Marine veteran prosecuted in Wash., D.C.

[seamusTX]

I just read this story in the April issue of American's First Freedom. It is Wayne La Pierre's lead article.

A U.S. Marine, Corporal Melroy Cort, served three combat tours in Iraq. His deployment ended with his legs being blown off by a roadside bomb.

In 2006, he was sent from his home in Ohio to Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington, D.C. Cpl. Cort has an Ohio RTC permit. He asked his commanding officer what he should do with his sidearm. The officer told him to check it in at the armory at Walter Reed.

While driving through Washington, Cpl. Cort's vehicle got a flat tire. He pulled into a service station to get it repaired. He transferred his pistol from the glove compartment to his jacket pocket. Someone saw him and called the cops. He was arrested, jailed overnight, and charged with felony possession of an unlicensed firearm and two misdemeanors.

He apparently could not afford a defense attorney (no surprise). After three jury trials, he was acquitted of the felony charge and found guilty of misdemeanor possession of ammunition (yes, this is a criminal offense in our nation's capital and many other places).

Number 1, this is an obvious violation of the 2nd amendment and outrageous treatment of a wounded veteran who has proven his trustworthiness beyond queston. Granted, these events took place before the Heller decision was handed down, but that probably would not have mattered to the authorities.

Number 2, no one stood up for this man, not the Marine Corps, not the Bush Department of Justice, not the NRA.

I can't believe I'm only hearing about this now. I can't find anything about it on the web.

- Jim

[seamusTX]

P.S.: Now that I spelled his name correctly, I can find some links:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02840.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can see from this photo that Cpl. Cort was guilty of being a black man with a gun.

Surprisingly even-handed coverage from the Wash. Post.

More, mostly blogs: http://www.google.com/search?q=Melroy+Cort" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

[TheArmedFarmer]

Three juries? I'm glad to see they acquitted him on the gun charges, but SHAME ON THOSE JURORS for finding him guilty on the ammunition charge. The law is unjust and they should have acquitted.

[Purplehood]

I just read this story in the April issue of American's First Freedom. It is Wayne La Pierre's lead article.

A U.S. Marine, Corporal Melroy Cort, served three combat tours in Iraq. His deployment ended with his legs being blown off by a roadside bomb.

In 2006, he was sent from his home in Ohio to Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington, D.C. Cpl. Cort has an Ohio RTC permit. He asked his commanding officer what he should do with his sidearm. The officer told him to check it in at the armory at Walter Reed.

While driving through Washington, Cpl. Cort's vehicle got a flat tire. He pulled into a service station to get it repaired. He transferred his pistol from the glove compartment to his jacket pocket. Someone saw him and called the cops. He was arrested, jailed overnight, and charged with felony possession of an unlicensed firearm and two misdemeanors.

He apparently could not afford a defense attorney (no surprise). After three jury trials, he was acquitted of the felony charge and found guilty of misdemeanor possession of ammunition (yes, this is a criminal offense in our nation's capital and many other places).

Number 1, this is an obvious violation of the 2nd amendment and outrageous treatment of a wounded veteran who has proven his trustworthiness beyond queston. Granted, these events took place before the Heller decision was handed down, but that probably would not have mattered to the authorities.

Number 2, no one stood up for this man, not the Marine Corps, not the Bush Department of Justice, not the NRA.

I can't believe I'm only hearing about this now. I can't find anything about it on the web.

- Jim

I read about this case in the issue of American Rifleman that I got in the mail last night. Seemed like the NRA was really into this and is providing support.

Edit: I would also submit that the USMC must be at least tacitly supporting him. As I understand, he is still on Active Duty. Believe me, if they were not, he would have been administratively released from the Marines in a heartbeat.

[seamusTX]

I didn't see anything about the NRA giving him assistance.

You're right about the Marines keeping him on the payroll while he was under indictment. I don't know what their policy is about things like that.

I was thinking along the lines of Cpl. Cort traveling between military facilities and carrying his weapon as advised by his superior officer, there must be an argument there for a member of the military performing his duties being immune from local laws.

- Jim

[Purplehood]

I didn't see anything about the NRA giving him assistance.

You're right about the Marines keeping him on the payroll while he was under indictment. I don't know what their policy is about things like that.

I was thinking along the lines of Cpl. Cort traveling between military facilities and carrying his weapon as advised by his superior officer, there must be an argument there for a member of the military performing his duties being immune from local laws.

- Jim

That would be a good argument. Was he carrying Official Military (TAD/TDY) orders on him at the time? If so, he should have a Military Lawyer standing beside him.

[seamusTX]

Was he carrying Official Military (TAD/TDY) orders on him at the time?

I have no idea. I don't know how these things work. I am assuming that being told to go to Walter Reed is an order.

- Jim

[Purplehood]

Was he carrying Official Military (TAD/TDY) orders on him at the time?

I have no idea. I don't know how these things work. I am assuming that being told to go to Walter Reed is an order.

- Jim

Yeah, but they wouldn't admit him without papers. That is why I am wondering what all the hoopla is about.

[Charles L. Cotton]

Here is a little more information. Cpl. Cort did not contact the NRA until after he had represented himself and argued his own case. (The jury nullified the felony gun possession charge by acquitting him.) After the NRA was contacted, the NRA did provide some assistance on appeal.

Here is something everyone needs to understand. The ethics rules for attorneys, and in some states statutory laws, prevent the NRA from contacting anyone and everyone we think is getting the short end of the stick. Even a call the the main switchboard at NRA HQ, or to membership, or any other department likely will not be sufficient for us to offer support. It is viewed much like it would be if I saw a news report about someone getting killed in an 18 wheeler wreck and I called their family and offered to represent them. We simply cannot do that. The potential client has to call me. The Brady Bunch and other anti-gun organizations are always looking for a way to cause trouble for the NRA, so we must be very careful not to cross the line, or to even appear to be crossing the line.

Chas.

[seamusTX]

Thank you, Charles. I did not consider that aspect of the NRA giving legal advice.

I also understand that the NRA cannot get involved in every firearms case. It seems to me that they choose cases that can make case law. That makes sense to me.

- Jim