East Boston man says he has good alibi for Dorchester gun charges: He's blind
An East Boston man had bail set at $2,500 today on charges related to the loaded gun and "high-capacity feeding device" police say they found in the trunk of his car after a traffic stop early Saturday in Dorchester.
At his arraignment today, Anthony Bailey's attorney, however, said the gun wasn't Bailey's - and couldn't be, because he can't see. "This man couldn't possibly use it," attorney Marcy Levington said, as her client, wearing dark sunglasses and holding a cane, stood in the prisoner's dock.
Boston Police report they found the gun after stopping the car - driven by Gregory Thureson, 35, of East Boston, but registered to Bailey - at Columbia Road and Washington Street around 1:10 a.m. on Saturday after Thureson allegedly made a right turn on red even though the intersection had a "No turn on red" sign.
Officers cited Thureson for the offense, then ordered him out of the car after learning his license was suspended. Since Bailey, 29, and also an East Boston resident, obviously couldn't drive the car, they decided to impound it:
Prior to towing the vehicle, officers conducted an inventory search of the vehicle for valuables/weapons. In the trunk, officers discovered a Michael Kors bag containing a loaded Glock 19 9mm firearm and a box of additional ammunition. Officers were informed by the registered owner of the motor vehicle that it was his wife’s bag. None of the vehicle’s occupants could produce a License to Carry.
Assistant District Attorney Marc Tohme had asked for bail of $25,000 for Bailey, noting the seriousness of the charge and a 2006 conviction for possession of a class A drug with intent to distribute.
The judge, however, agreed with Levington's request to set bail at no more than the $2,500 she said Bailey's family could raise.
Levington noted the gun was not found on Bailey, said Bailey denied telling the police the bag in the back was his wife's and said he had no idea how the gun got there. She added that numerous members of Bailey's family were in attendance at the arraignment - including his parents, his wife and his daughter.
She pleaded with the judge to set a bail amount the family could raise by asking her to consider just how long a blind man might last at the Nashua Street jail.
As the arraignment ended, one member of his family yelled "Love you!" His daughter yelled "Daddy!".
Innocent, etc.
Ad:
Comments
he drives his car
by sense of smell?
evelyn...woodhead...spid..
evelyn...woodhead...spid...readin...course
Bostonians park by braille
The car might be equipped with curb feelers, lane detection and and collision avoidance braking system. Self driving next for the blind and blind drunk.
Oh
They way people drive here, I thought being blind was a requirement.
That and
Bipolar.
I've seen signs
that say "BLIND DRIVE".
But
How would they know to follow the command if they can't read it?
He was the passenger during
He was the passenger during the traffic stop, but also the vehicle's actual owner, so that's why he got blamed for the guns.
I saw it!
Wait, I've seen this movie! The street-smart prosecutor simply throws his phone at the "blind" man, who flinches...not so blind after all, are we?
Immmmmm Bliiinnnd!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv_negs7AFw
Underrated sequel.
Driving a Ferarri blind
Blindsight
People who are blind can still have reflexive reactions to danger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindsight
"This man couldn't possibly
"This man couldn't possibly use it."
Do his hands work?
It sounds like he's pandering to ableists, who mistakenly presume the Blind are incompetent.. I don't know our state laws, but blind people are permitted to own and fire guns in the US.
The Gun Debate, Why it Matters for the Blind.
https://nfb.org/images/nfb/publications/bm/bm14/bm1401/bm140116.htm
Difference is driving is a
Difference is driving is a privilege. Means to means of personal defense are a constitutionally protected civil right.
Even if
it's a terrible idea.
its worth mentioning
that despite my own joke, the blind guy wasnt the guy driving the car
Does the defenseman think the
Does the defenseman think the judge and jury are ignorant? I realize defense attorneys have to constantly lie and make up stories but how can a blind person drive? Anything less than a quick guilty verdict would high concern me...
But...
He wasn't driving.
Oh I see (no pun intended)
Oh I see (no pun intended) now. Why are they linking he blind man to the gun?
The guns being in the car had
The guns being in the car had to be in possession of one of the two occupants; the police claim he admitted the bag in which the guns were found was his wife's bag, so logically he, not the driver, gets charged with possession.
There could also be the legal fiction called "constructive possession" at work here; I'm not 100% familiar with MA's firearms laws. "Constructive possession" is how the feds will for example nail a "prohibited person" on a gun charge because his spouse, roommate, whatever has a firearm in the same residence.
Not all blind people
can't shoot guns.
">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tt2EXWzMV18[/youtube]