Help Ward Bird of Moultonborough

[sa meredith]

Folks...my sincere hope is to not get sucked into any back and forth thing here. Ward is home, that's the only thing that really matters. While I never thought he belonged in jail, I also never thought he was blameless in this whole mess.
I find many of these posts indeed comical...the ones ragging on the Gov, and not satisfied because he was not granted full pardon. ARE YOU FREAKIN' FOR REAL??!!!
Everyone has been saying, Free Bird, Free Bird, Free Bird, Free Bird...and he is free...but noooooooo, now that's not enough. Christ, he's home. Enough all ready. Good for him.
So he can't pack heat anymore...ohh, the horror of it all.
He can't work with Boy Scouts...maybe unfair, but not as unfair as being behind bars.
Look, I read thru a lot of this stuff...and don't know Ward, and know Harris is off her rocker.
One thing stood out for me ...one, just one, so don't hate on me MARKNH. This is a guy (Ward) who at one time, while drinking, was part of a group firing a gun at a tree stump (so they say, anyway). And witnessed a bullet enter a near by home. And what was Ward's intial reaction (before the next day)???? To run home and do nothing. Hide, as it were. Someone could have been lying on the floor, bleeding to death. I don't care if he fired the shot or not...he saw it. This is all accurate info, according to police reports.
So let's back it down a bit. This man should probably not have been in prison...but he should probably not have guns either.
He is not blameless in this whole mess...no way, no how.
So, let's hold off on naming him Saint Ward.

[RailroadJoe]

Can his wife have guns?

[jeffk]

OK sa meredith let me try a story.

You walk into a bar for a drink and are sitting there minding your own business when a strange woman walks up and starts screaming at you. This goes on for a while and someone calls the police. Shortly you are at the police station and find yourself arrested for raping this woman that you have never meet before. The evidence is flimsy but the woman is emotional and certain in her accusation and a sympathetic jury finds you guilty. You are sentenced to 5 years. Because you are a model prisoner you end up with early release but you are now a convicted sex offender. It all seems so unfair.

But a former girl friend from college has told the media that the two of you got drunk one night and you had sex with her against her wishes. She didn't really say no but she was pretty out of it. So you have a history of taking advantage of women. You probably deserve the rape conviction.

And all you did was go into a bar for a drink.

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by jeffk

OK sa meredith let me try a story.

But a former girl friend from college has told the media that the two of you got drunk one night and you had sex with her against her wishes. She didn't really say no but she was pretty out of it. So you have a history of taking advantage of women. You probably deserve the rape conviction.

.

Wait a minute...were you with me at North Adams State college???

[christo1]

Originally Posted by jeffk

OK sa meredith let me try a story.

You walk into a bar for a drink and are sitting there minding your own business when a strange woman walks up and starts screaming at you. This goes on for a while and someone calls the police. Shortly you are at the police station and find yourself arrested for raping this woman that you have never meet before. The evidence is flimsy but the woman is emotional and certain in her accusation and a sympathetic jury finds you guilty. You are sentenced to 5 years. Because you are a model prisoner you end up with early release but you are now a convicted sex offender. It all seems so unfair.

But a former girl friend from college has told the media that the two of you got drunk one night and you had sex with her against her wishes. She didn't really say no but she was pretty out of it. So you have a history of taking advantage of women. You probably deserve the rape conviction.

And all you did was go into a bar for a drink.

sounds like a certain super bowl quarterback!

[Seeker]

Originally Posted by RailroadJoe

Can his wife have guns?

I would say no. At least not on or in his premises. He would not be allowed access to the area in which they were stored. If he did it would not be actual but constructive possession which now is also normally judged illegal and subject to the same penalties (up to 10 yrs).

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by RailroadJoe

Can his wife have guns?

Of course she can. She lives with Ward so she needs a weapon to protect herself!

[TOAD]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

Of course she can. She lives with Ward so she needs a weapon to protect herself!

Way it should be.

[RailroadJoe]

I agree, but remember if the gun is in her name, but in the residence of Ward, does this violate his terms of no weapon?

I'd like to know as my son falls under the same problem. He can not have a gun to hunt with and we always hunted together.

[NoBozo]

I suspect Ward can't be within 300 yards...OR whatever".. of a Gun. If he gets within 300 yards...."OR Whatever"..of a Police station he will have to detour around it. Just the way it is Today. NB

[sa meredith]

Secondcurve...I think your joke may have been lost on people. A bit harsh...but funny enough to lighten things up. It was was getting out of hand.
To folks who PM'd me...apprieciate the words, but truly was never looking to make a stand.
I was truly a neutral observer, took an interest in this mess, read all I could...and just can't believe the way that most Bird suporters won't concede an inch. I find it truly confusing.
The thread should die, but as it is still open...what the heck...
I think the strangest thing in this whole case, is the Bird supports who want to say how relevant Harris' history is...and yet don't want to get involved with Bird's history. How does that work?
I also find it strange that not one Bird supporter...not one will concede on the fact that, if Bird had not went to get his gun that day, before going outside...none of this happens. None of it. The supports want to talk about their "right to carry" and "I just don't understand his way of life...he always carries". I get all that. I concede to you all...guns are great, I'm buying my first one this afternoon. Now, concede that...simply, had he not made the decision to bring his gun outside to meet Harris, none of this happens.
I also find it strange that all Bird supports went sideways crazy on me, when I suggested he plead this out. You all explained to me, "he is a man of character...why would he make a plea. He did nothing wrong, so why accept responsibilty for it". Ok, I'll buy it. You win. So I ask...applying that same logic, why in 2002, did he pay for repairs to the house that was shot during target practice. You just told me he would not take responsiblity for something he did not do. Certainly, fine members of this forum, you are not employing a double standard, are you? The logic would have to be applied to both cases.
In the end, Ward is home...WHERE HE BELONGS! Harris, the nut job, cost him a Christmas with his family that he can never get back...shame on her.
But enough of this pardon stuff..and ragging on the very Gov that set him free.
His gun carrying days are over. Is that something really worth getting all cranked up over? Simply put...he was not completely blameless here.
These are the thoughts (mine) of a neutral observer, who never met Ward, and knows Harris to be a bad person.

[NoRegrets]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

.....I was truly a neutral observer, took an interest in this mess, read all I could...and just can't believe the way that most Bird suporters won't concede an inch. I find it truly confusing.
The thread should die, but as it is still open...what the heck...
I think the strangest thing in this whole case, is the Bird supports who want to say how relevant Harris' history is...and yet don't want to get involved with Bird's history. How does that work?
I also find it strange that not one Bird supporter...not one will concede on the fact that, if Bird had not went to get his gun that day, before going outside...none of this happens. None of it. The supports want to talk about their "right to carry" and "I just don't understand his way of life...he always carries". I get all that. I concede to you all...guns are great, I'm buying my first one this afternoon. Now, concede that...simply, had he not made the decision to bring his gun outside to meet Harris, none of this happens.
I also find it strange that all Bird supports went sideways crazy on me, when I suggested he plead this out. You all explained to me, "he is a man of character...why would he make a plea. He did nothing wrong, so why accept responsibilty for it". Ok, I'll buy it. You win. So I ask...applying that same logic, why in 2002, did he pay for repairs to the house that was shot during target practice. You just told me he would not take responsiblity for something he did not do. Certainly, fine members of this forum, you are not employing a double standard, are you? The logic would have to be applied to both cases....

My thinking has changed alot since 2002. I do not think life is static and we all can change postions and become either hardened or compasionite based on situations, moods, or events beyond our control. The forum should allow all to verbally spar and exercise their minds. I think the jabs become entertaining (providing they do not get personal).

You are applying exact logic to your argument without acounting for change.
People that "go strange" on you are probably just frustrated that they can not effectively articulate their feelings, ideas, or just need to compensate for some unknown reason.

I am pleased he is home and can watch this weekends super bowl. GO STEELERS!

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Secondcurve...I think your joke may have been lost on people. A bit harsh...but funny enough to lighten things up. It was was getting out of hand.
To folks who PM'd me...apprieciate the words, but truly was never looking to make a stand.
I was truly a neutral observer, took an interest in this mess, read all I could...and just can't believe the way that most Bird suporters won't concede an inch. I find it truly confusing.
The thread should die, but as it is still open...what the heck...
I think the strangest thing in this whole case, is the Bird supports who want to say how relevant Harris' history is...and yet don't want to get involved with Bird's history. How does that work?
I also find it strange that not one Bird supporter...not one will concede on the fact that, if Bird had not went to get his gun that day, before going outside...none of this happens. None of it. The supports want to talk about their "right to carry" and "I just don't understand his way of life...he always carries". I get all that. I concede to you all...guns are great, I'm buying my first one this afternoon. Now, concede that...simply, had he not made the decision to bring his gun outside to meet Harris, none of this happens. I also find it strange that all Bird supports went sideways crazy on me, when I suggested he plead this out. You all explained to me, "he is a man of character...why would he make a plea. He did nothing wrong, so why accept responsibilty for it". Ok, I'll buy it. You win. So I ask...applying that same logic, why in 2002, did he pay for repairs to the house that was shot during target practice. You just told me he would not take responsiblity for something he did not do. Certainly, fine members of this forum, you are not employing a double standard, are you? The logic would have to be applied to both cases.
In the end, Ward is home...WHERE HE BELONGS! Harris, the nut job, cost him a Christmas with his family that he can never get back...shame on her.
But enough of this pardon stuff..and ragging on the very Gov that set him free.
His gun carrying days are over. Is that something really worth getting all cranked up over? Simply put...he was not completely blameless here.
These are the thoughts (mine) of a neutral observer, who never met Ward, and knows Harris to be a bad person.

Why did he go out onto the porch in the first place ? To deal with a person who was knowingly, willingly and purposely,trespassing.

You feel that a larger portion of the blames lies on Wards shoulders because when he walked out on to his porch, he chose to take his firearm with him which is something he just always does.

I and many others feel that. Had Christine Harris followed the instructions given her and not entered onto property that she was distinctly told not to enter, then Ward would have Never had to walk out onto his porch at All, gun or no gun !

So, if we want to point a finger at which person started the ball of legal woes rolling in the first place, that blame falls 100% squarely on the shoulders of Christine Harris.

Per your logic. If I get in my truck to go to the post office, which is just something I always do, and I crash into the side of a car whose driver knowingly, willingly and purposely pulls out in front of me, the accident would have to be mostly My fault. Sure the other driver has to share some of the blame for driving like a bonehead but the majority of the blame is on me. Why ?
Because if I had not made the decision to drive my truck to the post office and had walked instead, then the accident would never have happened.

Originally Posted by sa meredith

In the end, Ward is home...WHERE HE BELONGS! Harris, the nut job, cost him a Christmas with his family that he can never get back...shame on her..

That was very nicely said. Thank you

PS. I thought I did very good in ignoring secondcurve's sarcastic comment.

[Heaven]

Without some new information, it is clear to me that the woman was lost and her arrival at Bird's house was in innocence.

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Heaven

Without some new information, it is clear to me that the woman was lost and her arrival at Bird's house was in innocence.

Hmmm, lets see. Private dead end road. One way in, one way out. Ok, I guess I can accept that there are obviously some people mentally challenged enough to have difficulty with that concept.
Clearly instructed to NOT go past the white trailer but chose to do so anyway. Yup, that is clearly an innocent act all right.

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

Hmmm, lets see. Private dead end road. One way in, one way out. Ok, I guess I can accept that there are clearly some people mentally challenged enough to have difficulty with that concept.
Clearly instructed to NOT go past the white trailer but chose to do so anyway. Yup, that is clearly an innocent act all right.

You never answered when I asked if your read the trial transcript? Have you?

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Heaven

You never answered when I asked if your read the trial transcript? Have you?

Yes ! I have also been on the road where Christine Harris "say's" she was "lost". Only an idiot can get lost on that road !

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

Yes ! I have also been on the road where Christine Harris "say's" she was "lost". Only an idiot can get lost on that road !

So you agree that she was directed to the road by Ward's niece.

And you agree that she would have to pass through Ward's property, through "No Trespassing" signs, by his driveway, in order to get to the listed property.

And you agree this is a looney woman from the southern part of the State wearing a red pantsuit, for god's sake, and not some local wood-booger like you and me. She missed "the bridge", went on the wrong side of the white trailer and turned up his driveway instead of proceeding further down the road.

Yea, she got lost.

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Heaven

So you agree that she was directed to the road by Ward's niece.

And you agree that she would have to pass through Ward's property, through "No Trespassing" signs, by his driveway, in order to get to the listed property.

And you agree this is a looney woman from the southern part of the State wearing a red pantsuit, for god's sake, and not some local wood-booger like you and me. She missed "the bridge", went on the wrong side of the white trailer and turned up his driveway instead of proceeding further down the road.

Yea, she got lost.

If I am at your house and ask you where the guest bathroom is. You tell me it is down the hall, 2nd door on the right but don't go past the White greek statue because that is not where the guest bath is located. I choose to go past the White greek statue (the one I was Told Not to go past) anyway, does that mean I am lost or just to stupid to follow simple directions and/ or maybe wants to snoop around ?
I do however agree that she is a Loony woman from the southern part of the state wearing a red pantsuit.

[Heaven]

MarkinNH many of your comments sound like what an idealistic young man would say, and I don't mean that disrespectfully.

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

Plus, please don't forget that a jury of 12 of Ward's peers found him GUILTY. Could all of these folks simply have misunderstood Ward?

Secondcurve...I have deleted this post after re-thinking about my continued involvement in this thread.
I no longer want to bang my head against the wall.
Apparently, 12 jury members, a prosecutor, police officers, and a judge, all got it wrong.
My bad. Ward is indeed blameless.
Could you please delete your post, as your response captured my post, and I want out.
My final thought is that he never belonged in jail...punishment did not fit crime. He may however have some anger management issues, and perhaps has become a bit to comfortable with his guns.
Rock on...

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Secondcurve...I have deleted this post after re-thinking about my continued involvement in this thread.
I no longer want to bang my head against the wall.
Apparently, 12 jury members, a prosecutor, police officers, and a judge, all got it wrong.
My bad. Ward is indeed blameless.
Could you please delete your post, as your response captured my post, and I want out.
My final thought is that he never belonged in jail...punishment did not fit crime. He may however have some anger management issues, and perhaps has become a bit to comfortable with his guns.
Rock on...

I am done, too. Hopefully, things go well for Ward in the future.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

Yes ! I have also been on the road where Christine Harris "say's" she was "lost". Only an idiot can get lost on that road !

At the pardon hearing in concord Carroll County Attorney Tom Dewhurst said: “the jury did visit the area of Bird’s house and found it would have been easy to get turned around”.

OH Well, just 12 randomly picked Carroll County citizens who are idiots just like Harris….isn’t that right MarkinNH?

[hoopdawg]

Well he is free !!! now can we be free of all the signs ??? take them down

[Tank151]

I hope this knuckle-head is banned for possession of owning any firearms or weapons for that matter! Based on his past, we'll see his name here again I sure. Just hope it's not a fatality where this clown shoots an innocent citizen or law enforcement officer?

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Rusty

At the pardon hearing in concord Carroll County Attorney Tom Dewhurst said: “the jury did visit the area of Bird’s house and found it would have been easy to get turned around”.

OH Well, just 12 randomly picked Carroll County citizens who are idiots just like Harris….isn’t that right MarkinNH?

The words you quote are the words of the current county prosecutor not necessarily the words of all 12 jurors.... isn't that right Rusty?

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by MarkinNH

The words you quote are the words of the current county prosecutor not necessarily the words of all 12 jurors.... isn't that right Rusty?

I have been on Emerson Path and the Yukon Trail and know for a fact that a person can get mixed up and end up lost, so you can call me one of those idiots also. I had some business dealings with Lakes Region Water Co. and that got me to know that area pretty well. I don’t want to go into detail as to what transpired so I’ll just leave it at that.

[jeffk]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Secondcurve...I think your joke may have been lost on people. A bit harsh...but funny enough to lighten things up. It was was getting out of hand.
To folks who PM'd me...apprieciate the words, but truly was never looking to make a stand.
I was truly a neutral observer, took an interest in this mess, read all I could...and just can't believe the way that most Bird suporters won't concede an inch. I find it truly confusing.
The thread should die, but as it is still open...what the heck...
I think the strangest thing in this whole case, is the Bird supports who want to say how relevant Harris' history is...and yet don't want to get involved with Bird's history. How does that work?
I also find it strange that not one Bird supporter...not one will concede on the fact that, if Bird had not went to get his gun that day, before going outside...none of this happens. None of it. The supports want to talk about their "right to carry" and "I just don't understand his way of life...he always carries". I get all that. I concede to you all...guns are great, I'm buying my first one this afternoon. Now, concede that...simply, had he not made the decision to bring his gun outside to meet Harris, none of this happens.
I also find it strange that all Bird supports went sideways crazy on me, when I suggested he plead this out. You all explained to me, "he is a man of character...why would he make a plea. He did nothing wrong, so why accept responsibilty for it". Ok, I'll buy it. You win. So I ask...applying that same logic, why in 2002, did he pay for repairs to the house that was shot during target practice. You just told me he would not take responsiblity for something he did not do. Certainly, fine members of this forum, you are not employing a double standard, are you? The logic would have to be applied to both cases.
In the end, Ward is home...WHERE HE BELONGS! Harris, the nut job, cost him a Christmas with his family that he can never get back...shame on her.
But enough of this pardon stuff..and ragging on the very Gov that set him free.
His gun carrying days are over. Is that something really worth getting all cranked up over? Simply put...he was not completely blameless here.
These are the thoughts (mine) of a neutral observer, who never met Ward, and knows Harris to be a bad person.

First, considering the circumstances, I think secondcurve's "joke" was in very poor taste.

Next, I think you are far from a neutral observer. You have a mocking and prejudicial tone about people who carry guns. I have never owned a gun (OK a BB gun) and only used a friend's 22 once in my teens. I don't think I would qualify as a gun nut. However I respect the people who choose to carry guns responsibly. Yes, Ward was drunk and stupid and fired at a tree stump in a populated area. He turned himself in, was convicted of a violation and paid a fine (a standard punishment), and he replaced the window he broke. The matter was closed and hopefully he learned something.

Ever driven faster than the speed limit sa meredith? Maybe run a stoplight? Driven when you were probably drunk? Did you turn yourself in or pay any penalty? If you are driving with your cruise control locked on 58 and an officer mistakenly tickets you for doing 70 in a 55 zone should all your past traffic sins be used to judge you this time? If so, most of us wouldn't have licenses to drive anymore.

And I guess your reputation doesn't mean much to you. You wouldn't mind being a wrongly convicted felon. Gun use doesn't matter to you but suppose they took away your car license. If you were a gun user a lot of your friends have guns so you can no longer go to their houses or go hunting or target shooting with them. Some states don't allow felons to vote. Would that matter to you? You have to declare your conviction on employment applications. Do you think that might affect your employability? How many social organizations want nothing to do with you if you are a felon? Aw, what the heck, it's just a felony conviction.

Finally, you claim that Ward is not blameless. If he didn't threaten her with his gun he is. He could have walked anywhere around town that he wanted to with his gun, many people do, and NONE of them are doing anything wrong, legally or otherwise. And you claim that if he had not brought his gun with him nothing would have happened. But we are told Ms. Harris accused her landlord falsely of physically harassing her when he was never anywhere around her. She could have accused Ward of the same thing, or pushing her, or other type of assault. There was no evidence of it but there was no evidence that Ward did anything with his gun either. Ms. Harris has a great ability to manufacture trouble and I think you are naive to think that the presence of Ward's gun was the source of the problem. It is only your prejudice that makes you think so.

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by jeffk

First, considering the circumstances, I think secondcurve's "joke" was in very poor taste.

Next, I think you are far from a neutral observer. You have a mocking and prejudicial tone about people who carry guns. I have never owned a gun (OK a BB gun) and only used a friend's 22 once in my teens. I don't think I would qualify as a gun nut. However I respect the people who choose to carry guns responsibly. Yes, Ward was drunk and stupid and fired at a tree stump in a populated area. He turned himself in, was convicted of a violation and paid a fine (a standard punishment), and he replaced the window he broke. The matter was closed and hopefully he learned something.

Ever driven faster than the speed limit sa meredith? Maybe run a stoplight? Driven when you were probably drunk? Did you turn yourself in or pay any penalty? If you are driving with your cruise control locked on 58 and an officer mistakenly tickets you for doing 70 in a 55 zone should all your past traffic sins be used to judge you this time? If so, most of us wouldn't have licenses to drive anymore.

And I guess your reputation doesn't mean much to you. You wouldn't mind being a wrongly convicted felon. Gun use doesn't matter to you but suppose they took away your car license. If you were a gun user a lot of your friends have guns so you can no longer go to their houses or go hunting or target shooting with them. Some states don't allow felons to vote. Would that matter to you? You have to declare your conviction on employment applications. Do you think that might affect your employability? How many social organizations want nothing to do with you if you are a felon? Aw, what the heck, it's just a felony conviction.

Finally, you claim that Ward is not blameless. If he didn't threaten her with his gun he is. He could have walked anywhere around town that he wanted to with his gun, many people do, and NONE of them are doing anything wrong, legally or otherwise. And you claim that if he had not brought his gun with him nothing would have happened. But we are told Ms. Harris accused her landlord falsely of physically harassing her when he was never anywhere around her. She could have accused Ward of the same thing, or pushing her, or other type of assault. There was no evidence of it but there was no evidence that Ward did anything with his gun either. Ms. Harris has a great ability to manufacture trouble and I think you are naive to think that the presence of Ward's gun was the source of the problem. It is only your prejudice that makes you think so.

Jeff:

What about the fact that the police have been to Ward's house on numerous occasions to deal with family disputes? Also, he carries a side arm to protect himself from his brother in law? The family has endless disputes about property, etc. He gets drunk and starts shooting up tree stumps. Some lady drives onto his property and he arms himself to see what she is up to? Do you see a fact pattern?

The bottom line is that Ward brings a lot of his problems on himself. Now that he is out of the big house he should embrace the concept of personal responsibility and stay out of trouble.

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

Jeff:

What about the fact that the police have been to Ward's house on numerous occasions to deal with family disputes? Also, he carries a side arm to protect himself from his brother in law? The family has endless disputes about property, etc. He gets drunk and starts shooting up tree stumps. Some lady drives onto his property and he arms himself to see what she is up to? Do you see a fact pattern?
The bottom line is that Ward brings a lot of his problems on himself. Now that he is out of the big house he should embrace the concept of personal responsibility and stay out of trouble.

If you knew his brother in law you might understand !
You might be able to twist those details into a "fact pattern" I certainly don't see it.
Personally I think you have alot of audacity to make a slanderous statement that implies that Ward is a danger to his own wife.

[jeffk]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

Jeff:

What about the fact that the police have been to Ward's house on numerous occasions to deal with family disputes? Also, he carries a side arm to protect himself from his brother in law? The family has endless disputes about property, etc. He gets drunk and starts shooting up tree stumps. Some lady drives onto his property and he arms himself to see what she is up to? Do you see a fact pattern?

The bottom line is that Ward brings a lot of his problems on himself. Now that he is out of the big house he should embrace the concept of personal responsibility and stay out of trouble.

I don't personally know Ward Bird. I don't know if he has a streak of trouble seeking in him.

I do know I have had the police to my house a few times as well and it had nothing to do with MY behavior. And calling the police to settle a problem sounds like what many of his critics here are advocating. So if you call the police to defuse a dispute you are a bad person and if you don't call the police you are a bad person? Let's say for laughs that Ward never carried a gun but called the police. Ms. Harris leaves but comes back several times during the week and the police are called each time. Are the multiple police visits a strike against Ward?

I also don't know Ward's brother in law but from what you say it sounds like he has done threatening things, not Ward. It's not a bad thing to want to protect yourself. Also, you don't get to pick your brother in law.

As to family disputes about property, so what. Many families have constant running disputes about one thing or another, some of them quite nasty. Shared property is a common bone of contention.

He was wrong to shoot at the tree stump and was treated justly according to the law and repaired the damage he did.

Finally, as to staying out of trouble, Ward was in his own house in a moderately remote area, minding his own business. There was some video footage of the drive to his house and there are some VERY obvious signs that tell you uninvited visitors are not welcome. Ms. Harris ignored them AND ignored the verbal request for her to leave. He wasn't looking for trouble. It sought him out and jumped on his back in the person of a very disturbed woman.

BTW, I'm not nominating him for sainthood. I don't know him. However a felony conviction is a very serious thing and shouldn't be reached without some certainty of guilt. This whole case rested on the word of a troubled woman who instigated the whole incident to begin with. Given no vision into their histories I would not convict someone of a felony in a he said, she said case. Given vision into their histories I find Ward a far more credible witness.

And as a final twist, suppose Ward had never took his gun with him but Ms. Harris said he threatened her with a gun? She's made stuff up in the past. No evidence to the contrary would he have been convicted? After all, he COULD have had a gun. There were guns in the house. People would have testified he usually carried one. Just food for thought.

[jeffatsquam]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Folks...my sincere hope is to not get sucked into any back and forth thing here. Ward is home, that's the only thing that really matters. While I never thought he belonged in jail, I also never thought he was blameless in this whole mess.
I find many of these posts indeed comical...the ones ragging on the Gov, and not satisfied because he was not granted full pardon. ARE YOU FREAKIN' FOR REAL??!!!
Everyone has been saying, Free Bird, Free Bird, Free Bird, Free Bird...and he is free...but noooooooo, now that's not enough. Christ, he's home. Enough all ready. Good for him.
So he can't pack heat anymore...ohh, the horror of it all.
He can't work with Boy Scouts...maybe unfair, but not as unfair as being behind bars.
Look, I read thru a lot of this stuff...and don't know Ward, and know Harris is off her rocker.
One thing stood out for me ...one, just one, so don't hate on me MARKNH. This is a guy (Ward) who at one time, while drinking, was part of a group firing a gun at a tree stump (so they say, anyway). And witnessed a bullet enter a near by home. And what was Ward's intial reaction (before the next day)???? To run home and do nothing. Hide, as it were. Someone could have been lying on the floor, bleeding to death. I don't care if he fired the shot or not...he saw it. This is all accurate info, according to police reports.
So let's back it down a bit. This man should probably not have been in prison...but he should probably not have guns either.
He is not blameless in this whole mess...no way, no how.
So, let's hold off on naming him Saint Ward.

Your facts are inaccurate you need to spend the rest of the day with FLL

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by jeffatsquam

Your facts are inaccurate you need to spend the rest of the day with FLL

Ok, so tell us what happened that evening that a stray shot went into the neighbors house, would you please? And how or how not Bird was involved with that?

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by jeffatsquam

Your facts are inaccurate you need to spend the rest of the day with FLL

Don't just post and run...it is unbecoming, and makes you look quite foolish.
Show me where my facts are wrong...if they are...then WMUR, The UL, and Citizen all got it wrong.
Let me state again...he never belonged in jail. Never.
Did he want her to see the gun, as he went back in....ABSOLUTELY!
To the untrained eye, can the action of disabling a gun's ability to fire, indeed look like it is being prepared to fire...of course.
Christ...I can't believe people are putting me in a position to get behind a woman who is of questionable mental capacity...I am not in her corner.
I just can't believe people wanted Ward out, he is out, and now, that's not enough.
Sorry...he indeed played a part in this. I understand it is his right/way of life/everyday pattern to carry. I get it...I support it...I understand it. However, if he had not gone to his gun safe, to get his gun (which he stated is what he did), before going out that day..none of this would have happened. None of it. None of it at all. But, she said she saw a gun, and he admitted he had one on his person...the combination of those two things, set the wheels in motion.
Subtract one (like maybe maybe if she said she saw a gun...be he stated all the way thru, that he never had one with him) of those two things...and her story would have come apart instantly.
How can any rational thinking person not see it this way?
I have no doubt he is a good guy, and don't think he wanted to shot her...but he absolutely wanted her to see it.
I'm out....

[jeffatsquam]

Sorry to look foolish to you but I had to go back to WORK!

My understanding of the facts of 2002 is that the round was not located in the camp until sometime after Mr.Bird left the party. I am not sure weather it was before or after Mr.Bird called the MPD and stated that he was one of the people target shooting at the stump.

Your paragraph takes these facts and twist them around to help your argument.S O P

I would think that any rational person that thought about this case that Mr.bird was at home under Dr. orders to take it easy and not get to worked up was totally in his RIGHT and Ms. Harris was totally in the WRONG.

[sa meredith]

Originally Posted by jeffatsquam

Sorry to look foolish to you but I had to go back to WORK!

My understanding of the facts of 2002 is that the round was not located in the camp until sometime after Mr.Bird left the party. I am not sure weather it was before or after Mr.Bird called the MPD and stated that he was one of the people target shooting at the stump.

Your paragraph takes these facts and twist them around to help your argument.S O P

I would think that any rational person that thought about this case that Mr.bird was at home under Dr. orders to take it easy and not get to worked up was totally in his RIGHT and Ms. Harris was totally in the WRONG.

I twisted no facts...I told no lies. Why the FFL comment is beyond me.
Maybe you're just an internet tough guy.
Bottom line...if he had confronted her without the gun, none...of ..this...happens. Period. Fact.
"He was home under Dr. orders to take it easy and not get worked up "...you say. So grabbing your heater is staying cool and calm? Christ almighty...do the math!

[jeffatsquam]

"You said he witnessed a bullet enter a home" that is Wrong. Than you went on to state that someone could have been seriously injured and he ran in order to prove your point that he is reckless.

Ward Bird's supporters number in the 1,000's Christine Harris's supporters number in the, well I guess 0 isn't really a number in this instance.

Webmaster, I am sorry to engage an individual and I will not post in this thread again.

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by jeffatsquam

"
Webmaster, I am sorry to engage an individual and I will not post in this thread again.

That's too bad because

"My understanding of the facts of 2002 is that the round was not located in the camp until sometime after Mr.Bird left the party. I am not sure weather it was before or after Mr.Bird called the MPD and stated that he was one of the people target shooting at the stump."

is really vague on several points and I was hopeing you would qualify that.

[Pineedles]

He's home with his family. Let it rest.

[VitaBene]

I saw Mr Bird at Ridgewood picking kids up from Nordic practice, I gave him a thumbs up which was promptly returned. I am very happy that he has rejoined his family.

At least his next step in the legal process will be done from the outside.

[Dogg]

What is incredibly pathetic is that people will not let this thread or issue die... Ward is home with his family which is what I thought was the point of the whole thread and bandwagon.

Now we have certain people posting (here and other places) that the governor is weak (using a term that is acceptable) because he didn't provide Ward with a full pardon... I will bet that you don't know what the term of "Criminal Threatening" is... The governor did more than he should have IMO in this case; as he brought up 3 levels of court found or upheld the original conviction, why should he overturn it?

Neither person in this case has a clear background; the only reason why his lawyer would state that he would put Ward on the stand now is because he didn't earlier and lost!

It is incredible to read the BS provided on here and other sites about what was testified to against Ward; "He did run to the end of the porch with the gun." (pg. 149. ln 8) this can happen folks from a person with stitches/staples/surgery etc.. no jumping etc as originally reported. The jury was NOT told to believe that he 'ran' or 'chased' her... That quote is the statement made to the jury to take home... It was 2 years.... You tell me who won the superbowl on spot 2 years ago..

For all the supports; Ward is home, end you battle, you "hero" is home... For all those against, I suggest you move on as there is really nothing more that can or will be done.

Everyone needs to learn that they can disagree and move on...

My suggestion is to close the thread and move on...

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by Dogg

Everyone needs to learn that they can disagree and move on...

Well it is quite clear what you disagree with from the sarcastic tone of your post. If your so displeased with Wards release and the continuation of this thread, don't read it any more, feel free to take your own suggestion and Move on.
I certainly won't miss your 2 cents worth.

[topwater]

Don (webmaster) we won the battle and we won the war. Ward is HOME with his family. That was what this thread was all about. Nothing more & nothing less. Now its turning out to be just like the speed limit thread. Please at this time == Lock this thread. == Before it starts to ruin a good thing.

[NoRegrets]

If you were on the jury and heard all the evidence posted here, how would have have voted? What would be your rationalle?

I would have found him innocent since the first crime of trespassing and confrontation was not his doing. Since it was escallated and then became one word against the other, I would have decided if the first crime wasn't commited the second would not have occured. It was the ladies fault. Dismiss the charges.

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by topwater

Don (webmaster) we won the battle and we won the war. Ward is HOME with his family. That was what this thread was all about. Nothing more & nothing less. Now its turning out to be just like the speed limit thread. Please at this time == Lock this thread. == Before it starts to ruin a good thing.

Maybe for some this thread and this protest was about getting Bird home. For others, it is obviously going to continue as being about "Pardon Bird". You will see that several of the "Free Ward Bird" signs now read "Pardon Ward Bird". I don't know the law but it seems that a pardon can be pursued forever with changes in the govoernor's office. Is this correct?
For my personal answer to NoRegrets, all of the information I have read outside of the trial transcripts support the decision of the jury in my opinion. (NoRegrets, so I am clear, did you read the trial transcripts?).

[wifi]

Perhaps its time for a poll with all the options from no pardon to total complete pardon, and what ever bashing that might evolve can move there?

[NoRegrets]

Originally Posted by Heaven

Maybe for some this thread and this protest was about getting Bird home. For others, it is obviously going to continue as being about "Pardon Bird". You will see that several of the "Free Ward Bird" signs now read "Pardon Ward Bird". I don't know the law but it seems that a pardon can be pursued forever with changes in the govoernor's office. Is this correct?
For my personal answer to NoRegrets, all of the information I have read outside of the trial transcripts support the decision of the jury in my opinion. (NoRegrets, so I am clear, did you read the trial transcripts?).

Good and fair question. No I did not read or study the court trial transcripts. I have read the writings from the forum members and news media. I then applyed my values and instincts as the basis of my logic. I think it is interesting to understand how people come to a conclusion to offer judgement. If you re-read my first statement I did refer to "the evidence posted here".

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

Good and fair question. No I did not read or study the court trial transcripts. I have read the writings from the forum members and news media. I then applyed my values and instincts as the basis of my logic. I think it is interesting to understand how people come to a conclusion to offer judgement. If you re-read my first statement I did refer to "the evidence posted here".

I agree that the information here (and from the news media) can be a valuable part of the base for forming an opinion in a broad sense, but typically there is also a lot of information from these type of sources that is baseless, and continues to be repeated. Let me take for example, a "fact" that several people here have incorrectly reported, that the woman's past was not a factor in the trial. In fact, her conviction WAS included as part of the information that the jury heard.
So it does get frustrating to try and converse in this thread with others who haven't taken the time to educate themselves as much as they possibly can before they make a hard-and-fast statement. Certainly, the most interesting part of this for me at least is extrapolating between "known" facts from all sources to determine what I believe happened. I have no emotional or political connection to the case, so it feels a bit like an intellectual exercise.

[MarkinNH]

Originally Posted by sa meredith

Christ...I can't believe people are putting me in a position to get behind a woman who is of questionable mental capacity...I am not in her corner...

Nobody is putting you in any position !
Don't blame other people for the choice's, decision's and opinion's that you yourself choose to make, take and stand behind.

If it makes you feel any better, I for one don't see your opinion in this situation as being in Christine Harris's corner or that your defending her actions in anyway.
I may not agree with your opinion but you are entitled to have whatever opinion you like.