Image 01 Image 03

St. Louis Top Prosecutor Charging Couple Who Brandished Guns to Defend Their Property

St. Louis Top Prosecutor Charging Couple Who Brandished Guns to Defend Their Property

The governor said he will likely pardon the couple.

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner filed charges against a couple who brandished their guns to defend their property against a mob headed to the mayor’s office “with felony unlawful use of a weapon.”

From Fox News:

Gardner, the city’s top prosecutor, told The Associated Press that Mark and Patricia McCloskey also faced a misdemeanor charge of fourth-degree assault over the June 28 incident. “It is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner — that is unlawful in the city of St. Louis,” Gardner said.

However, the McCloskeys have said many times they were defending themselves, with tensions high in St. Louis and other cities over race and law enforcement. They said that the crowd of demonstrators broke an iron gate marked with “No Trespassing” and “Private Street” signs, and that some violently threatened them.

Gov. Mike Parson said he will likely pardon the couple:

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson told a radio host last week that based on the information he’s received, it’s likely he would pardon a white St. Louis couple if they are charged for brandishing guns during a racial injustice protest outside their mansion.

In an interview Friday on the Marc Cox Morning Show on 97.1 FM in St. Louis, Parson was asked if he would consider a pardon.

“I think that’s exactly what would happen,” Parson said. He later added that based on what he knows about the case, “I don’t think they’re going to spend any time in jail.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Time to charge the Antifa embeded prosecutrix for violation of 18 U.S.C 242

Mary, it was the Mayor’s house, not office…

Per the McCloskeys the mayor does not live in their neighborhood

Hope the governor issues the pardon today, before the ink is dry on the charging documents.

This is an outrageous abuse of power by the Soros hack.

    The problem is that McCloskey and his wife are licensed attorneys (the nonbomb-throwing kind). Even if they are pardoned, their law licenses could be at risk.

    ThePrimordialOrderedPair in reply to Observer. | July 20, 2020 at 8:48 pm

    The governor cannot pardon anyone until AFTER CONVICTION, per the Missouri state constitution, Art IV, Sec 7:

    “Section 7. Reprieves, commutations and pardons—limitations on power.—The governor shall have power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, after conviction, for all offenses except treason and cases of impeachment …”

“with felony unlawful use of a weapon.” That is not going to fly. Frivolous lawsuit.

    Brave Sir Robbin in reply to Tsquared. | July 20, 2020 at 7:10 pm

    It is a not a lawsuit. It is prosecution. Is there a judge who will throw this out? Would a judge sanction the prosecution?

    One reason you a get a jury of your peers is to give the people a chance to nullify a corrupt or unjust prosecution. Any juror may nullify the prosecution. It only takes one.

      ThePrimordialOrderedPair in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | July 20, 2020 at 8:54 pm

      But in this case it is more likely that jurors would be intimidated into convicting (from the media circus that shall surround the case, other jurors who just want to hang the McCloskeys, law be damned, …). I would not count on a jury from St. Louis to save the McCloskeys. If this is allowed to go to trial they will probably get railroaded and it is highly unlikely that the cowardly governor will pardon them after such a conviction.

freespeechfanatic | July 20, 2020 at 5:59 pm

Well, this was inevitable. The Left never disappoints. They always follow through on their threats.

JackinSilverSpring | July 20, 2020 at 6:06 pm

You dial 9-1-1 because you are being criminally threatened. A voice comes on to say: Thank you for calling 9-1-1. All operators are busy at the moment with other callers. Your call is important to us, so please stay on the line. Your expected wait time is five days. Please keep in mind that if you are being victimized in a crime, and you defend yourself, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

I’m originally from the STL area. The city is the pits. There are great areas in the burbs and beyond to build another mansion if they want to. These folks are apparently very wealthy, and why they stay in this hellhole is beyond me.

    Joe-dallas in reply to budmania. | July 20, 2020 at 6:20 pm

    they probably cant sell the house any time in the foreseeable future unless the are willing to take a steep discount.
    A) the house is close enough to downtown and a low income neighborhood on a busy street
    B) Most every rioter in St Louis knows where the house is located.

    So who is going to buy the house knowing it is marked for destruction by “peaceful protestors”

The Friendly Grizzly | July 20, 2020 at 6:14 pm

This sort of thing further solidifies my belief that the American justice system is nothing but a political joke.

At least the McCloskeys can afford justice. Most can’t. A case like this would put me in the poor house.

    This could still drain their bank accounts and destroy their professional reputations. Innocence is no guarantee against total ruin in Soviet Amerika.

    Colonel Travis in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | July 20, 2020 at 7:22 pm

    It is a joke. Fortunately, there are a few good companies that act as legal self-defense insurance. I’m a member of one. If you own a firearm, you really need to get this. It’s not expensive and the good ones will cover all your legal expenses at every juncture with no limit.

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Colonel Travis. | July 21, 2020 at 5:56 am

      If it will not violate any LI rules, please post the name(s) of such outfits. I have a carry permit but have been reluctant exactly because of the legal circuses. Thank you.

        It is not against LI rules to share #2a protection information.

        Keep in mind: The goal of these prosecutions is to instill fear in Americans, to ensure that they do not use their God-given, Constitutionally-recognized right to bear arms for personal and property protection. Don’t buy it, unless you live in a Democrat-run city or state, where these show prosecutions will continue as the left attempts to make Americans think it’s better to be torn apart by rabid mobs than to defend themselves by lawful means. If you live in such a place, move. Seriously, it has come to that.

          The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | July 21, 2020 at 8:32 am

          Northeastern Tennessee is still America, so I am fortunate with that part.

          You just won the $64,000 Question.

          The real purpose of the charges is to instill fear of those who would have the need to protect themselves.

          Big Brother says take your medicine and do not defend yourself.

          The Democrats want it to be illegal to protect yourself. In the UK, there are stories of persons defending themselves being arrested.

          I will have to sign up for that concealed carry class.

        Colonel Travis in reply to The Friendly Grizzly. | July 21, 2020 at 2:10 pm

        Grizz, I’m sorry, I didn’t see this until now. I’m with Texas Law Shield (US Law Shield, it started in Texas then expanded). Andrew Branca, who LI introduced me to here, is with CCW Safe. I would say CCW Safe offers the best high-end plan in America. It covers everything, including cleaning up the blood in your house and counseling and reimbursement for time off work. I almost went with them but I decided with Texas Law Shield for a few minor reasons, it was a tough decision. Another one I’d trust is Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network, very reasonable cost, Massad Ayoob is on the board, enough said.

        You don’t have to get a high-end plan but you want a company that gives you money up front, not reimbursement, you want the maximum amount of coverage you can afford, you want to have the ability to use your own lawyer, you want coverage beyond just one criminal trial (like after a mistrial, civil trial, appeals, etc.), bail coverage, expert witness.

        If you spend a few minutes online you can find good info. deciding what’s best for you. The first time after listening to Branca talk about this in general, I’m convinced it’s a necessity.

        Good luck

Just as I predicted. This is about forcing people to bend the knee to the Red Guard.

“When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom, because that is according to your principles. When I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom, because that is according to my principles.” – Frank Herbert (Children Of Dune)

Published this weekend on Ace of Spades HQ.

Intimidation by those in power… abuse of power. This is Black Power and Prog Dem Leftist Power. Think of Blacks in the South … unarmed and at the mercy of the KKK….now roles reversed with BLM, Antifa and the Dems. The only constant? NRA protecting the 2A for freed Blacks then and now for (still) free Whites (and everyone else).

“Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.” Churchill (конечно!)

The process is the punishment, regardless of its outcome. This is not how a free nation operates.

Pardon? Why in the world would they need to be pardoned? Holding their legally-purchased firearms in open sight to let the trespassers know that they will not go down without a fight.

Turns out the Constitution is only as good as the people people interpreting it. They’ve found a way around it and it’s now effectively worthless.

2smartforlibs | July 20, 2020 at 6:39 pm

This is another waste of TAXPAYER money.

the_last_l3oyscout | July 20, 2020 at 6:58 pm

I saw this mentioned a couple weeks ago, maybe here, TuCa, I can’t remember. This is not about them or what they did. They have the means and the connections to defend themselves in court. This is a warning to the rest of us. Resist and we will destroy you.


I don’t know what the Missouri statute, or St. Louis city ordinance, defines as “brandishing”, but where there are such statutes they are criminal statutes. The Circuit Attorney apparently intends to charge them with the crime of brandishing and whatever else her weak mind can come up with (OK, her assistants probably provide all the brain power in her office).

So unless you are also claiming that they committed a criminal act, “brandishing” doesn’t mean what you think it means.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Edward. | July 20, 2020 at 9:27 pm

    If her assistants are affirmative selections, their brain power may be quite limited. Someone should lookup who they are.

    henrybowman in reply to Edward. | July 22, 2020 at 12:18 am

    And breaking news on that account — the handgun the Mrs. is holding is non-operational, and both of them knew it. The firing pin spring and pin had been reversed so that the gun could not possibly fire, prior to using the gun as a prop in a court case.

    The Missouri brandishing law requires the gun to be operational, otherwise the Mrs. is off the hook.

    Now — wait for it — the prosecutor’s evidence team reported that the gun was not operational, and were instructed to reassemble it into firing condition. Tampering with evidence.

Note well. Self defense is unacceptable behavior in St Louis.

We do not know exactly what statute the McCloskeys are charged with violating. If it is 571.030 sec 1(4) then there is a specific self defense exception under 571.030 sec 4 which references 563.032 sec 2(3), which covers trespass. So, there was really no chargeable criminal violation here. Another Zimmerman case in the making.

Well, the Dhimmi-crats have already politicized economics and science, so, why not legal practice?

This, along with the unethical and politically-motivated prosecution of that Georgia police officer for a clear-cut case of lawful self-defense, are what happens when Dhimmi-crat zealotry trumps fairness, facts and ethics.

Menacing and brandishing laws need to be thrown out all across the country. That’s how the got Michael Strickland in Oregon who was lawfully defending himself, too. Before the governor pardons them, I think the case should be allowed to wind through the courts first, as much as it may suck for them. Pardoning this early will be a b perceived win for the DA and media will use it as a cudgel against the “white governor”. I also think this would be an excellent case for ALL of us to get involved in any way possible. When will we get a more perfect case. Lawful gun owners, protecting lives and private property outside. We cannot allow the left to win this one.

Dantzig93101 | July 20, 2020 at 9:22 pm

It’s straight out of the playbook for Communists and traitors. By ignoring the rioters and prosecuting the victims, she:

1. Protects the guilty.

2. Persecutes the innocent.

3. Discredits the government, of which she is an official.

Take that whitey.

From kmov – “during a racial injustice protest”.
The lies never stop in any form.

The Missouri AG just said he is entering the case in defense of the homeowners

Says their 2nd Amendments Rights are being violated

‘Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime’ – Lavrentiy P. Beria

She charging the guy who shot the carjacker this week?
No real crime in that city?

The Governor providing a pardon is good but doesn’t eliminate the problem which everybody knows is racist Kim Gardner.

    Milhouse in reply to jrcowboy49. | July 21, 2020 at 5:31 pm

    Yeah, but she’s not a problem he can do anything about; the charges are merely a symptom of the disease, but they’re something he can fix.

      jb4 in reply to Milhouse. | July 21, 2020 at 6:45 pm

      But isn’t she a problem Barr could fix by charging her under that mentioned Federal statute? Of course, I have not seen any inclination by Barr to charge anyone for anything.

        Milhouse in reply to jb4. | July 21, 2020 at 6:55 pm

        Barr can’t remove her from office. And bringing civil rights charges is not easy; the bar is appropriately set very high, or else Holder could have charged every DA in the country.

        henrybowman in reply to jb4. | July 22, 2020 at 12:24 am

        The code you cite is the primary instigation of the various “immunity” conditions from which we suffer today. With immunity, it’s almost impossible to charge a single person under this section.

        The only time I’m aware of anyone ever being successfully prosecuted under this code was in the case of the four cops charged with the Rodney King beating.