Mark and Patricia McCloskey, the St. Louis couple who sought to protect their property and lives from the rabid BLM mob marching down their private street pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges and agreed to forfeit the firearms they used in the showdown last year. This from thegatewaypundit.com.
Mark McCloskey spoke to reporters from the courthouse steps on Thursday and said he’d “do it again” to protect his family.
“I’d do it again,” McCloskey said from the courthouse steps. “Any time the mob approaches me, I’ll do what I can to put them in imminent threat of physical injury because that’s what kept them from destroying my house and my family.”
A St. Louis couple who gained notoriety for pointing guns at social justice demonstrators last year pleaded guilty Thursday to misdemeanor charges and agreed to give up the weapons they used during the confrontation.
Patricia McCloskey pleaded guilty to misdemeanor harassment and was fined $2,000. Her husband, Mark McCloskey, pleaded guilty to misdemeanor fourth-degree assault and was fined $750.
The McCloskeys, both of them lawyers in their 60s, wore blue blazers and spoke calmly in answering questions from Judge David Mason during Thursday’s hearing. Mason asked Mark McCloskey if he acknowledged that his actions put people at risk of personal injury. He replied, “I sure did your honor.”
A livestream of the militant mob clearly showed they entered through a gate into a private community.
Mr. McCloskey explained during his on-camera interview last year that he announced to the Marxist mob that they were on private property and that’s when they became enraged.
“Somebody forced the gate, and I stood up and announced that this is private property. Go back. I can’t remember in detail anymore. I went inside, I got a rifle. And when they … because as soon as I said this is private property, those words enraged the crowd,” he said.
McClosky said one of the militants pulled out a loaded pistol magazine and clicked them together and said ‘you’re next.’
“We were threatened with our lives, threatened with a house being burned down, my office building being burned down, even our dog’s life being threatened. It was, it was about as bad as it can get,” McCloskey said.
McCloskey believes that the only thing that stopped the crowd from approaching his home was his rifle.
I’m baffled by this court decision. Am I within my rights to protect myself, my family, and my home or by law am I expected to submit to harm? I foresee an appeal. In fact, I hope there is an appeal. I hope this becomes another Landmark case that clarifies what a homeowner is allowed to do to protect life, limb, and property.
