 |
|
Linda Hamilton Is Guilty of ‘Assault With A Dangerous Weapon’
Pittsfield Judge
Finds Nurse Erred After
Being ‘Terrified’ by Trucker on Rural Highway
By Ed Oliver
February 1, 2001
A nurse,
who claims a tailgating truck driver terrified her one day last year as
she drove home from work on the Mohawk Trail, was found guilty of assault
with a dangerous weapon yesterday by a judge in Pittsfield because she
displayed her handgun during the incident.
Linda Hamilton,
from the little western Massachusetts town of Heath, will lose the gun
permit she has held for ten years and will have to pay about four hundred
dollars in fines. The truck driver, James M. Harkins of Wilmington Mass.,
will go to court this month to face a charge of driving-to-endanger.
The trucker
testified that Hamilton was driving very slowly that day so he put his
lights on but stayed a car length behind her. He said she put on her brakes
when he put on his lights. “I don’t have time for that,” he said. He said
he has safe-driving awards. He said he thought Hamilton was reaching for
a cell phone, but he then realized it was a gun which she allegedly held
up for him to see. Then she allegedly pointed it at him.
His testimony
was in contrast to a previous hearing where he and his lawyer as much
as admitted he tried to get her out of the way of his truck. Those admissions
resulted in charges filed against him for driving-to-endanger.
The trucker’s
testimony yesterday also included three key embellishments that are noticeably
absent from the written statement he submitted the day after the incident:
- He testified yesterday that the gun he saw in the nurse’s hand was clearly not in a holster.
- He testified that she pointed the gun at him while she was driving her car and he was behind her.
- He said
Hamilton’s actions put him “in fear.”
The nurse
testified that the truck raced right up to her bumper and then swung over
into the opposite lane to drive next to her door to intimidate her, but
it would drop back behind her again rather than pass. She said the truck
lunged at her in a similar way several times, which terrified her. She
said she grabbed her gun out of her purse and held it in its holster against
the steering wheel, not to brandish it, but because she planned to take
it with her once she found a place to pull over and phone the police.
The truck
immediately backed off. She did pull over and call the police, yet she
said she was treated as the criminal because of her gun -- and maybe her
pro-gun bumper sticker -- while the police were satisfied to take the
truck driver’s name and number and let him go.
Judge
Barbalunga Makes Quick Decision
At the conclusion of the bench trial yesterday in Pittsfield District
Court, Attorney Gregory Hession barely began his closing argument before
the judge cut him off and announced his decision.
Judge Alfred
A. Barbalunga said that the truck driver may have committed violations,
but he believes Hamilton is a “hyper-sensitive person” who drew her gun
with intent, contrary to her claims.
Attorney
Hession responded that even given those facts as stated by the judge,
Hamilton had a right to take such minimal action in self defense as she
thought the truck was about to run her off the road.
|
“She has a license to carry [a gun],” said one onlooker, “Why is she in court?” |
Interestingly,
a September 30, 2000 news article in the Berkshire Eagle quoted the truck
driver’s attorney as saying at a hearing that Hamilton is a “hyper-sensitive
person” because she carries a gun to work with her. Judge Michael J. Ripps
presided at that hearing. Yet, Judge Barbalunga used that exact same phrase
yesterday, “hyper-sensitive person,” almost as though he boned up on the
case with news clippings. He claimed at the beginning of the trial yesterday
that he knew very little about the case.
The judge
said that Hamilton’s story did not make any sense to him and he shares
the DA’s concern for her mental health. He did not accept the DA’s recommendation,
however, to sentence Hamilton to two years probation and a mental evaluation.
He said she is not a threat to anybody if she is disarmed. He said he
is a card-carrying gun owner himself and believes guns should be handled
responsibly.
Waived
a Jury Trial
Yesterday, Atty. Hession waived a jury trial in order to avoid
any grandstanding by the DA about guns. However, Assistant District Attorney
Kelly Mulcahy still tried to spring some new dramatic accusations against
Hamilton, which some say appeared to give validation to Hamilton’s claim
that the DA’s office was out to get her because she is a gun owner who
raised a fuss in the media and refused to accept a deal.
Mulcahy tried
to get Hamilton to admit that she brought her gun into the hospital where
she worked on a daily basis and stored it in her locker, which is against
hospital policy. But Hamilton explained that she followed the advice of
hospital attorneys who looked into the situation at her request. The lawyers
told her the law says she can store the gun with a trigger lock, unloaded,
in a lock-box inside her car while she works.
Mulcahy also
charged that Linda Hamilton and her husband Russ were attempting to cash
in on her plight because she was seen on local TV asking for donations.
Atty. Hession objected and asked what was wrong with the couple asking
for help with their legal expenses. After a sidebar, the matter was dropped.
Later, Russ
Hamilton told Massachusetts News that they received a total of
$5900 in donations, which they used for legal expenses and a private
detective.
Case
Gained National Interest
The incident with the truck, which occurred on March 1, 2000,
ignited a small amount of national interest on the Internet and talk radio
among Second Amendment defenders and other liberty-minded people, some
who helped by sending Hamilton small donations for her defense and others
who rallied at the courthouse.
Yesterday,
a handful of people were at the trial to lend moral support for Hamilton.
One man, who identified himself as “Jim from Dalton,” said he doesn’t
even know Hamilton personally but wanted to support her. “She has a license
to carry,” he said. “Why is she in court?”
Another supporter
named Ed Willey from Monroe said, “This is one of the worst cases of injustice
I’ve seen in a long time.”
Henry B.
Smith, an NRA safety instructor from Goshen was also there in support
of Smith told Mass News, “It’s frightening that a citizen who legally
holds can be persecuted like this.”
Atty. Hession told Mass News, “This case was political. If your politics goes the other way, you lose.”
The Hamiltons
have not decided if they will appeal.
Police
Assumed Guilt
“There are
no laws against brandishing in this state, no laws!” said Hamilton to
Mass News.
On the day
of the incident according to Hamilton, Detective Rick Lesniak of the North
Adams Police Dept. came over to where she had been stopped by state police,
pointed to her gun on the car seat and told two rookie, female state troopers,
“That right there is against the law, having a gun in the car.” He then
seized the weapon.
Hamilton
told Mass News that Detective Lesniak admitted his ignorance of the gun
laws to her former attorney after being asked why he assumed she broke
any gun laws. According to Hamilton, Lesniak responded, “I don’t know
anything about the gun laws,” to excuse his mistake.
Lesniak confirmed
to Massachusetts News yesterday that he said to the attorney he doesn’t
know anything about the gun laws. He told Mass News he doesn’t keep up
with the gun laws because they are constantly changing. This time however,
he said he took the gun out of the car as a “safety precaution,” rather
than because he thought a law was broken.