Examination and Determinations Regarding the Handgun of Patricia McCloskey

Ken Whittle filed this request with the St. Louis County Circuit Court of St. Louis County, MO.
Est. Completion None
Status
Awaiting Response

Communications

From: Ken Whittle

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the The Missouri Sunshine Law, I hereby request the following records:

Any and all information, communications, documentation and memorandum relating to the circuit attorney's office decisions and actions in the disassembling of the handgun owned by Patricia McCloskey, the re-assembling of the handgun, firing of the handgun, and then finding that the gun was capable of lethal use and charging Ms. McCloskey.

Link: https://www.kmov.com/news/report-patricia-mccloskeys-handgun-inoperable-when-seized-by-police/article_dfd6a4e6-cb8d-11ea-a521-43ba7e819c88.html

"The handgun held by Patricia McCloskey at her home in the Central West End was not capable of firing when seized by police, according to a document obtained by News 4.

It’s a new development in the case against the local couple seen pointing guns outside their Central West End home last month. And it’s one that legal experts say raises very serious questions about whether the entire case can proceed.

The document was sent to News 4 anonymously, but it appears to be the lab report from the firearms analysis in the case.

It shows that two firearms were taken to the lab for testing. Both were taken into custody by St. Louis police in a search warrant executed on July 10.

The first, the rifle which Mark McCloskey was seen holding outside his home on June 28, as protesters marched through the Central West End and came through a gate on the private street.

According to the lab, it fired when tested.

But the gun Patricia McCloskey had, a small handgun, examiners say, could not be test-fired as submitted.

At the request of prosecutor Chris Hinkley, the report says, the firearm was stripped and found to have been assembled incorrectly. It was then re-assembled properly, test fired and functioned as designed. Charging documents said the gun was capable of lethal use.

“It would be disheartening to learn, if accurate, that the authorities tampered with evidence in order to bring charges against an innocent member of the community,” the McCloskey's attorney Joel Schwartz said. He declined to comment further. A previous attorney for the McCloskey's had indicated the gun had been rendered inoperable long before the incident because it had been used as an exhibit in previous lawsuits. That attorney, Al Watkins, had the gun in his possession for a short time, but turned it over to police.

Legal experts say that the law in Missouri is clear: In order for Patricia McCloskey to be guilty of exhibiting a weapon, which she was charged with Monday, the gun she had has to be readily capable of lethal use. If it was inoperable, some attorneys say she never should have been charged in the first place.

A spokesperson for the Circuit Attorney’s Office would not comment this Tuesday, saying it’s a pending case."

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 3 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Ken Whittle

From: City of St. Louis

Good morning!

Muckrock News has erroneously sent several sunshine requests to (314)
622-4392, the fax number for the Department of Public Safety which impacts
response timeliness.

As a courtesy to Muckrock News, the Department of Public Safety has
forwarded the requests to the City's Sunshine Request Coordinator.

Going forward please follow the proper procedure when submitting a Sunshine
Request to the City of St Louis to facilitate a timely response. Click on
link for directions on how to properly file a Sunshine Request St Louis
City Sunshine Request Information
<https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/departments/counselor/sunshine-requests.cfm#servicePreparation>

Please share this information with the appropriate parties within your
organization.

Sincerely,

Kim Cole
Government Services Analyst
Department of Public Safety
City Hall, Room 401
(314) 589-6037
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/

*Be counted! Participate in the 2020 Census!*

From: City of St. Louis

Dear Ken Whittle:

In response to your online above-referenced request, please be advised
that further information for submitting such request and the appropriate
point of contact are attached.

When seeking records of other points of contacts and agencies, such contact
information may be found by following the Organizations and Contacts
<https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/departments/counselor/other-records-requests.cfm>
link
under the preparation section of the Sunshine Law and Public Records
Requests page.

The above-referenced request, with our office, is now considered closed.
Thank you.

Sincerely,

Diedra Weaver
Sunshine Law Coordinator
City of St. Louis
City Counselor's Office
1200 Market St., Room 314
St. Louis, MO 63103-2864
(314)622-4084

*We have a new easy way to submit sunshine requests! Just use the "Begin
online" button here: Make a Sunshine Request
<https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/departments/counselor/sunshine-requests.cfm>.*

RE: 1371003

NOTE: This information contained in this e-mail message, including any
attachments, is legally privileged and confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, use or
dissemination of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this message in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at (314)
622-3361 and delete this message from your system. Although this e-mail
and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect
that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened,
it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free,
and no responsibility is accepted by the City of St. Louis for any loss or
damage arising in any way from its use.

From: Ken Whittle

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the The Missouri Sunshine Law, I hereby request the following records:

Any and all information, communications, documentation and memorandum relating to the circuit attorney's office decisions and actions in the disassembling of the handgun owned by Patricia McCloskey, the re-assembling of the handgun, firing of the handgun, and then finding that the gun was capable of lethal use and charging Ms. McCloskey.

Link: https://www.kmov.com/news/report-patricia-mccloskeys-handgun-inoperable-when-seized-by-police/article_dfd6a4e6-cb8d-11ea-a521-43ba7e819c88.html

"The handgun held by Patricia McCloskey at her home in the Central West End was not capable of firing when seized by police, according to a document obtained by News 4.

It’s a new development in the case against the local couple seen pointing guns outside their Central West End home last month. And it’s one that legal experts say raises very serious questions about whether the entire case can proceed.

The document was sent to News 4 anonymously, but it appears to be the lab report from the firearms analysis in the case.

It shows that two firearms were taken to the lab for testing. Both were taken into custody by St. Louis police in a search warrant executed on July 10.

The first, the rifle which Mark McCloskey was seen holding outside his home on June 28, as protesters marched through the Central West End and came through a gate on the private street.

According to the lab, it fired when tested.

But the gun Patricia McCloskey had, a small handgun, examiners say, could not be test-fired as submitted.

At the request of prosecutor Chris Hinkley, the report says, the firearm was stripped and found to have been assembled incorrectly. It was then re-assembled properly, test fired and functioned as designed. Charging documents said the gun was capable of lethal use.

“It would be disheartening to learn, if accurate, that the authorities tampered with evidence in order to bring charges against an innocent member of the community,” the McCloskey's attorney Joel Schwartz said. He declined to comment further. A previous attorney for the McCloskey's had indicated the gun had been rendered inoperable long before the incident because it had been used as an exhibit in previous lawsuits. That attorney, Al Watkins, had the gun in his possession for a short time, but turned it over to police.

Legal experts say that the law in Missouri is clear: In order for Patricia McCloskey to be guilty of exhibiting a weapon, which she was charged with Monday, the gun she had has to be readily capable of lethal use. If it was inoperable, some attorneys say she never should have been charged in the first place.

A spokesperson for the Circuit Attorney’s Office would not comment this Tuesday, saying it’s a pending case."

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 3 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Ken Whittle

Files

pages

Close