I cn see something like this happening here:   http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/15/brian-aitkens-mistake

So much for being Honest.

Mother doesn't seem to bright either.  What was she thinking? 

sounds like a good lawsuit will be brewing!

I've gotta leave for work, so I only read the first page, but wow. That judge needs to be fired (or whatever the proper term of judges is). And I concur with houdni, there's definitely a lawsuit in the wings on this one...see the article that Old Guy posted about gun crimes never getting expunged from someone's record. This will be an interesting...curious to see what Gov. Christie does.

Wait, I just read that the judge was already "dismissed" by Gov. Christie for making stupid decisions on the bench...why is he still presiding over cases?!

- Alex

IMO, this was a very poorly handled case. Sure, based on the fact that he stopped at his mother's house, you could make the argument that it was illegal to do so. It was legal for him to transport the firearms from out of state to his new home in New Jersey. The law just doesn't handle short stops very well. It's the same thing here in Hawaii. Legally you can only transport firearms between a few places. What happens if you stop or go through the drive through to pick up food?

The Judge was an %*!@&#$() that didn't allow a key piece of evidence that probably would have (and should have) got Brian Aitken off. The prosecutors were %)(*&!@*$# because they still charged Mr. Aitken with the crime that should have been a slap on the wrist.

The problem is the law and the law-yers. I agree; New jersey = Hawaii

Having been a Juror.........

    We are supposed to follow the Law as Stated By the Judge.  Not supposed to infer anything else even IF one or more of us may
           be aware of other laws that may pertain to the situation.  Having said that, all it takes is one juror to say Not Guilty and stick with it
           to have a hung jury which may result in a retrial.....

The More you know of a lot of "stuff", having many different life experiences, I think cause a person to "hang" a jury up.  I think, if there had been a juror
   that knew NJ gun laws and federal gun laws, that juror "could" have used that knowledge to hang the jury.  He doesn't "have" to disclose what he knows
   to the other jurors.  Just say that you don't believe he's guilty.  However, the Judge may Poll the jury.  That could get interesting........

I've been told.........

Defense attorney and Prosecutor Are Not Under Oath, as a result, they do NOT have to tell the truth.

They do Not have to tell/disclose ALL the facts of the event/situation

Persons on the stand are "sworn" to tell the "truth"........

FWIW

I heard about this case.  Very anti! Very messed-up!

I hope they get a stay for jail time pending appeal, I don't think this stuff is going to fly at all.

There are lots of pro-gun attorneys that come out of the woodwork for this type of stuff, and this level of stare decisis would be ridiculous.

Jury nullification.....the jury can be more than just a trier of fact, but also weigh the veracity of the law or how it is applied. Happened a lot during prohibition and the civil war. Now, most courts do not have to mention the process to the jury. Too bad.....