False Charges Dropped - Firearm Legal Defence

[dacron]

It's called public mischief , and is a criminal code charge. Accuser should have been charged with this.

That's up to the crown, not a defense lawyer / insurance service. And then the public will outcry if you jail accusers, real accusers will stay mum etc... So it's a moot point. You're better off with the insurance, hoping it can be proved malicious and recover the fees from the accuser. It'd probably do more to stop them from doing it again opposed to 3 months of un-monitored probation and an apology.

[Bigbubba]

I'm sure you know how to use google... In case you don't... https://firearmlegaldefence.com/gun-...apons-charges/

No offence to you, and yes I know how google works, but I am not trying to sell a product, Capri is. They should be showing me how great it is. Not expecting me to research it myself.

And as far as this article on their website, nowhere that I could see does it say they defended this individual. It's just a news article.
In fact it doesn't state what happened with his collection either - was it siezed or returned after he plead it out?
Did he plead guilty as part of a deal to get the collection back? Or for a lesser sentence? Lots of information missing here.

[doczong]

IANAL. I do work in a law firm, and deal with this regularly.

In Ontario, you can always sue in Civil court for costs of the preceding legal action, plus current legal action (to recoup the costs of the former).

This is aside from any charges you could get the Crown to accept and have the police charge the other party with. Don't forget, the crowns have a job to do, and all this costs money. Unless you make a giant stink about it, go to the media, etc, the chances of a crown pursuing charges on something so small as filing a false report, or mischief are quite slim. So forget getting the person charged criminally. Especially when it comes to something as charged as firearms. Good luck on malicious prosecution. The amount of discovery alone to make that case could bankrupt the normal person. And what's the return on investment? Recouped costs? Not worth the stress unless you have a lot of money and a high tolerance for stress.

So, on the Civil side (since we've given up on getting the crowns to prosecute, or getting the crowns prosecuted)... assuming you get judgement - you now need to collect. Many people are what is called "judgement proof" and unless they have liquid assets that you can seize, you are going to have a hard time collecting and recouping costs on hard assets.

It's a zero sum game.

[Trimmer 905]

IANAL. I do work in a law firm, and deal with this regularly.

In Ontario, you can always sue in Civil court for costs of the preceding legal action, plus current legal action (to recoup the costs of the former).

This is aside from any charges you could get the Crown to accept and have the police charge the other party with. Don't forget, the crowns have a job to do, and all this costs money. Unless you make a giant stink about it, go to the media, etc, the chances of a crown pursuing charges on something so small as filing a false report, or mischief are quite slim. So forget getting the person charged criminally. Especially when it comes to something as charged as firearms. Good luck on malicious prosecution. The amount of discovery alone to make that case could bankrupt the normal person. And what's the return on investment? Recouped costs? Not worth the stress unless you have a lot of money and a high tolerance for stress.

So, on the Civil side (since we've given up on getting the crowns to prosecute, or getting the crowns prosecuted)... assuming you get judgement - you now need to collect. Many people are what is called "judgement proof" and unless they have liquid assets that you can seize, you are going to have a hard time collecting and recouping costs on hard assets.

It's a zero sum game.

Thank you for that. I agree that obtaining a judgement is one thing,collecting is an entirely different matter. Are you recommending buying the insurance?

[captainamazing]

Isn't there a law that would get the malicious false accuser into trouble in cases like this?

its called Public Mischief. Causing a Police officer to initiate an investigation based on fabricated / misleading evidence.

[SteelCap]

IANAL. I do work in a law firm, and deal with this regularly.

In Ontario, you can always sue in Civil court for costs of the preceding legal action, plus current legal action (to recoup the costs of the former).

This is aside from any charges you could get the Crown to accept and have the police charge the other party with. Don't forget, the crowns have a job to do, and all this costs money. Unless you make a giant stink about it, go to the media, etc, the chances of a crown pursuing charges on something so small as filing a false report, or mischief are quite slim. So forget getting the person charged criminally. Especially when it comes to something as charged as firearms. Good luck on malicious prosecution. The amount of discovery alone to make that case could bankrupt the normal person. And what's the return on investment? Recouped costs? Not worth the stress unless you have a lot of money and a high tolerance for stress.

So, on the Civil side (since we've given up on getting the crowns to prosecute, or getting the crowns prosecuted)... assuming you get judgement - you now need to collect. Many people are what is called "judgement proof" and unless they have liquid assets that you can seize, you are going to have a hard time collecting and recouping costs on hard assets.

It's a zero sum game.

So using the same argument, how does the prosecution feel about being led on a wild goose chase? Would they the prosecution want to ensure that there is something worth prosecuting before proceeding? Otherwise they have jobs or better jobs to do than wasting time on some falsified report?

[volkov956]

I think going after the police for not properly investigating before acting would be a more usefull reaction to false charges the police system needs to be put in check when it comes to firearms and related items. The Police want people to file reports on each other we are in a snitch on each other situation

[bcbravo2zero]

IANAL. I do work in a law firm, and deal with this regularly.

In Ontario, you can always sue in Civil court for costs of the preceding legal action, plus current legal action (to recoup the costs of the former).

This is aside from any charges you could get the Crown to accept and have the police charge the other party with. Don't forget, the crowns have a job to do, and all this costs money. Unless you make a giant stink about it, go to the media, etc, the chances of a crown pursuing charges on something so small as filing a false report, or mischief are quite slim. So forget getting the person charged criminally. Especially when it comes to something as charged as firearms. Good luck on malicious prosecution. The amount of discovery alone to make that case could bankrupt the normal person. And what's the return on investment? Recouped costs? Not worth the stress unless you have a lot of money and a high tolerance for stress.

So, on the Civil side (since we've given up on getting the crowns to prosecute, or getting the crowns prosecuted)... assuming you get judgement - you now need to collect. Many people are what is called "judgement proof" and unless they have liquid assets that you can seize, you are going to have a hard time collecting and recouping costs on hard assets.

It's a zero sum game.

Totally agree. This would be the reality for most people.
I would add that if/when a litigant gets an award of costs in the civil action, it isn't a dollar-for-dollar reimbursement. Not at all...

[1bigrn]

The ones that don't have brains enough to buy the insurance are probably the ones that will need it.
I'm going to buy a policy.

So, if someone cannot afford it the they "don't have brains". The reality is that should not be such a need for this insurance. Just another unecessary cost for gun owners. The more expensive the hobby the less people doing it. Otherwise I would be yachting and jet flying!

[Bigbubba]

So using the same argument, how does the prosecution feel about being led on a wild goose chase? Would they the prosecution want to ensure that there is something worth prosecuting before proceeding? Otherwise they have jobs or better jobs to do than wasting time on some falsified report?

Exactly. Once the report is filed, the cops should be doing there due diligence (or the Crown should be) and then deciding if charges are needed or not and go from there. Not just lay charges and try and convince a judge the person is guilty.