10-10-2015, 03:19 PM
(10-10-2015, 02:45 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Gee . . . wouldn't a straw purchase satisfy all three elements of aiding and abetting the felonious purchase of a firearm?
Silly me.
I thought there were laws and paperwork addressing this issue.
Especially if he attempted or threatened suicide.
Be aggressive, charge the bitch and let her do the explaining.
Well, we're all silly and wrong sometimes, Tiki. At least, I know I am.
No evidence has been released to the public supporting a charge of "aiding and abetting" against the idiot mom. Based on what we know now, that law on the books is not applicable in this case. That answers your question as to "why not charge her with aiding and abetting now?"
Law enforcement has indicated that all of the guns they found were purchased legally. If it turns out that idiot mom legally purchased the guns, but did so because her son legally could not, the law on the books prohibiting straw purchases can be used to file charges against her.
Still, straw purchasing the guns for her son would not legally equate to "aiding and abetting" UNLESS there is evidence that she had knowledge and intent pertaining to the crimes he carried out with those guns.
So, she should be charged with one or both of those offenses if probable cause turns up to support those charges. To charge her without probable cause, as you suggest, would be a violation of her Constitutional rights.
If no evidence is turned up to suggest that she committed either of those offenses, I don't know of any offense currently on the books which would apply to idiot mom in this case.