Tag Archives: Abigail Zwerner

The legality of it

Yes, we see that at times. There is legality to nearly anything and it is not always clear how to steer the law. Even as we were given yesterday (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64897423) the headline ‘US six-year-old who shot teacher won’t be charged – prosecutor’ there are no real questions on that setting. A 6 year old is too young to understand the law (Doli Incapax), as such he cannot be prosecuted. Yet when we look back at ‘United States of Criminality’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/09/united-states-of-criminality/) now over two months ago. I gave the reader “more important nothing on the parents. Is anyone waking up? Then there is CBS who used the line “a handgun was used”, was that all? There are over 170,000,000 of handguns in the US (according to one source) there are thousands of brands. I think that the police from day one could have done better than “a handgun was used” and the media never followed up on it, at least not from the dozen or so sources I saw. So why not? What makes this case different? Who are the parents? I let you simmer on this” and even more on the story before that, a day before that I gave the readers “He also would not comment on how the boy got access to the gun or who owns the weapon” that was more than two months ago. Now we see “authorities in the city of Newport News have yet to decide if any adult will face criminal charges in the case” with the added “once we analyse all the facts, we will charge any person or persons that we believe we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt committed a crime” It took me less than 5 minutes to get to there in January and two months later the locals did not even wake up yet. So any weapon BS approach is now non existent in the US. Two months and nothing was done, so don’t come to me on anti gun laws, on anti violent crimes. A setting that was clear where the parents had clear responsibility to keep guns out of the hands of children these parents failed miserably. I would speculate that this stinks of nepotism. The Law, the media they all failed here and there is enough printed evidence to make that case of failure. There is enough evidence to wonder what on earth the police forces in Virginia is doing, so far they did close to nothing. The school failed, the police failed, the law failed. As I see it that teacher is due a 7 figure payout and the first number will be well higher than a ‘1’. As I see it the media is merely milking these situations, if not the entire Virginia case would have been on the forefront of EVERY news cycle for weeks to come and perhaps something would have been done, but it isn’t. So if you want to get angry about gun laws, do something about these failures, because they are clear failures on multiple levels no less.


Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

And I was right (yet again)

This all started for me on the 8th of January when I wrote ‘Little shits’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/08/little-shits/) I asked questions then which was mere hour after the event. Now the BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64406295) ‘Three warnings before US boy, 6, shot teacher – lawyer’ a mere hour ago. We get to see “This included a request to search the boy and a report from another child who said the boy had shown him a gun. The teacher – Abigail Zwerner, 25 – is recovering after being released from hospital last week. In the fallout, the school’s superintendent has now lost his job.” I had clear questions which did not reflect on the quotes. I wondered why the mother had not been taken away on suspicion of attempted negligent manslaughter, there is a case to be made for co-conspirator for grievous bodily harm, none of that happened. And when we get to “The removal of Mr Parker happened only hours after Ms Zwerner’s lawyer, Diane Toscano, announced plans to sue the district, saying the shooting was “entirely preventable”.” It is sacrificing superintendent Parker to make the optional damage less. But that is not the case, it is actually a lot worse. It is seen with “Virginia law prohibits anyone from recklessly leaving a loaded, unsecured firearm in such a way that may endanger a child under 14 years of age.” The added “the gun used by the boy had been legally purchased by his mother. The boy’s family said the weapon had been “secured”. Police have not responded to this claim” merely makes this worse. You see, if it was secured a 6 year old should not be able to get to it, you do get that, don’t you. I saw this in the first instance, questions should have been asked and they are brushed away on a few levels, so as I see it, the monetary claim for the shot teacher will go into the millions and she will win. When her lawyer Diane Toscano has a go at the people still there, this case will be decided for the teacher and I expect this will be a quick decision. And it also shows how much of a joke American schools are. They are all about safety and no guns and basic security is overlooked as the article clearly shows. So when I hear another idiot shout gun laws, I will tell them to get a clue and leave their young child at the Richneck Elementary School in Virginia. The quote “The official allegedly responded: “Well, he has little pockets.”” Merely angered me more. 

You see, I can kill a person with a simple Derringer .22. A gun is a tool and the army trained me to use this tool properly. One you see the elements that make for a gun, a flintlock pistol can be just as deadly as a magnum .44, the bullet kills and the bullet does not need to be large, a decent understanding of anatomy gets you there. So the entire Richneck Elementary School farce is a big joke from start to finish and I saw the elemental issue on January 8th, it seems that the BBC is only catching on 2 weeks after the fact and they aren’t even there yet. If they were the articles would have been a lot more aggressive and the media as a whole failed people and future victims in all of this. A stage that has been visible for weeks and no one acted, more important, the media isn’t asking any questions. With all the anti gun sentiments, are you not curious why?

Consider “The boy’s family”, no mention of the father, the mother and the mother is only mentioned to the smallest degree. So who was responsible for keeping the firearm secured? How did a 6 year old get to it? It might be an acceptable reason, but that also sets the bar for Doli Incapax higher and the mention of “the family of the young boy said he suffered from an “acute disability”” just doesn’t cut the mustard. This case stinks to high heaven and the media isn’t doing it job. Why not?


1 Comment

Filed under Law, Media