Thread: Vandalia LEO Encounter
Have you done a follow-up records request for the full video, etc.?
To the original poster: If you need help lifting audio out of that mess, let me know. I do this often for my agency and have software+experience if needed.
Here are the two systems I am referring to :
http://www.avt-usa.com/ Apollo Video Systems
http://www.safetyvision.com/ Safety Vision
Last edited by half_life1052; 04-15-2012 at 10:53 PM. Reason: adding links
Approximately two weeks ago a lieutenant from the department called and left me a voice mail. In the message he stated that he had been made aware of the incident and had seen the video online and also saw there was, "Quite a bit of discussion on the incident." on this forum. He also stated that it looked like I was looking for more information on the issue. We assume he was referring to the fact that we didn't believe I was given the whole tape. We decided it was in my best interest at that point in time not to return the call because we were still unsure of what action we were going to take and we believe there might of been a hidden motive to the call.
Secondly, this past Monday I met with the city mayor and city manager in the council chambers before the council meeting. When the mayor entered before the meeting started she immediately approached me. She asked me what my business was at the meeting and I informed her of why I was in attendance. She conveyed to me that the city would much rather handle the situation in another setting. She introduced me to the city manager who invited me to contact him the next day (Tuesday) regarding the issue. I departed without addressing the council publicly. Later that night I recognized the only other person in attendance as a newspaper reporter, I believe.
Yesterday I did contact the city manager. In the conversation we covered several topics relative to the issue at hand. He stated that he had been previously made aware of the incident and it was handled improperly. Also, he apologized for the actions of the officer, and relayed that the city had not had any prior incidents regarding open carry. The manager also confirmed that the officer who initiated the stop had been advised that the issue was not handled correctly. I informed him that the training of officers in the matter of open carry was all I desired out of the issue. The city has also passed down new training and protocol through the ranks so all officers on the department know how to handle open carry and that this was a learning experience for the city, he affirmed to me. I asked the city manager if training records would reflect what he had just informed me. He declared that they would, and gave me the contact information for the chief of police so when those records become public I can contact him.
In the conference I also inquired about the cruiser cam video and audio. After consulting the police chief on how the cameras work, he told me that there are two ways to activate the camera/audio. One is when the officer activates the emergency light bar equipped on the vehicle. The second is that there is a button somewhere on the officers belt which can be pressed to activate the camera. It was after the officer cuffed me that he activated the camera from his persons. I found it strange that the officer didn't find it necessary to activate the camera until that point. The city manager affirmed that I had indeed received the entire footage of the event.
At this point in time, as long as the training records do indicate that training in the sensitivity of open carry have become standard protocol at the department, we feel satisfied with the outcome of the matter.
LOOK I learned about paragraphs!!!!!
I know there might be some commas out of place though.
Last edited by RCall; 04-18-2012 at 07:22 PM.
It's easy for them to say what they have/will do, but as you indicated, it's necessary to confirm the accuracy of their statements.
I suggest that unless their training indicates ALL of the following with regard to OC, it's not complete:
1) Open carry is legal
2) Consensual conversations are fine, but a non-consensual or Terry stop is not justified unless the officer can reasonably conclude (and articulate) that a crime has or is about to occur
3) The taking of an individual's firearm is a mark of a non-consensual stop
4) An officer can ask for ID, but not demand it, nor can any other identifying information be demanded unless the officer can reasonably conclude (and articulate) that a crime has or is about to occur
5) Threats of possible charges of inducing panic and/or disorderly conduct are not acceptable
It's late, so if I missed something, please add to or correct my list.
Good job! I'd request also a hard copy of the specific training the officers receive.
RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!
Life Member NRA
Life Member GOA
2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"
Did the city manager have all that stuff he stated to you, given to you in writing and signed by he, the mayor and the chief of police?
Did you record the conversation?
....adjusting my tinfoil hat....it IS government ya know. Don't trust them one iota.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.
What I found interesting about that video was that the cop's radio was blaring in the background so that the conversation could barely be heard. Nice to way to cover their a$$es in case they say something out of line.
If they falsify that somebody attended and that cop violates somebody's rights, they pierce their own officer's qualified immunity.
If they falsify that somebody didn't attend, they open themselves up to suit for failing to properly train and supervise.
Heads you win, tails they lose.
This weekend I'm suppose to be spending time in the Dayton/Vandalia area with friends. Because of what has transpired I thought I would take a moment and call Vandalia's Police department to find out their stance relating to open carry. I was surprised that the police chief, Douglas Knight, answered the phone. I informed him of my plans and asked if I should be concerned with open carry.
Due to the incident he assured me that the officers have been brought up to date on the Ohio gun laws. He also wanted to point out that they also briefed the dispatchers. If they get a call from a concerned resident they would investigate. But, it is to be handled in the politest manner possible. He also ensured me that if anyone felt they were not dealt with fairly they should contact him directly to resolve this matter.
It should be noted that the chief was very polite and did not demonstrate any hostility towards open carry. However, he also did not convey or interject his personal biases if any.
As someone told me once, when open carrying it is better to kill them with kindness. But, that does not require you to forfeit your rights.
Last edited by F350; 04-20-2012 at 09:44 PM.
As for the "resolution," I wouldn't agree that training is going to solve this problem. Training is the appropriate remedy for ignorance. The officer already knew, by his own admission, that open carry is a constitutionally-protected right, and that it's a relatively common practice. He knew you were doing nothing illegal, but decided to forcibly impose his own opinions upon you, simply because he figured he could get away with it. The proper way to address a willful violation of the law is through punishment, not training.
Not only is the content VERY disturbing, but even with the music/radio stripped out the microphone doesn't pick things up as well as I figure it should.
Certainly not because I distrust the OP, but we all need the entire tape so as to confirm the OP's timeline/description. One thing is clear, though - the handcuffs are already on when the officer "requests" to see his ID (uh-huh).
I'm of two minds - use the tape to "educate" other departments or use a legal settlement to do the same thing. Along those lines, maybe it would be worth seeing if this kind of behavior is par for the course for this department, or is the exception.
There is no excuse for the commercial radio to be on in the officer's car at the time of the stop. This needs to be addressed in addition to whatever other procedures are developed.
Thanks again for posting the tape. It was eye-opening.
Last edited by BB62; 04-22-2012 at 10:49 AM.
That worked out well. It didn't cost $20K, to get started.. (Where did that figure come from COL?) I have yet to inquire price with the lawyer, but similar incidents I've read about, 5K will start you out. If you can find a lawyer.
I would also like to compliment the OP for chasing this like he did. You are hereby awarded the right to Host a M&G picnic at a place of your choosing.. Carry On!