Max Misch pleaded not guilty Thursday in Bennington to two charges of possessing illegal large-capacity magazines.
As a condition of his release, the 36-year-old Bennington man may not possess firearms, ammunition or gun accessories while the case is pending. He was also ordered not to contact former Bennington state representative Kiah Morris, her husband, or a third individual named in a police affidavit.
State police seized two 30-round magazines from Misch’s residence Wednesday while executing a search warrant, according to the Vermont Attorney General’s office.
A 2018 state law banned as of October 1, 2018, the acquisition and possession of magazines that contain more than 10 rounds for a long gun or 15 rounds for a handgun. (Magazines that were lawfully obtained prior to the new law are exempted.)
The two misdemeanor charges each carry a potential penalty of up to one year in jail and a $500 fine.
Attorney General T.J. Donovan, whose office is prosecuting the case, summarized the court’s order to Seven Days. Donovan described contents of the state’s affidavit for probable cause. Donovan said the AG’s office received a tip the week of January 22 from a law enforcement source who alleged Misch had traveled to New Hampshire to buy banned magazines.
Barely a week earlier, Donovan had announced that he did not have grounds to charge Misch for his racist online harassment campaign against Morris. Misch, an avowed white nationalist, crashed the press conference the AG held at Congregation Beth El synagogue, where Morris was present.
While investigating the tip about Misch’s magazine purchase, Vermont State Police learned that a therapist had called the Bennington Police Department in October to alert the department that a woman she was treating had stated concern about Misch’s collection of guns and ammunition and his “predatory and intimidating behavior.”
Donovan said Bennington police did not disclose the therapist’s phone call to his office during its months-long investigation into the racial harassment of Morris.
Asked whether he thought the call should have been disclosed, Donovan replied, “Yes.”
“Right now, we’re focused on prosecuting this case,” he added.
Correction, March 5, 2019: Details of the new gun law were misstated in a previous version of this story.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
When the police or prosecutor can go to a judge and get a search warrant over the suspicion you may have high capacity magazine you are living in a police state not a free country. What has happened to America.
Hmm, the article says 2 magazines recovered, not 4. So it would be an issue to prove which 2 were there 2 that were legally brought to VT or at least one the wasn’t brought legally to VT. I can’t see how you prove it either way, and with presumption of innocence and the prosecution having to prove guilt, I don’t think this is as easy to prove as some think. Now if they find 4 magazines, you still have to prove he didn’t buy all four before the deadline, but at least you are closer…
Patrick,
Your second paragraph makes the case that the defense will have to present.
While you are technically correct that the purchase in NH is legal if the magazines are not transported to Vermont, I would assume that the prosecution will also introduce testimony from Lisa Shapiro (and/or others) stating that Ms. Shapiro purchased the magazines for the defendant and that either he or she (or conceivably someone else) DID transport the magazines to Vermont and that they DID end up in the house, where 4 magazines were, in fact, found. Since the prosecution can also provide a plausible chain of evidence for the other 2, I continue to believe it will NOT need to distinguish which ones are which.
Apparently unlike you, given the evidence that already exists, I think the prosecution has a pretty persuasive case. The standard is reasonable doubt rather than any doubt precisely to eliminate the possibility of failing to convict in cases where the evidence overwhelmingly suggests guilt, which is the way I read this evidence so far
I am not a lawyer (and as far as I know, you arent either), and neither of us knows every scrap of evidence probative or exculpatory that will be introduced assuming the case goes to trial. But assuming that nothing persuasive has been left out of press accounts, this is where I believe we are now.
Mr. Misch had better hope that the armchair lawyers in these comments columns are correct, and that the law itself can be found unconstitutional. I suspect THAT is the case hell end up making.
Im so willing to wait for the courts to decide that issue that Ill spare them (and you) my inexpert guidance on the matter.