Proposed Dominick Black Plea Deal, Felony Charges Dropped

[jdege]

https://www.ammoland.com/2022/01/rittenhouse-case-dominick-black-plea-deal-felony-charges-dropped/#axzz7HhqUquT1
Rittenhouse Case: Proposed Dominick Black Plea Deal, Felony Charges Dropped
The charges against Dominick Black for “providing” the rifle fell apart when the weapons charge against Kyle Rittenhouse was dismissed.

The Kenosha County Eye has obtained a proposed Plea agreement for Dominick Black related to the Kyle Rittenhouse case. Dominick Black was Kyle Rittenhouse’s friend who purchased the rifle Kyle carried and shot three attackers in self-defense, in 2020, during the riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

[...]

At about minute 37 Kevin Matheson of Kenosha County Eye says the prosecutor Binger and Dominick Black’s attorney have signed a plea agreement to drop the felony charges and plead guilty to a county ordinance of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. This is a citation, not a criminal matter. The fine agreed to is $2,000. There is no mention of forfeiture of the rifles which are legally owned by Dominick Black.

[Holland&Holland]

Probably the best possible outcome.

[jdege]

http://kenoshacountyeye.com/2022/01/10/kenosha-judge-approves-plea-deal-for-dominick-black-man-who-provided-ar-15-to-rittenhouse-all-criminal-charges-officially-dismissed/
Kenosha Judge Approves Plea Deal For Dominick Black, Man Who Provided AR-15 To Rittenhouse – All Criminal Charges Officially Dismissed

Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder today made it official – Dominick Black’s criminal charges have been dismissed with prejudice. “With prejudice” means that the state cannot appeal this case or retry it according to Black’s Attorney, Tony Cotton out of Waukesha. Black was 19 years old when Kenosha prosecutors charged him with two felonies for giving Kyle Rittenhouse a gun that he used to defend himself against three violent criminals on August 25, 2020. Black faced 12 years in prison if convicted. This plea deal, negotiated by Dominic Black’s attorney and Kenosha Assistant District Attorney T. Clair Binger, required black to plead no contest to a non-criminal ordinance citation of “contributing to the delinquency of a child.”

Judge Schroeder fined black $1,500 plus court costs, for a total of around $2,000. Black had already posted $2,500 so he will get about $500 back.

[BigBlue]

So it wasn't a straw purchase issue, it was about 'making a dangerous weapon available to a minor'? Glad the outcome went the right direction then.

Other articles I've read stated things more as "Black bought the rifle for Rittenhouse", which would be a different situation. Obviously many media outlets are either incompetent in their ability to understand and communicate accurately or they outright lie to push their agenda.

[TSKNIGHT]

So it wasn't a straw purchase issue, it was about 'making a dangerous weapon available to a minor'? Glad the outcome went the right direction then.

Other articles I've read stated things more as "Black bought the rifle for Rittenhouse", which would be a different situation. Obviously many media outlets are either incompetent in their ability to understand and communicate accurately or they outright lie to push their agenda.

No, they would never lie! It's obviously just a minor misunderstanding of basic English.

[ex-LT]

Obviously many media outlets are either incompetent in their ability to understand and communicate accurately or they outright lie to push their agenda.

[smurfman]

So it wasn't a straw purchase issue, it was about 'making a dangerous weapon available to a minor'? Glad the outcome went the right direction then.

Other articles I've read stated things more as "Black bought the rifle for Rittenhouse", which would be a different situation. Obviously many media outlets are either incompetent in their ability to understand and communicate accurately or they outright lie to push their agenda.

Black was pretty fortunate in his plea deal. Under oath during the Rittenhouse trial, both Black and Rittenhouse admitted that Rittenhouse gave Black the money to purchase the rifle. That is most definitely a prohibited action.

Black might not be totally out of the woods though. He might not be charged by any Wisconsin court but I believe the Feds could take the case for lying on the 4473. If the Feds can and do, Black may have a tough time defending himself due to the plea and his testimony.

[jdege]

Black might not be totally out of the woods though. He might not be charged by any Wisconsin court but I believe the Feds could take the case for lying on the 4473. If the Feds can and do, Black may have a tough time defending himself due to the plea and his testimony.

The critical fact may be that Black didn't actually give the gun to Rittenhouse, that he, in fact, kept it in his own gun safe in Wisconsin.

Remember, the law isn't about "ownership", but about possession. The gun wasn't in Rittenhouse's possession except when he was visiting.

[Holland&Holland]

Black might not be totally out of the woods though. He might not be charged by any Wisconsin court but I believe the Feds could take the case for lying on the 4473. If the Feds can and do, Black may have a tough time defending himself due to the plea and his testimony.

The critical fact may be that Black didn't actually give the gun to Rittenhouse, that he, in fact, kept it in his own gun safe in Wisconsin.

Remember, the law isn't about "ownership", but about possession. The gun wasn't in Rittenhouse's possession except when he was visiting.

Form 4473 instructions
Question 11.a. Actual Transferee/Buyer: For purposes of this form, a person is the actual transferee/buyer if he/she is purchasing the firearm for him/herself or otherwise acquiring the firearm for him/herself. (e.g., redeeming the firearm from pawn, retrieving it from consignment, firearm raffle winner). A person is also the actual transferee/buyer if he/she is legitimately purchasing the firearm as a bona fide gift for a third party. A gift is not bona fide if another person offered or gave the person completing this form money, service(s), or item(s) of value to acquire the firearm for him/her, or if the other person is prohibited by law from receiving or possessing the firearm.

[smurfman]

Black might not be totally out of the woods though. He might not be charged by any Wisconsin court but I believe the Feds could take the case for lying on the 4473. If the Feds can and do, Black may have a tough time defending himself due to the plea and his testimony.

The critical fact may be that Black didn't actually give the gun to Rittenhouse, that he, in fact, kept it in his own gun safe in Wisconsin.

Remember, the law isn't about "ownership", but about possession. The gun wasn't in Rittenhouse's possession except when he was visiting.

It is not about possession nor ownership- it is about who provided the funds for the purchase. The funding of the purchase was illegal with the ownership or possession issue irrelevant. But, if one did go there, Rittenhouse had possession of the firearm at some point which would have then made Black a straw purchaser. No matter how one looked at it, Black was not in a good place. And probably still isn't.

The critical fact is the prosecutor is likely still smarting from the Rittenhouse case and did not want to try Black's case in front of the same judge. The prosecutor probably could not stand a second loss so worked hard to get "something" from it. It will be interesting to see if the Feds do something. I wouldn't bet against them not taking up the case.