Return to “Cuffed and Stuffed”
Couldn't have said it better myself. Oldgringo, you are the MAN!!!Oldgringo wrote:Well, maybe it wasn't so much a sheltered life as knowing what was expected of me and learning (maturity) when to keep my mouth shut.marksiwel wrote:
If its such a sheltered life, why are you worried about the cops coming for you?
Good information! Thanks for that explanation, Steve!srothstein wrote:There is a significant difference between the two cases. In the current case, thee is a two year wait because he has not yet been tried on the charges. While the charges have been dismissed, that might be only a temporary situation. The state has two years to prosecute a misdemeanor and might refile the charges. But, the statute of limitations is one reason there is a delay in moving for an expungement when there is no trial.dihappy wrote:Seriously?handog wrote:I was told after a two year waiting period I can try to have it removed completely. With the attorneys fee and court cost it would be about $1000.00. It's crazy.
I was arrested on a bogus charge and beat it in court. My attorney told me that an expungment has to be done quickly after. He took care of it, and it didnt cost any where near $1000.
In your case, you actually had a trial and were found not guilty. Since you have a right against double jeopardy, you cannot be tried twice and there is no reason to delay the expungement.
It is a little sticky and the refiling of charges almost never happens, but there have been cases dismissed for a prosecutor decling to prosecute and then brought back up later if more evidence surfaces or if a different prosecutor takes office.
I'm only saying what I would do. I believe in escalation of a situation much like escalation of force. I would start with a formal complaint at the department level and then make my decisions based on what happens at that level. Having worked in a Police Department for a number of years, I've seen many formal complaints solved to the satisfaction of the citizen and resulting in the change of department policy. A major change in a pursuit policy at one department I worked at came about as a result of a citizen complaint. Hard to say....all situations are different. Based on what handog has said, this is what I would do. Not saying it's right for everyone.VoiceofReason wrote: Complaints to the department do no good. I speak from experience.
Complaints to the appropriate government do no good. I speak from experience.
Doing nothing will not change anything.
Suggestions?
I'm certainly not disagreeing that the arrest was wrong. Sure you can sue the police officer, who will more than likely be happily represented by an attorney for the local police officer's association. I'm thinking that the association probably has access to more money to fund the attorney's than does the OP. (This is just an assumption of course and could very well be incorrect.) Now of course, if the NRA or the TSRA want to take the battle on for the OP, that could be a different story.VoiceofReason wrote: Personally I would file on the department and the arresting officer. If he is the type that abuses his authority, it might make him reconsider his career choices.
His “mistakes” can affect people for the rest of their lives or could cost someone their life. I don’t know how many times I have heard “Ignorance of the law is no excuse”. I would assume that applies to LEOs too.
There is no excuse for this arrest. If he didn’t know the law, his superior officers should have. If no one on duty knew the law then the department should have a class on dealing with CHL holders.
I don’t think Concealed Handgun Licensing is going to go away any time soon, so law enforcement should learn to accept it and how to handle it. The sooner the better.
Seriously?!?!?!?! Holy Cats! Crazy is right!handog wrote: I was told after a two year waiting period I can try to have it removed completely. With the attorneys fee and court cost it would be about $1000.00. It's crazy.
I'm thinking it shouldn't be on your record if there were no charges??? Or am I completely wrong about that?handog wrote:Handgun back on hip, plastic back in wallet.Good posts by the way. I can certainly understand the lawsuit sentiment but I have decided to file a complaint instead. And I will walk in there calm and cool.
Since this may be on my record for life I want the arresting officer to have it on his record too. I hope it makes a difference.
More than likely what would happen is after years of depositions and stalling and paper filing and money, the city would settle out of court. Once the lawsuit is filed, the accused policeman isn't even really aware it's going on except when he gives his deposition. It becomes a lawyer's game after that (no offense, Charles). If the suit filer is lucky, he'll end up with a bit more money than it cost him to retain a lawyer. But more than likely, the police department won't bat an eye, won't change any of their policies and everthing will go on as normal. It's not pretty, but it's reality.03Lightningrocks wrote:I disagree. A big fat law suite settlement will teach them not to violate the rights of the citizens in their jurisdiction. It can also help the fellow who was arrested recover some of his costs. The police agencies can not be allowed to define the law as they see fit. The arresting officer should have a big black mark put on his record so that when he decides to abuse his power the next time, their can be a written record of his need to be fired.gregthehand wrote:I for one don't think it would do any good to sue the department or arresting officer. I just don't see what it would accomplish. A formal written complaint to the department may be more appropriate.