Gotta love this from the Boston Globe on the Entwistle murder trial:
Jurors soon will see graphic photos of the bodies, but first, Ritchie likely will give them their first glimpse of the suspected murder weapon: a long-barreled .22-caliber revolver owned by Rachel Entwistle’s stepfather, Joseph Matterazzo, 61, who, in a fatherly attempt to bond, taught Entwistle how to load and shoot the weapon.
Ritchie disclosed yesterday to Middlesex Assistant District Attorney Michael Fabbri that 10 partial fingerprints were lifted from all over the hand cannon, but they “lacked quantity and quality” to successfully compare against 25 sets of fingerprints from persons close to the case.
They are not to bias on this . . . a ‘hand cannon” they call the gun. . . ooooo evil gun. The thing is a .22. It is in no way shape or form a hand cannon. They try to get you to see a big gun like Dirty Harry would use but that is not what it is. It is a .22, a very small caliber gun that most folks would learn to shoot on. Not much kick, very small bullet and hardly worth the fear they are trying to invoke about it.
Any wonder the Boston Globe is loosing readers still? I got stopped in the grocery store a few months back by them wanting to give me $20 or $50 bucks in gift cards to the store if I signed up for their paper. . . I laughed and said no thanks, I want real news when I read a paper, not your liberal propaganda. . . I wasn’t alone, he didn’t seem to get any takers while we were there.
2 comments:
A .22?
The news I saw this morning it looked like a Colt Python.
I nearly cried when I saw it, because as you know crime guns are destroyed after the trial.
A MA-compliant Colt Python. Gone forever.
For that ALONE I'd flip the switch on Entwhistle...
I wonder if the gun will be destroyed since he did not own the gun? Shouldn't it be returned to the owner since he did nothing wrong and is still the legal owner?? I can understand if the gun is owned by the convicted person or you don't know who owns it but in this case can someone tell my how the state could destroy it without compensation to the rightful owner?
I wonder. . .
Post a Comment