Civil War Reenactor Faces Felony Aggravated Assault Charges in MD
February 26, 2009 - 5 Comments
by Sarah Barnes
This was posted yesterday in The Evening Sun newspaper. Seems a little extreme for a situation that sounds like a bad joke that got out of hand. What do you think?
Here’s what happened according to the story:
from Felony charges refiled in re-enactor shooting
By KATHARINE HARMON, The Evening Sun, 02/25/2009On Aug. 3,The aggravated assault charges previously dropped against the Civil War re-enactor who allegedly shot another re-enactor in the foot in August were refiled last month.Paul J. Sproesser, 44, of Locust Street in Frederick, Md., was originally charged with two felony counts of aggravated assault as well as two counts of reckless endangerment and one count of simple assault for shooting the 17-year-old re-enactor.
Sproesser shot a .69-caliber Springfield black powder rifle point-blank at a piece of canvas over the teen’s foot, court documents said. The rifle was filled only with gunpowder and did not contain a bullet.
The shot resulted in powder burns to two of the teen’s toes and the partial amputation of one, court documents said.
Both re-enactors had just completed a re-enactment at the American Civil War Museum at 297 Steinwehr Ave. The 17-year-old lay on the ground, covered by a piece of canvas tarp, when Sproesser walked past, pointed his rifle and fired.
The gunpowder went through the canvas, through the victim’s leather boot and socks and into his right foot.
In an interview with police, Sproesser said he had walked up to the tarp, pointed the rifle, which he had loaded, at the canvas and fired. He also said he knew the boy was under the tarp, court documents said.
Filed Under: About Reenacting, Civil War, News
Tags: Civil War, Civil War Living History, Civil War Reenactors
Comments (5)
Jim Barnes
February 28th, 2009 at 11:23 am
The guy was stupid, but it sounds like an overly ambitious District Attorney wants to make a name for himself as a tough guy by using this minor. The act itself was dumb, negligent and dangerous, but probably not a felony. More grounds for a civil suit.
mike
March 5th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
definitely a case of stupidity, negligence, and lack of common sense.
an accidental discharge can happen, but purposefully discharging your weapon is a whole different matter. i don’t necessarily agree with aggravated assault which implies malicious intent…he certainly could have pointed it elsewhere if harm was intended.
not privy to the facts of the case it sounds as if reckless endangerment and illegal discharge of a firearm in public are in order, as well as liability on his part. perhaps he was aiming at the tarp between his feet but no excuse here. the guy is a jackass for his conduct and he has changed this boys life forever, discredited himself, and made reenactors look irresponsible to the general public.
ban him and let him face the consequences. maybe we can get his gear cheap now!
mike
Jim Barnes
March 5th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Yeah, its like you said a few weeks ago, guns and alcohol don’t mix…In this case, guns and stupidity didn’t mix. There will no doubt be a lawsuit from the kid’s family before its over. The hobby doesn’t need this crap.
Matt Gillespie
March 8th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
What an idiot! The guy should never be allowed to handle a firearm again. I think the 17 year-old should be allowed to shoot him in his foot!
Jim Barnes
March 8th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
As they said in ‘The HMS Pinafore’, “Let the punishment fit the crime…” I think a shot in foot would be a great idea. Might set a good precedent.
Leave a reply