Mccloskeys: Law-Breaking Or Self-Defense?

Mark and Patricia McCloskey, a wealthy white couple, gained notoriety after they were filmed brandishing firearms at Black Lives Matter protesters passing by their mansion in St. Louis, Missouri. The incident took place on June 28, 2020, during a period of heightened racial injustice protests sparked by the killing of George Floyd. While the McCloskeys claimed they were acting in self-defence and protecting their property, they were charged with unlawful use of a weapon, a felony. The charges and subsequent seizure of their firearms sparked a debate about Second Amendment rights, state laws, and the constitutionality of the authorities' actions.

The McCloskeys were charged with unlawful use of a weapon

On June 28, 2020, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, a couple of lawyers, gained notoriety after they were filmed brandishing firearms at Black Lives Matter protesters outside their mansion in St. Louis, Missouri. The protesters were marching to the home of St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson, who had recently publicly shared the names and addresses of residents who had written to her urging her to defund the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.

The McCloskeys claimed that the protesters were a "mob" who had broken through a gate and were trespassing on their property. However, other accounts state that the protesters were peaceful and remained on the sidewalk and roadway. The McCloskeys were filmed aiming their weapons directly at demonstrators, with Patricia McCloskey shouting, "Go!"

In response to the incident, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner charged the couple with "unlawful use of a weapon", a felony. The complaint stated that the McCloskeys had displayed their semi-automatic weapons "in an angry or threatening manner". Gardner wrote: "We are fortunate this situation did not escalate into deadly force... I believe [a diversion programme] would serve as a fair resolution to this matter."

The McCloskeys' actions were praised by conservatives, including then-President Donald Trump, who commented that the couple were going to be "beat up badly, if they were lucky". Missouri's conservative governor also stated that if the McCloskeys were convicted, he would pardon them.

Missouri's castle doctrine law

The Castle Doctrine, which Missouri recognises, allows residents to use force against intruders as "a man's home is his castle". This doctrine extends the self-defence rights to protect one's home and personal space.

In the state of Missouri, people have no duty to retreat if there has been an unlawful entrance or attempted entrance into their dwelling, residence, or vehicle. By entering a person's home or vehicle, the intruder is considered the initial aggressor. This gives homeowners and renters an easier-to-prove claim of self-defence, which includes the use of lethal force.

Missouri's version of the stand-your-ground law expands the Castle Doctrine to include waving the duty to retreat for someone who had a reasonable fear of death, a forcible felony, or serious physical injury in any location they had the right to be.

However, the use of force must be reasonable and justifiable under the circumstances. Lethal force may only be used if the resident reasonably believes that the intruder will use unlawful force against them, and it is necessary to protect themselves or someone else.

In the case of Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who pointed guns at Black Lives Matter protestors from their front yard, Missouri's Attorney General Eric Schmitt filed a legal brief in support of dismissing the case, writing that prosecuting the McCloskeys violates their right to bear arms and their right to defend their property under the Castle Doctrine.

The protesters were trespassing

However, this is disputed. A freelance photographer and journalism graduate student, Daniel Shular, told the BBC that the gate was unlocked and intact when the first marchers entered. Shular estimated that he was the sixth person to pass through the gate, and that "it looked normal to me when I passed through."

Most legal analysts agree that the protesters were trespassing when they entered Portland Place. The street is private property owned by a trust, and residents pay towards its management and upkeep, as well as private security.

The McCloskeys' lawyer initially stated that "Mr and Mrs McCloskey acted lawfully on their property which sits on a private gated lane."

The McCloskeys' right to bear arms

The right to bear arms is a contentious issue in the United States, with strong opinions on both sides of the debate. The Second Amendment guarantees US citizens the right to keep and bear arms, and the Fourth Amendment states that citizens have the right to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures".

The McCloskeys, a couple from St. Louis, Missouri, gained notoriety when they brandished firearms at Black Lives Matter protesters passing by their home. The incident occurred on June 28, 2020, as protesters marched to the home of St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson, calling for her resignation after she publicly shared the names and addresses of residents who had suggested defunding the police department.

The McCloskeys, who are both lawyers, claimed they were defending their property from a violent mob. They stated that protesters ignored signs indicating they were entering a private street and destroyed a gate on their property, which they believed constituted criminal rioting under Missouri law. The couple also said they received death, rape, and arson threats during the incident.

However, many legal analysts and protesters disputed these claims. Video evidence suggests that protesters remained on the sidewalk and roadway and did not cross onto the McCloskeys' property. Special prosecutor Richard Callahan determined that the protesters were peaceful, and no weapons were found among them.

The McCloskeys were initially charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon. However, they later pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges, with Mark McCloskey pleading guilty to fourth-degree assault and Patricia McCloskey to harassment. They were pardoned by the governor and put on probation by the Missouri Supreme Court, which also suspended their law licenses for a period.

The case sparked a broader debate about the right to bear arms and the limits of this right in situations of civil protest. Supporters of the McCloskeys argued that their actions were protected under the Second Amendment and Missouri's "castle doctrine", which allows residents to use force against intruders as "one's home is one's castle". Opponents, however, criticised their actions as an unreasonable use of force against peaceful protesters, with some legal experts arguing that the McCloskeys' actions could be classified as assault.

The incident and its aftermath highlight the ongoing tension and differing interpretations of the right to bear arms in the United States.

The protesters' right to peaceful protest

The right to peaceful protest is a fundamental aspect of a democratic society. Protests have played a pivotal role in shaping history, from the Boston Tea Party to the Black Lives Matter movement. The First Amendment of the US Constitution enshrines the freedom of speech, the right to peaceably assemble, and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. These rights are not absolute, however, and may be subjected to reasonable regulation and content-neutral restrictions.

Protesters' rights are strongest in "traditional public forums" such as streets, sidewalks, and parks. They also typically have the right to assemble on other public property, as long as they are not blocking access or interfering with the intended purpose of the location. Counterprotesters have equivalent free speech rights, and police must treat both groups equally, maintaining a separation while allowing them to remain within sight and sound of one another.

Protesters do not require a permit to march on sidewalks or streets, provided they do not obstruct traffic. However, certain events, such as large rallies or street closures, may necessitate permits. Importantly, permits cannot be denied due to the controversial nature or unpopular views expressed during the protest.

While the First Amendment protects the right to peaceful protest, it does not shield unlawful conduct. The Supreme Court has established that the government may lawfully stop a protest accompanied by violence and intimidation, as the right is to "peaceably" assemble.

In the case of the McCloskeys, the protesters were marching on a private street, Portland Place, which is owned by a trust and marked with "Private Property" signs. While the McCloskeys' right to bear arms and defend their property is protected under the Second Amendment and Missouri's "castle doctrine," the protesters' right to peaceful protest does not extend to private property without the owner's consent. Most legal analysts agree that the protesters were trespassing when they entered Portland Place.

The McCloskeys claimed that the protesters broke down the gate, while some protesters asserted that it was already open when they entered. The McCloskeys also alleged that the protesters threatened their lives, though there is little evidence of this in the live streams of the incident. Ultimately, the McCloskeys were charged with "unlawful use of a weapon," a felony, and later pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges.

Frequently asked questions