imported post
This would be an excellent case to get elivated to the WSSC. Unfortunately the risk is great. It would require that the oerson be convicted of the current charges and then there is no assurance that if convicted and appealed that the WSSC will even hear the case. The result being a felony conviction and loss of firearm possession for life. My opinion is that the legislature intentionally made the penalty a felony in order to dissuade legal contests. Then , again, I may be giving the legislature credit for intellegence it doesn't possess.
In any regard the fact the prosecution got two different measurements (and there is no evidence that even the second measurement is correct). Was it done by the police department? If so what technique was used? Anything less than a professional survey is prone to error. According to measurement two, the error in judgement by the accused was 46 feet. That amounts to an error percentage of 4.6%. Most private citizens don't have ready access to a measurig technique with that degree of accuracy. The only method of measurement that is generally without question is a professional survey. Any other measurement is subject. It is especially subject ifa straight line measurement must traverse private property where it may encounter buildingswhich require measurement bypasses, each bypass injects possible error into the measurement. By bypass I mean each time the measurement encounters a building the track must deviate 90 degrees, measure the building, then deviate 90 degrees back to the original line. By now you are seeing the stupidity of the whole situation. Remember, we're talking about a 46' 1in. distance which would determine guilty or not guilty. 46 feet in over a fifth of a mile. I'm suprised the prosecution didn't let the judges dismissal stand, especially when even they didn't get it right the first time.
