The answer is it depends.
Some guns will come with multiple magazines as part of a package. Think of it like a saddle package. Sometimes you can get a saddle pad, leathers, and stirrups as part of a package. I am not familiar with that particular Ruger 9mm.
How many rounds a regular magazine will hold is also somewhat dependent on the model. A safe answer would be that it likely would hold 9 rounds if it were full. Many pistols do have an extended magazine available for purchase.
@Dragonfly90, I understood it to be that the gun was empty when the cops found it, so since there were three shots fired then there were only three bullets in the gun when it was brought to the scene.
I am speculating that not only has the defense planned all along in case RC was called, but they also have had a pretty good idea of what RC might be saying. They did not question the police at that hearing with no knowledge of RC and RC’s gun.
My choosing what to say and not say has a reason. Perhaps I see some hole in your statement. Maybe even a big one.
Well share it then. I’m not afraid of being proven wrong.
There would not be anything in the gun if he’s fired all the bullets in the magazine.
Pistols like this eject the shell upon firing. They’d be somewhere on the ground around where the gun was fired. That’s where the term “policing your brass” comes from. At a shooting range, common courtesy says if you can safely pick up your brass after firing, you are expected to do so. There is often a barrel for spent brass to be recycled available. Much like sweeping the aisle after grooming your horse is expected.
I understood it to mean there were 3 unfired rounds still in the magazine (though that could mean 4 total still in the gun - one in the chamber and 3 in the magazine).
General comment.
If RC and MB are both telling the truth then there should be no major discrepancy between the two of them as to the basics of the transfer of the gun.
I shoot a revolver so…
I understood that what LK thought was the gun jamming was actually the gun being out of ammo and when the police found the gun under MB it was open because the magazine was empty, which means the gun was brought to the scene with only three bullets in it.
@Sdel, you are good at finding old posts. Can you find the posts that discuss how the gun was found from the thread about the police hearing thing?
[quote=“trubandloki, post:1413, topic:767426”] Can you find the posts that discuss how the gun was found from the thread about the police hearing thing?
[/quote]
It was very early on in the last thread about the hearing.
Nah
I’d forgotten about the discussion about whether the chamber was open upon arrival of the police and if it was because the gun had jammed.
I don’t shoot a Ruger 9mm so I have no experience on how easy they jam and whether it would be likely that the slide would be open. If someone was trying to clear a jam, for sure the slide would be open while that occurred.
That is how I took her multiple statements that mention the law firm she declares she hired. She was a little vague on if it’d be an actual lawsuit or petitioning the Congress to force a change to the rules that would make SS have to respond to allegations of victim blaming and bullying between adults. One statement also makes me think Safe Sport may have declined to consider the tapes.
That is what the following quotes seem to imply…
“ But I find it to be imperative for them to hire a blue chip global firm (preferably based in DC) and take on SafeSport also. Maybe even USEF too. USEF’s precious “donors,” may just get sick & tired of having to front the bill every time one of USEF’s “bad actors,” does something nearly unthinkable.”
“ If taken to Congress, laws could in fact be changed. In the extreme case, (if accepted) SCOTUS would hear arguments and make a ruling. That ruling would then become the precedent, as no such case involving SafeSport has ever been heard by SCOTUS at this time.”
“ If you’re going to fight an entire organization (or two, if we include Safesport) - two very well funded organizations- hire a firm who sees those organizations & thinks, “USEF VIPS & SAFESPORT? Ppffft! Welcome to DC”
“I was responding to VX re how an attorney could essentially change laws wrt SafeSport. Not make or decide the laws. Wrt this topic, SafeSport could be held accountable for either purposeful or non purposeful mistakes. In order to do that, it would probably need to begin with a civil suit, except, SafeSport is protected from lawsuits.”
“ False claims must never be tolerated. And SS should be able to tell the difference between the laughable & the critical. True claims, backed by all the types of evidence SS might require to investigate & proceed to next stages, must be taken seriously.”
I assume that the reason behind this is that Safe Sport combined her reports with the various other counter filed reports, dismissed them all, and then released the file to the defense during the investigation phase of the criminal and civil trials. See the following….
“ [the victims] distrusted their respective investigators (they likely had different one’s at first, but SS eventually assigned one investigator to combine the case) or distrusted the sudden switching around & n longer felt that SS was capable of properly handling a case if this magnitude.”
Sure thing. I’ll recopy my hearing notes from the last thread. Full disclosure…someone has consistently referred to them as “my fiction”….
Okay, I’m home and have my notes now. Walking through from when I logged in (I was a touch late) to finish.
Prosecution:
The officer was asked to describe what happened starting as he was coming up to the scene.
He pulled up into the drive way. Pulled his gun and preceded to approach from behind MB’s silver truck. Before he could see the scene he hear calls for “help”. As he came on the scene he saw LK on her back bleeding and to her right (2-3 ft away) he saw two males (later id’ed as RG and MB) with one on top of the other (RG on top, MB on bottom). MB’s left hand was underneath his torso. RG was ordered to get up and moved toward the side and back of the officer. When MB got up the gun was located on the ground near his left hand. The slot was back and locked, magazine not loaded. He was handcuffed with hands behind his back. Blood was on his face and he had a laceration on his forehead. Other officers arrived and Hensley took MB to the middle of the parking area at first, then moved him to a truck and utility trailer on the opposite side of the parking area from the house. He heard the statement “I had a good life” stated 2-3 times, verbatim quote while being attended by medical. MB had a blank stare and then left by ambulance.
This officer did not go to hospital. I’m going to break here because of the questions….but I heard differently then Eggbutt about the positions of RG/MB. I think I heard that RG had one hand pinning MB’s right hand pulled behind MB’s back and one hand pulling MB up by the shoulder.
Defense cross exam: (questions are paraphrased some)
When/what was the call
—call at 2:15 pm active shooter
Did you recognize the person calling for help (before you could see the situation) from responding to the 911 calls? Was it the person on top or bottom?
—No.
Was LK conscious?
-Unsure
Did you see RG hit/beat MB upon/after your arrival?
-No
There was some dickering about the exact question used, and the officer was handed his notes to try to refresh his memory, about how the officer asked who the shooter was on the scene.
Where did you find the three?
—right by the stairs…on a cement area.
Did you take your guard off of RG?
—No.
Was there a dog?
-a small dog bit my leg and boots. It was pretty aggressive.
Was RG concerned about harm to the dog?
-He said “Don’t hurt my dog.”
Don’t remember exact question….
—RG grabbed the dog and went into the house.
Was he searched?
—Objection and sustained. Reason, it was a Miranda hearing not an evidentiary hearing.
Did you recall any deformity to MB’s arm?
—No
Did MB cry out in pain (while being handcuffed)?
—No.
(Circled back around) Asked where the gun was after RG indicated the shooter.
—a lot of back and forth about exact words and what was in the report but essentially answered “RG said it was underneath MB.”
Revisited the condition the gun was found in.
—picked up in locked position, gun was empty, the officer separated the gun and magazine, no bullets in the magazine.
Asked if he knew how many bullets were in the magazine
—No
Asked if the officer noticed the injuries about MB’s head and eyes.
—No recall
Showed pictures to the officer and noted injuries to both eyes, ears, and head.
Asked officer about his comments on MB’s affect.
—Officer described MB as incoherent in the report and not talking.
Asked if his statements “I had a good life” as MB talking to himself
—yes, talking to himself
Asked if RG said the shooting was on video
—Yes, at one point
Did you notice blood on MB’s face? Did you determine you had blood on you.
—-Yes, a little, both MB and LK’s blood
You described the dog as small. Isn’t it 50-60 lbs?
—remember it as small (different from Eggbutt’s), but I wasn’t very afraid of it.
Prosecution redirect: None
Judge asked question of the officer about the basis for his use of the description that MB was incoherent.
—His blank stare, wasn’t aggressive/upset, he was “just there”.
Defenses closing arguments was a bit of a clash with the judge.
—asked the judge to consider the whole of the situation. The obvious injuries and beating he had received. That he was described as partially unconscious, dazed, and incoherent. His statement at the hospital were made after applications of major pain medicines.
-Judge interrupted and argued that his notes said the statements happened before the meds. Defense re-read the officer report and meds were given before each statement. Then judge argued that he can’t know that certain meds can cause confusion and in what time frame as that would require a medical expert witness.
No decision made today.
Dec 8th will be an in person evidence review between prosecution and defense. More motions may come from that.
Judge has 8 trials with 5 being jail case. Penciled in March 21st for jury selection with arguments starting March 28th. Expected 3 full weeks of argument.
Edited to make a clarification that was needed in the previous thread….
My notes are almost identical.
Color me NOT AT ALL surprised.
Thanks for going to the trouble to post that information.
Observation…weren’t several posters thrilled when the news came out that RC would testify for the prosecution? Does it seem that excitement has waned, or is it just me and the back and forth posts about RC and who said what when?
Mounting a full legal assault to make Safe Sport police bullying between adults - who have the means and frontal lobe development to mediate these situations WITHOUT congressional attention - is ridiculous. And frankly, I don’t see how this whole situation seems has anything to do with power imbalances, grooming, manipulation, or physical abuse. It pretty much seems like two people wouldn’t back down and insisted that their way was the right way - with MB’s version of events coming in a few months.
Safe Sport exists to protect those who are vulnerable AND can’t give legal consent. Being bullied as an adult sucks, but that’s why you can file harassment and cyberstalking charges.
I said what I said.
seems somebody wanted to weaponize SS - at least to me.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
