TexasCHLforum.com

This has degenerated into mindless cop bashing. I will consider that the time for intelligent conversation has passed for this thread and no longer post on it.


Have fun boys. Give that copper heck.

marksiwel wrote:While I'm at it.
I've heard WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY to many stories of LEO and Prison guards who "Taunt" people while their locked up? Not only is this Childish, but there is blowback in the community, I can only imagine the harm that this behavior has caused to Police Cooperation with communties to actual police being targeted for crimes.

From who? I'd be curious to know the details of these stories. You can PM them to me if you like. To be honest, I suspect they are just stories. Have you spent 10 minutes in the secure side of a county jail much less a state prison?

I can tell you from my experiences that everyone processed in our counties jail is called sir or ma'am as long as possible.


Regarding a secure side of a PD - it's exactly that...secure. Sworn personnel and non-sworn staff only. Once in a while a guest comes in, or people from a citizen's police academy, ride-a-long, what have you...but they are always escorted. As a sidenote, even LEO's can't carry in jails. We can't bring guns, mags, knives, or batons. All we get is OC...well and our hands. But I could tag someone with my radio if I really needed too, it's heavier than my ASP.

Wisewr wrote:Not to mention emotional damages caused which they should ultimatly pay for along with any lawyer fees, but maybe you could go out and buy a new carry gun and holster while they have your's and try and get that included in the settlement. Havn't you been eyeing a new gun and holster? Here's your chance to get someone else to pay for it.

Someone else? You do realize that if the government has to pay for it....well...nm. It's not like it's a corporation...



If the OP does bring a civil suit please start a post about it. I'd be very interested in following the outcome of it.

handog wrote:

gigag04 wrote:

handog wrote:I was suprised at how ignorant of the law they were. When the dust settled the judge agreed with me, not the LEO.

If the CA didn't prosecute then why did you even go to a judge to discuss the specifics of the case? You should've been magistrated and released.

marksiwel wrote:

handog wrote:I'm reluctant to give the jurisdiction here because a false arrest and civil liberties lawsuit is being considered.

more than likely a good idea. The less said the better.

If someone reported it I doubt you'll have much ground to stand on. Don't want to start a urinating contest but you'll have the burden of proof (albeit a lower one in civil court) to convince judge/jury of the officer's malicious intent.

And if he was following orders from a superior, then you may get something from the city/county...who knows. I'd have to ask what's your aim in bringing a suit and who would you be going after? Just curious. Glad everything worked for you.

I stood in front of a magistrate, not a judge. I stand corrected. My aim is mainly to bring awareness so that others won't go through it.

A judge is a magistrate, at any level. I was just curious why you even had to go to court on it if the CA was dropping the charges. Mr. Rothstein cleared it up for me. I didn't know they had to go in to ask the judge if they could choose not to prosecute. Seems like a pain but somebody somewhere decided that's how it should be.

Get your gun back yet?

buffalo_speedway_tx wrote:It also is amazing how many guns had to be pointed at you considering you most likely were not making any threatening gestures.

It is easy to arm chair quarterback actions when we weren't the ones responding. And we don't know exactly what call was dispatched to the officers and what they could see from their approach.


Handog - did you get a copy of the officer's report or his Probable Cause statement?

srothstein wrote:The case actually has to go to a judge to be dismissed since it has already been started in the court process during the arrest and magistration. In most cases, the prosecutor just hands the file to the judge with a motion to dismiss "nolle prosequi" (if I haev the Latin right). Sometimes, the court will want both sides present or the motion takes place at the first real adversarial hearing.

Ah ok. This makes sense. Would the OP have to testify if the prosector motions to dismiss due to non-pros?

handog wrote:I was suprised at how ignorant of the law they were. When the dust settled the judge agreed with me, not the LEO.

If the CA didn't prosecute then why did you even go to a judge to discuss the specifics of the case? You should've been magistrated and released.

marksiwel wrote:

handog wrote:I'm reluctant to give the jurisdiction here because a false arrest and civil liberties lawsuit is being considered.

more than likely a good idea. The less said the better.

If someone reported it I doubt you'll have much ground to stand on. Don't want to start a urinating contest but you'll have the burden of proof (albeit a lower one in civil court) to convince judge/jury of the officer's malicious intent.

And if he was following orders from a superior, then you may get something from the city/county...who knows. I'd have to ask what's your aim in bringing a suit and who would you be going after? Just curious. Glad everything worked for you.