Felony Menacing in Colorado

[twelvegates]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CO

I live in a small community of a couple dozen homes and everyone knows everyone else's business. One of our elderly (over age 70) neighbors (I'll call him A) was recently charged with felony menacing. There are always two sides to the story, and I will try to combine them as best I can.

"A" was driving into the neighborhood as neighbor "B" and "B's" wife drove by him while exiting the neighborhood. "A" gave "B" the "one fingered salute" and may have swerved his car towards "B", though "A" claims it was "B" who swerved his car towards "A".

"A" then stopped his car in front of his home to retrieve his mail. Rather than proceed home, "B" swung his car around to come back after "A".

The story gets a bit murky here. "A" claims that "B" was blasting his car horn continuously while "B" and "B's" wife were laughing and pointing at him, and kept driving closer and closer to "A" as he was standing near the mailbox.

"B" claims that he turned the car around and drove back to "A" to demand an apology. (Evidently, this behavior from "A" has been ongoing for a while.)

"B" and "B's" wife claim that, as they drove up to "A", he drew a gun from a holster, aimed it at "B's" head, and threatened to kill him.

"B" claims he feared for his life, as he is elderly (age 75) and disabled, that he pointed at his weapon, saying "I've got a gun".

Either way, B" then drove backwards into someone else's driveway where he called 911.

In the meantime, "A" drove directly to the sheriff's office to report the incident. "A" was arrested on 2 counts of felony menacing, based on his own statement.

"A" was subsequently offered a plea deal for misdemeanor menacing, but refused it and has pled "not guilty". A jury trial was been scheduled for later this summer.

"A" has no prior arrests -- just a couple of speeding tickets in the past 10-20 years.

My initial thought was that this would be difficult case for the DA to prove, as there are two different explanations of what happened, but the fact that "B's" wife was present, and corroborates "B's" story gives me pause.

If you were defending this case, what do you think of "A's" chances of prevailing? ("A" has hired a criminal attorney.)

 

[HighwayMan]

If you were defending this case, what do you think of "A's" chances of prevailing? ("A" has hired a criminal attorney.)

Please do your own homework assignments.

 

[twelvegates]

Please do your own homework assignments.

Thanks for the snark. I'm a 59 year old neighbor of "A" and "B" and I'm worried for my friend.

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CO

I live in a small community of a couple dozen homes and everyone knows everyone else's business. One of our elderly (over age 70) neighbors (I'll call him A) was recently charged with felony menacing. There are always two sides to the story, and I will try to combine them as best I can.

"A" was driving into the neighborhood as neighbor "B" and "B's" wife drove by him while exiting the neighborhood. "A" gave "B" the "one fingered salute" and may have swerved his car towards "B", though "A" claims it was "B" who swerved his car towards "A".

"A" then stopped his car in front of his home to retrieve his mail. Rather than proceed home, "B" swung his car around to come back after "A".

The story gets a bit murky here. "A" claims that "B" was blasting his car horn continuously while "B" and "B's" wife were laughing and pointing at him, and kept driving closer and closer to "A" as he was standing near the mailbox.

"B" claims that he turned the car around and drove back to "A" to demand an apology. (Evidently, this behavior from "A" has been ongoing for a while.)

"B" and "B's" wife claim that, as they drove up to "A", he drew a gun from a holster, aimed it at "B's" head, and threatened to kill him.

"B" claims he feared for his life, as he is elderly (age 75) and disabled, that he pointed at his weapon, saying "I've got a gun".

Either way, B" then drove backwards into someone else's driveway where he called 911.

In the meantime, "A" drove directly to the sheriff's office to report the incident. "A" was arrested on 2 counts of felony menacing, based on his own statement.

"A" was subsequently offered a plea deal for misdemeanor menacing, but refused it and has pled "not guilty". A jury trial was been scheduled for later this summer.

"A" has no prior arrests -- just a couple of speeding tickets in the past 10-20 years.

My initial thought was that this would be a difficult case for the DA to prove, as there are two different explanations of what happened, but the fact that "B's" wife was present, and corroborates "B's" story gives me pause.

If you were defending this case, what do you think of "A's" chances of prevailing? ("A" has hired a criminal attorney.)

I think it will not be difficult for the DA to prove because, despite your belief that there are "always two sides to the story," A and B and B's wife apparently all agree with the single story told by A. It was this story told by A that led to the felony charges.

Menacing is charged as a felony when a weapon is involved - and it does not even need to be a real weapon. The weapon just has to be believed as real by the person being threatened with it. If B and B's wife were in fear of harm from the weapon wielded by A, the felony menacing is an appropriate charge. A faces up to 3 years in prison.

It is good that A has hired a criminal attorney. I hope the attorney he hired is a good one.

 

[latigo]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CO

I live in a small community of a couple dozen homes and everyone knows everyone else's business. One of our elderly (over age 70) neighbors (I'll call him A) was recently charged with felony menacing. There are always two sides to the story, and I will try to combine them as best I can.

"A" was driving into the neighborhood as neighbor "B" and "B's" wife drove by him while exiting the neighborhood. "A" gave "B" the "one fingered salute" and may have swerved his car towards "B", though "A" claims it was "B" who swerved his car towards "A".

"A" then stopped his car in front of his home to retrieve his mail. Rather than proceed home, "B" swung his car around to come back after "A".

The story gets a bit murky here. "A" claims that "B" was blasting his car horn continuously while "B" and "B's" wife were laughing and pointing at him, and kept driving closer and closer to "A" as he was standing near the mailbox.

"B" claims that he turned the car around and drove back to "A" to demand an apology. (Evidently, this behavior from "A" has been ongoing for a while.)

"B" and "B's" wife claim that, as they drove up to "A", he drew a gun from a holster, aimed it at "B's" head, and threatened to kill him.

"B" claims he feared for his life, as he is elderly (age 75) and disabled, that he pointed at his weapon, saying "I've got a gun".

Either way, B" then drove backwards into someone else's driveway where he called 911.

In the meantime, "A" drove directly to the sheriff's office to report the incident. "A" was arrested on 2 counts of felony menacing, based on his own statement.

"A" was subsequently offered a plea deal for misdemeanor menacing, but refused it and has pled "not guilty". A jury trial was been scheduled for later this summer.

"A" has no prior arrests -- just a couple of speeding tickets in the past 10-20 years.

My initial thought was that this would be difficult case for the DA to prove, as there are two different explanations of what happened, but the fact that "B's" wife was present, and corroborates "B's" story gives me pause.

If you were defending this case, what do you think of "A's" chances of prevailing? ("A" has hired a criminal attorney.)

Perhaps on further reflection you would like to add more to this meaningless, sleep inducing background like such essentials as what these people had for breakfast, the make, year and color of their vehicles, was it a dark and stormy night, or just "murky", blah, blah . . . . . .

This story may give you "pause", but the truth is that its duller than dishwater; plus, there isn't hint of legal issue.

 

[quincy]

twelvegates asked about the "odds" of his friend A being convicted in a jury trial on two counts of felony menacing - which is a legal question. It is just not one that we can answer. But it is a legal question.

I personally think A should have accepted the plea to misdemeanor menacing. I think it unlikely that a jury will be sympathetic to someone accused of aiming a gun at two people and threatening to kill them.

 

[twelvegates]

twelvegates asked about the "odds" of his friend A being convicted in a jury trial on two counts of felony menacing - which is a legal question. It is just not one that we can answer. But it is a legal question.

I personally think A should have accepted the plea to misdemeanor menacing. I think it unlikely that a jury will be sympathetic to someone accused of aiming a gun at two people and threatening to kill them.

Thanks for the answers. Sorry if the details were unnecessary, as I am not a lawyer or associated with the legal profession.

I was wondering if the idea of a claim to self defense would in any way counter the claim of felony menacing. "A" is old and disabled, and faced with a person coming at him with a vehicle. He could not have run away from the scene of the incident, and was unwilling to wait and see what "B" was going to do next.

 

[HighwayMan]

Let "A"'s attorney deal with "A"'s legal issue. You have no control over what happens and guessing or speculating about different scenarios is pretty much a waste of time.

 

[twelvegates]

Let "A"'s attorney deal with "A"'s legal issue. You have no control over what happens and guessing or speculating about different scenarios is pretty much a waste of time.

Yeah, I know. I just feel helpless because I can't help my friend, who has helped me so much over the years.

 

[latigo]

twelvegates asked about the "odds" of his friend A being convicted in a jury trial on two counts of felony menacing - which is a legal question. It is just not one that we can answer. . . .

The reason it cannot answer is because it is not a LEGAL question!

If the trier of the FACTS finds that the acts and conduct of the old geezer are as reported here, then it becomes a question of the state of his mind; to-wit: Did he know that his actions and conduct were likely to place the complainants in fear of serious bodily injury.

The variable or unknown is not the law in this instance, that is indisputable. It is a question of fact and fact only as to whether the defendant knowingly violated it.

If a jury trial, the jury wouldn't be charged with determining whether or not the acts complained of are criminal! They would be instructed as to the law and asked to find from the evidence whether or not the defendant committed the acts complained of.

 

[quincy]

Thanks for the answers. Sorry if the details were unnecessary, as I am not a lawyer or associated with the legal profession.

I was wondering if the idea of a claim to self defense would in any way counter the claim of felony menacing. "A" is old and disabled, and faced with a person coming at him with a vehicle. He could not have run away from the scene of the incident, and was unwilling to wait and see what "B" was going to do next.

The details were fine, twelvegates.

Although I see problems with a claim of self defense because it appears your friend was the initial aggressor (even though you say he later withdrew from the dispute to his own property), your friend's attorney has access to all of the facts and will know best what will work and what won't. I suggest you trust the attorney.

I understand your concern for your neighbor but I agree with HighwayMan. There does not seem to be much you can do to help.

 

[not2cleverRed]

<snip>

Either way, B" then drove backwards into someone else's driveway where he called 911.

In the meantime, "A" drove directly to the sheriff's office to report the incident. "A" was arrested on 2 counts of felony menacing, based on his own statement.

"A" was subsequently offered a plea deal for misdemeanor menacing, but refused it and has pled "not guilty". A jury trial was been scheduled for later this summer.

"A" has no prior arrests -- just a couple of speeding tickets in the past 10-20 years.

My initial thought was that this would be difficult case for the DA to prove, as there are two different explanations of what happened, but the fact that "B's" wife was present, and corroborates "B's" story gives me pause.

If you were defending this case, what do you think of "A's" chances of prevailing? ("A" has hired a criminal attorney.)

Your friend Mr. Athol was arrested "based on his own statement" to the police - after he went to the bother of reporting the incident in person.

If he was previously a gentleman, then perhaps he needs a physical to see if there's a medical basis for his change in behavior. He might also seek psychological help. Most of us aren't packing when we go to the mailbox. Most of us have been told since little children never to point a gun unless we intend to shoot it.

In addition to competent legal representation, Mr. Athol can help himself in the long run by determining what is causing his ungentlemanly behavior, and if possible addressing it. (This is especially useful if there is a medical basis.)