TexasCHLforum.com

Part I
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Part II
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And the Court proceedings:
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/attachment.php?id=8142" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good example of the value of the digital voice recorder.

Gah.. this drives me crazy. Why didn't they play the audio in the courtroom, clearly showing that the officer CHANGED his views between the street and the courtroom? He was claiming that a gun in a holster was 'concealed' on the street. this is ridiculous.

They were totally giving him the 10th degree on the street, but completely backtracking in the courtroom. Ridiculous.

If this isn't Gestapo-like tactics, I don't know what is...

Please excuse me for being a noodge, but this case illustrates something that I say from time to time: Police officers arrest you for what they think is an offense, not what the law says is an offense.

It is appalling how uninformed the prosecutor and judge were. I don't expect them to know the entire statutes by heart, but I would think the prosecutor would look up the law that he is prosecuting under.

I'd wager that most participants in this forum know the CHL and weapons laws better than the typical LEO.

- Jim

I really don't see how an LEO can effectively remember the nuances of each and every law, especially those that they do not come into contact with on a regular basis. Simply too much to handle. I have found that even those considered highly proficient knowledge-wise in any particular field still crack-open the reference book before jumping to any conclusions.

Purplehood wrote:I really don't see how an LEO can effectively remember the nuances of each and every law, especially those that they do not come into contact with on a regular basis. Simply too much to handle. I have found that even those considered highly proficient knowledge-wise in any particular field still crack-open the reference book before jumping to any conclusions.

I agree, but this guy was stating it in the audio as if he was sure it was a fact, when it was not. That's different from not knowing, and having to look things up.

dicion wrote:I agree, but this guy was stating it in the audio as if he was sure it was a fact, when it was not. That's different from not knowing, and having to look things up.

As the saying goes, "The problem isn't what he doesn't know, it's what he knows that ain't so."

Even prosecutors and judges can make mistakes. That's why verdicts are overturned on appeal -- which is very expensive for the defendant.

- Jim

That reminds me of when I was a young jarhead and was thinking about getting out and becoming an LA Deputy Sheriff. Long story short, I reenlisted since the only Academy date they could give me was 90+ days down the road and at that particular time the USMC was not allowing extensions in my field unless you agreed to reenlist in writing. So it was either be unemployed for a few months with a family or reenlist.
Anyway, the last formal step was sitting in front of a board of 2 or 3 officers (this was about 1989). They were all in suits, and I was in modified dress blues so I made a good impression.
They gave me the following scenario:
"You are patrolling an area that you know is restricted (should be no folks around for whatever reason)at night, and you find a parked car with fogged-up windows. What do you do?"
I call in the plates.
"You get nothing bad back".
I walk around the car with my flashlight and check it out.
"The windows are fogged-up and you cannot see inside".
I rap on the trunk of the car and say "Police or Deputy or whatever, please open your window".
No response.
I repeat myself loudly.
"You hear, 'Go away!'".
I walk up to the window without putting myself directly in front of it, and tap on the window with a nightstick or flashlight and again Identify myself and ask them to open up the window".
"The window rolls down and you recognize the Mayor of Los Angeles and a woman that you know is not his spouse. The Mayor looks at you and says, 'I am the Mayor, get out of here and leave me alone' and starts to roll the window back up".
I tap the glass as he does this and advise him that this is a restricted area.
"He yells 'Go away' and rolls the window up. What do you do?"
At this point all the guys on the board peer at me intently.
I look back at them and state, "I get on the radio and call my Desk Sergeant and tell him that the Mayor is in such and such area in a car with some lady that is not his wife and is telling me to go away, AND, what do YOU want me to do about it?"
All of the guys on the board start clapping each other on the back and laughing at my response. I got a 98 score for the interview.

The point of my story? If I was an LEO and I wasn't sure of what needed to be done and there was no compelling reason for immediate and decisive action, check with someone that might actually know what needs to be done.

dihappy wrote:
And the Court proceedings:
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/attachment.php?id=8142" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Where's the judgment? That was just the first session.

The charges were dropped.

Probably the prosecutor knew he would lose, when he read the statute. Prosecutors don't like to lose.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:The charges were dropped.

Probably the prosecutor knew he would lose, when he read the statute. Prosecutors don't like to lose.

- Jim

So does this lead to a high likelihood of winning a civil suit since this is basically the Alamgordo, NM case all over again?

IMHO, he might win a suit against the city, but he doesn't have much damages. He wasn't arrested. He might recover his legal fees.

He posted on the opencarry.org site that he's looking for an attorney who won't require him to pay up-front.

The problem with this sort of case is that it doesn't establish a precedent, so the police can keep arresting people for open carry, or whatever they are doing.

The situation is even worse in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The police there keep arresting people for open carry even though they have been told not to by the attorney general and a judge.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:I'd wager that most participants in this forum know the CHL and weapons laws better than the typical LEO.

- Jim

I actually have a binder at the house of CHL laws and anything else that is remotely related. I read it from time to time to keep it fresh.

seamusTX wrote:IMHO, he might win a suit against the city, but he doesn't have much damages. He wasn't arrested. He might recover his legal fees.

I'd want court costs, my lawyer's fee, the money I lost by missing work to be in court, and whatever it cost me to park downtown. . . and gas money to get there.
But I realize it is an imperfect world we live in and would not be surprised at all to be told I'm out of luck.

mgood wrote:But I realize it is an imperfect world we live in and would not be surprised at all to be told I'm out of luck.

What the defendant could recover depends in part on Michigan law. Most states limit the ability of defendants who are found not guilty or have charges dropped to sue for damages.

A false-arrest suit requires intentional wrongdoing on the part of the LEO or some other official, such as faking an affidavit to obtain a warrant. That's why these suits are rarely won.

The usual route in official wrongdoing is a federal civil right suit, but those also are rarely won except in cases of gross abuse.

- Jim