TexasCHLforum.com

Jumping Frog

wharvey wrote:Saddest thing is there has still been no disciplinary action taken against the joke of a cop.

His hearing is in December. He is currently out on "medical leave".

Jumping Frog

philip964 wrote:Interesting the difference between Texas and Ohio. They have to constantly sue the government to get their rights under the constitution and Ohio law.

What is going on here is the prosecutor knows that the city is facing a lot of liability from a civil suit, so they are desperately trying to push through any kind of criminal conviction so that it will help their defense in the civil rights case.

Jumping Frog

bilgerat57 wrote: My concern is that bad guys will be released for no other reason than the fact that this cop messed up on this one incident.

Except I do not believe it was "this one incident".

The way he gets out of the car with his gloves already on and says to the woman, "Get out of here before I put lumps on you!", says to me we are looking at a member of the Hickory Shampoo club.

Maybe there are problems with previous cases that should be reviewed again? Who is to say that discrediting this 'roid rager won't uncover some legitimate miscarriages of justice?

Jumping Frog

speedsix wrote:...his lawyer said he tried three times...and the audio's not clear enough for us to be sure what was said...I believe him...we may never know 'cause the case'll be thrown out...unless the city attorney refuses to do so because it would be seen as an admission that the cops were all wrong..

The city prosecutor even before the video was released had offered to drop the charges if the CHL would agree to not bring civil suit. His lawyer, after conferring with the client, turned that offer down.

Jumping Frog

It's somewhat ironic that this happened in Canton, OH.

Why? Well, the SCOTUS case of City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris is a landmark Fourth Amendment case for failure to train LEOs.

From the SCOTUS decision:

The inadequacy of police training may serve as the basis for § 1983 liability only where the failure to train in a relevant respect amounts to deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of persons with whom the police come into contact.

I guess not much has changed in the Canton OH police force . . .

Jumping Frog

kyreb wrote:Lived in Ohio for 5 years. I am not anti- LEO at all but cops up there tend to be a different breed...especially the state troopers. I had one who lived a couple doors down from that refused to talk to me...even wave for that matter, despite the fact he would bring his kid by the house regularly to sell items to fund the little guy's various sports teams. (Which I did. The kid was a neat little guy).
Anyway, the Ohio cops fought the state's "new" CHL law with a vengence. They lobbied to disallow a CHL to carry unsecured in your own car. ( since repealed I believe). Your CHL was tied to the tags on your car and the cops would pull over CHLs regularly just to harass them. Needless to say, the wife and I did not bother to apply for a CHL while we lived there.

Since I was the original poster, for the record, I lived in Ohio for years before moving to Texas, had my CHL there for years, and have been very active in OFCC at the political level as well as in their forums (almost 9000 posts). I would NOT characterize Ohio LEO's like your description at all.

LEO notifications have been tracked on OFCC's forums for years. Ninety-nine percent of the time they are a complete non-event. The overwhelming majority of Ohio LEO's are very supportive of CHL's. In fact, 3 of the original 4 founders of Ohioans For Concealed Carry were police officers. Pulling people over just because they have a CHL does not sound accurate to me at all.

It is true that the top brass at the Ohio State Highway Patrol originally opposed concealed carry, as well as the police union leaders (FOP). However, that attitude has never been reflected in the everyday rank and file.

This particular circumstance is so disturbing precisely because it is so non-typical.

kyreb wrote:Oh, one more thing, in Ohio if you have an AR15 and a mag that holds over 30 rounds, state law classified your semi auto AR as an "illegal machine gun". Ohio is definately not a gun friendly state unless said gun is a skeet shotgun, unloaded, locked up and completely inaccessable at all times. God bless Texas ( and KY too).

The magazine restriction is correct, and a disappointment. However, it is difficult to rank states as gun friendly or un-friendly. In Ohio, unlicensed open carry is in the Ohio Constitution as a fundamental right and state level preemption means it is not able to be restricted at the county or city level. I regularly open carried all around Columbus and never had an issue. And for the record, I did so while around LEO's from various agencies and never had a single issue.

That all said and done, thank God I am in Texas now!

Jumping Frog

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:The CHL holder had AMPLE time to notify BOTH officers and he FAILED. I'm not buying the "they wouldn't let me speak" excuse, nor am I buying the "...but officer, I wasn't picking up a prostitute" story either.

The lawyer analyzing the video has three different attempts on his part to notify, and the LEO told him to "shut up" all three times.

I think the prostitute issue is a distraction, given the woman was sent away and there was nothing charged.

This is the third instance in the last year that I personally know of in Ohio where a CHL was told to "shut up" and was later charged with failure to notify. The same lawyer handled one of the other cases and won at trial when there was also recorded evidence that the LEO told the CHL to "shut up" and it took him 51 seconds to notify.

FWIW, the same statute that requires notification also has a paragraph requiring the CHL to follow "any lawful order of any law enforcement officer", which is also a 1st Degree Misdemeanor (Equiv to Class A). So running into the wrong LEO gives you the jackpot either way.

Jumping Frog

Ohio requires a CHL to notify an LEO "promptly" when stopped for law enforcement purposes. Failure to notify is a 1st degree misdemeanor with a maximum 180 days in jail and a $1000 fine.

The CHL's attorney posted this in the Ohioans For Concealed Carry Forums (OFCC Forums). OFCC has since posted the dashcam video corroborating the CHL's treatment. OFCC is using this, and other similar egregious incidents to seek legislative changes to the notification law.

This is posted by the CHL defendant's attorney:

I am representing someone in a failure to notify case. It is an ongoing legal case, so I dont want to post too much here right now. I watched the video today, and it verified an almost unbelievable story my client told me. To make this real brief - my client was stopped. Tried to notify, but was told by one officer to shut up. Another officer came to the driver's side door, and again my client tried to notify. You can hear him in the video say "I've got . . ." before he his cut off with a profanity laced tirade, and demand for his driver's license. My clent hands the officer his license, tries to notify again while holding his CHL in his hand. The officer says "What? What are you waving around that you want me to see?" He takes it, looks at it, while my client says "I'm trying to tell you . . ." The officer asks, "do you have a gun? My guy says "Yes" and then is pushed against his vehicle while the officer takes the gun from my client's waistband holster. The total time from the officer approaching the car door to being told he has a gun was 55 seconds.

It gets worse from there. The officer tells my guy that "I should blast you right in the mouth." "I'm close to caving in your head." "You are a stupid human being." "How would you like it if I pull mine and stick it to your head." When speaking to another officer, he says "I hate these {expletive deleted} with their {expletive deleted} permits." And, again, later tells my client "I should have taken 2 steps back, put 10 rounds in your {expletive deleted}, and left you lying there. I should have executed you, and I'd go home and sleep good tonight."

Internal affairs was notified. I am having a difficult time conveying the intensity involved. This was bad, really bad scene.

Sorry I can't say more right now. Be careful out there!!

Edit to add one more bit of information. My client was stopped in his motor vehicle at the time. He was in a no parking zone. This was not the result of a high speed chase or anything like that.

But WARNING: The video contains extremely coarse language.
The entire dashcam video is posted here on Youtube: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
But WARNING: The video contains extremely coarse language.

The OFCC discussion is here: http://ohioccwforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=54153" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 8 matches

Re: OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.

Re: OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.

Re: OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.

Re: OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.

Re: OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.

Re: OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.

Re: OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.

OH - LEO Notification goes BAD, really BAD.