Stupid cop gets away with murder of 8 year old boy

D

Dave

Guest
Gun show organizer found not guilty in boy's Uzi death

story.fleury.dhg.jpg

January 14, 2011 9:36 p.m. EST
Ex-Police Chief Edward Fleury says the gun show where the boy died was meant to be an "educational event."


Springfield, Massachusetts (CNN) -- A former police chief was found not guilty Friday of involuntary manslaughter in the 2008 death of an 8-year-old boy who accidentally shot himself with a micro Uzi machine gun during a gun show.

Former Pelham, Massachusetts, Police Chief Edward Fleury, 53, was also acquitted of three counts of furnishing a machine gun to a minor in connection with the show that he helped organize. It was held at the Westfield Sportsman's Club in Westfield, Massachusetts.

During the gun show, 8-year-old Christopher Bizilj was firing the micro Uzi when he accidentally shot himself in the head. He died instantly.

Upon hearing the verdict, Fleury broke into tears. He later hugged his wife and spoke to reporters outside the courtroom, offering his condolences to the Bizilj family.

"This was meant to be an educational event for people and unfortunately this terrible accident happened," Fleury said, his voice heavy with emotion. "And I do want to express my heartfelt sympathy to the Bizilj family and their friends for this terrible accident."

Christopher's father, Charles Bizilj, was present at the time of the shooting and videotaped the entire incident. Parts of that tape were shown to the jury, which also heard emotional testimony from the father. The trial lasted 10 days.

"I ran over to him. His eyes were open and I saw no reason for him to be on the ground. And I tried to talk to him and he didn't respond. I put my hand behind his head to try to pick him up and there was a large portion of his cranium missing. And I put my hand against the back of his head," Charles Bizilj told members of the Hampden County jury.

Fleury faced up to 20 years in prison if convicted of involuntary manslaughter and up to 10 years for each count of furnishing a machine gun to a minor.

His lawyer, Rosemary Scapicchio, had argued that while Fleury helped organize the show, he wasn't directly responsible and hadn't actually given guns to the children there.

Carl Giuffre and Domenico Spano have also been charged in connection with the incident. The two were in charge of the show's shooting range and are accused of having provided the Uzi that killed Christopher Bizilj. Prosecutor William Bennett said he will decide next week whether to proceed with the case against them, given Fleury's acquittal.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Put him and the parents of the child in a cell and forget about it.
 
Gun show organizer found not guilty in boy's Uzi death


His lawyer, Rosemary Scapicchio, had argued that while Fleury helped organize the show, he wasn't directly responsible and hadn't actually given guns to the children there.

Carl Giuffre and Domenico Spano have also been charged in connection with the incident. The two were in charge of the show's shooting range and are accused of having provided the Uzi that killed Christopher Bizilj. Prosecutor William Bennett said he will decide next week whether to proceed with the case against them, given Fleury's acquittal.

Put him and the parents of the child in a cell and forget about it.

Correct me if I am not reading this right. Fleury organized a gun show where Carl Giuffre and Domenico Spano handed a mini UZI over to an eight year old while the parents consented and videotaped it. Fleury was not present to witness the accident let alone hand the gun to the child.

How is he a stupid cop that is responsible for this boy's death. Sounds like Giuffre and Spano are the stupid ones as well as the boy's parents for not only thinking that this would be a good idea... but hey, let's video tape this momentous occasion.

Fleury didn't do anything wrong.
 
Correct me if I am not reading this right. Fleury organized a gun show where Carl Giuffre and Domenico Spano handed a mini UZI over to an eight year old while the parents consented and videotaped it. Fleury was not present to witness the accident let alone hand the gun to the child.

How is he a stupid cop that is responsible for this boy's death. Sounds like Giuffre and Spano are the stupid ones as well as the boy's parents for not only thinking that this would be a good idea... but hey, let's video tape this momentous occasion.

Fleury didn't do anything wrong.

You're a police apologist. A child died because this guy organized an "educational event." You know how police operate. Being the organizer of the event he was responsible. What if he had supplied heroin to the two guys that were more directly responsible and the death was a result of that instead of a gun?

More to the point, what is his attitude about it? I don't see the remorse.

Because he's a pig he gets away with murder. I can't imagine another way to see it.
 
You're a police apologist. A child died because this guy organized an "educational event." You know how police operate. Being the organizer of the event he was responsible. What if he had supplied heroin to the two guys that were more directly responsible and the death was a result of that instead of a gun?

More to the point, what is his attitude about it? I don't see the remorse.

Because he's a pig he gets away with murder. I can't imagine another way to see it.

You have to separate your own personal feelings towards the 2nd Amendment and the Police and look at this objectively. While I support tougher gun laws and tighter screening processes, I have to face facts that this was a legal gathering (assembling at a gun show) to showcase legal items (guns).

Fleury is most likely liable in some capacity as far as a civil action but not culpable in the boys murder. Fleury never handed the gun to the child nor does it seem he was aware that Spano and Giuffre were handing UZI's to 8 year olds. He is not responsible for this boys murder.

Liken it to this. If I lend my car to you and you drive drunk hitting and killing someone then I am liable in a civil sense for having ownership of the car. I will most likely be successfully sued for allowing you possession of my vehicle in a civil suit. However it does not make me a murderer. I am not going to jail. You are. The only instance where I would be is if in the event I knowingly handed you the keys when I knew you were drunk OR I handed you the keys with the instruction to kill someone. Fleury did neither pertaining to his specific circumstances.

Your judgement, if not your language is misguided at worst. Fleury is not a murderer and no jury that followed the law would have convicted at the criminal level.

I am sure there will be a response such as this because you will be stubborn and let your emotions run with this but it will have to wait. I am delegated to using my iPhone for now.
 
Last edited:
You have to separate your own personal feelings towards the 2nd Amendment and the Police and look at this objectively. While I support tougher gun laws and tighter screening processes, I have to face facts that this was a legal gathering (assembling at a gun show) to showcase legal items (guns).

Fleury is most likely liable in some capacity as far as a civil action but not culpable in the boys murder. Fleury never handed the gun to the child nor does it seem he was aware that Spano and Giuffre were handing UZI's to 8 year olds. He is not responsible for this boys murder.

Liken it to this. If I lend my car to you and you drive drunk hitting and killing someone then I am liable in a civil sense for having ownership of the car. I will most likely be successfully sued for allowing you possession of my vehicle in a civil suit. However it does not make me a murderer. I am not going to jail. You are. The only instance where I would be is if in the event I knowingly handed you the keys when I knew you were drunk OR I handed you the keys with the instruction to kill someone. Fleury did neither pertaining to his specific circumstances.

Your judgement, if not your language is misguided at worst. Fleury is not a murderer and no jury that followed the law would have convicted at the criminal level.

I am sure there will be a response such as this because you will be stubborn and let your emotions run with this but it will have to wait. I am delegated to using my iPhone for now.

This post is not the best you can do. It's really not about the second amendment and I own guns. I also have a relative that is a retired police officer and I've got no criminal record so no personal reason to hate cops. Anyway, even if that were the case let's set that aside and look at the facts.

Both of our examples are flawed because an even that ultimately puts an automatic weapon in the hands of a child is pretty unique. Your example doesn't work because the immediate danger of a loaded weapon is not there and the responsibility is divided too many ways. I think it just makes it more complicated.

You agreed with the choice of the word "murder" so I'm guessing you were not wide-awake yet. He wasn't charged with murder, but if he had been of course the seriousness of the crime means that people can be found guilty with pretty minimal direct involvement if the level of careless disregard is sufficient.

What bothers me is that his statement isn't something about what a senseless tragedy it was and how he regrets his involvement if not culpability, rather than a self-serving statement about how it was an accident.
 
Too hard to multi quote - they don't have an app for that...

You originally titled this piece "gets away with murder". He is not a murderer, I never called him one nor insinuated that he was. Your post raises the issue of culpability when a crime was committed. A crime WAS committed, however the responsible party would most likely be Spano and Giuffre at a criminal trial. In a civil suit where the burden of proof is at a lower standard, Fleury could be held responsible simply for having his name attached, as possibly could any other organizer or advertiser.

The example is not flawed as it coincided with other instances of events where individuals are charged with criminal negligence. Common Law also dictates that an exact case need not be found in order to relate to the current dilemma but must raise similar issue.

You titled this post claiming that he got away with murder. Show me where he is directly responsible for the boys murder and is culpable in a criminal case.


And now back to sleep. If I could post a picture of my current surroundings I would. You would laugh.
 
Too hard to multi quote - they don't have an app for that...

You originally titled this piece "gets away with murder". He is not a murderer, I never called him one nor insinuated that he was. Your post raises the issue of culpability when a crime was committed. A crime WAS committed, however the responsible party would most likely be Spano and Giuffre at a criminal trial. In a civil suit where the burden of proof is at a lower standard, Fleury could be held responsible simply for having his name attached, as possibly could any other organizer or advertiser.

The example is not flawed as it coincided with other instances of events where individuals are charged with criminal negligence. Common Law also dictates that an exact case need not be found in order to relate to the current dilemma but must raise similar issue.

You titled this post claiming that he got away with murder. Show me where he is directly responsible for the boys murder and is culpable in a criminal case.

You quoted my word "murder" and that's the point. The only thing we could learn from this is how to argue better in the real world where it might actually count.


And now back to sleep. If I could post a picture of my current surroundings I would. You would laugh.

On a secret agent mission?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Buzzetta must be so proud to be defended by obsessive freaks. :D

Do you normally ignore the facts and make everything personal or is the biochemistry of your brain that messed up?

Obsessive freak? This coming from the guy who needs SO MUCH attention from any and everything that has a pulse. You know.

Stop trying to steal Morrissey's thunder, by claiming outlandish things like "murder" because some stupid father let his kid hold a loaded uzi, scrambling to get his camera, to take a proud picture of his kid shooting an uzi. That's not the cops fault, it's the father's. Of course, if your brain wasn't so clouded, you'd know this. :D
 
Stupid and moron have the same meaning which are used to describe someone who is not very intelligent, just different words.

Actually this isn't true. "Moron" is a more intense word than "stupid" with a more specific meaning. It was sometimes used to describe someone with mild mental retardation.

When you say "He's not stupid. He's a moron." you are saying "He isn't just stupid, he's very stupid."
 
Back
Top Bottom