Help Ward Bird of Moultonborough

[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.

[NoBozo]

No matter who you are: I think it's time to let Ward try and regain some semblance of normalcy by shutting down this thresd. If he keeps reading this stuff, that goal will be delayed as long as people keep "pecking" on this forum. Just sayin. NB

[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.