force is justified, you're OK to use anything at your disposal, it doesn't matter if it was a pocket knife or a tire iron. Used lawfully its a non issue, used illegally its a deadly weapon. Your local laws may vary, check and understand how your state laws are written and interpreted.

 

[stabman]

I have yet to come up with a single recorded instance where the characteristics of the "weapon" were pivotal to the case, though I would be very grateful of ANY links.

Perhaps not pivotal, but it can be one of the things which sways the judge or jury the rest of the way.
The prosecutor will often try playing up the characteristics of any weapon used to help load their hand, and sometimes it will have an effect.
If it didn't sway people at all, the prosecutors would never bother wasting their breath expounding on such such things.
Let's be honest, Voyager sounds much less evil and "killy" than, say, "Ninja Death Stalker 3000, now with disemboweling hook to cause the perp more well deserved agony."
Remember, a "jury of one's peers" generally is made up of a group with views that resemble yours not at all.

 

[HeavyHanded]

Again, we're talking theory. I'm not saying its impossible, but I AM saying I can't find any evidence of it being used in a real live court proceeding in any capacity.

A jury of your peers still has to be convinced of your intent and lack of justification. In theory your "intent" might be prejudiced by your choice of hardware, but not your justification. Once you invoke this as part of your defense, the prosecution has the burden of disproving your claim. At that point it wouldn't matter what you defended yourself with, might as well be a battleaxe. You could still be liable for a misdemeanor possession charge after the fact, but then you wouldn't be the first person to beat a murder rap and get dinged by a weapon possession charge - not involving a firearm I'm pretty sure it would get dismissed or pleaded down to a violation.


The only area I could see a marginally tacticool knife getting in the way of your rights - much more likely to be confiscated if you're a minor.

I have an open mind on this subject - any solid links would be helpful.