Say, the FBI threw Agent of the Dance under the bus!

Guess he should have shot some mothers in the face instead, I guess.

Dancing FBI agent charged with assault after dropping gun during backflip

Chase Bishop, 29, has been charged with one count of second-degree assault in connection with the June 2 nightclub shooting, according to a news release from the Denver District Attorney’s Office.

Bishop turned himself in on Tuesday morning after an arrest warrant was issued by Denver police, said Maro Casparian, a spokeswoman for the Denver District Attorney’s Office.

The results of a blood alcohol test have not been received, but District Attorney Beth McCann said in the news release said she was not going to wait.

I don’t know enough about the various possible charges to know if second-degree assault is more or less of a wrist slap than a mud person would have received, but I’m still surprised he was charged at all. “An FBI agent is always on duty,” so if he shot some guy in a bar the guy must have done something to deserve it. Right?

About Joel

You shouldn't ask these questions of a paranoid recluse, you know.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Say, the FBI threw Agent of the Dance under the bus!

  1. Ben says:

    He should have been charged with Aggravated Stupidity, which a Prosecutor might call something like “Culpable Negligence”.

    But seriously, it seems to me that the concept of “Assault” would necessarily require some sort of intent, or at least malice.

  2. Ken Hagler says:

    That may be deliberate on the prosecutor’s part. If the fed is charged with the wrong crime and then gets acquitted because it was the wrong crime, he then can’t be charged with the right crime.

  3. Bear says:

    Second-degree assault under Colorado law is actually appropriate, invlving reckless conduct resulting in serious injury. And it is a felony. I xpect he’ll get to plea it down to a misdemeanor that doesn’t make him a prohibited person.

  4. Bear – I’d been doing some reading on this a few months ago. Fwiw – some misdemeanors also could make one a prohibited person. It has to do with the amount of time one could be incarcerated for the offense – iirc it’s a year’s worth of potential time that could turn the misdemeanor into a denial.

    Here’s the source – sections (a)(1) and (d)(1). As I read it – one doesn’t even have to be sentenced for that amount of time – it’s the amount of the potential sentence that counts.

    With more and more records becoming digitally searchable – that could throw a wide loop over events that might have happened decades prior.

To the stake with the heretic!