• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Injured vet’s guns stolen by D.C. Emily Miller, TWT Cuffed, stuffed, jailed & disarme

H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
Injured vet’s guns stolen by D.C. Emily Miller, TWT Cuffed, stuffed, jailed & disarme

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2012/may/14/miller-injured-vets-guns-stolen-dc/
Mr. Kim was transporting his firearms from his parents’ house in New Jersey to South Carolina when he stopped at Walter Reed in Washington for a medical appointment in the summer of 2010.

After being pulled over, handcuffed, arrested, thrown in jail overnight, his guns were confiscated by the city.

In the end, the platoon leader felt forced to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge, which was later dismissed, but the District still refuses to return to him $10,000 worth of firearms and parts. The national guardsman will deploy to Kosovo this summer. The city should return his property before he leaves to serve our nation overseas for the third time.
 

zoom6zoom

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
1,694
Location
Dale City, VA, Virginia, USA
MPD spokesman Gwendolyn Crump said the department “notified the respondent’s attorney last week of his right to a hearing concerning the return of weapons.”
Why do they require a hearing? The charges were dropped, they have no cause or reason to keep his property a minute longer. I just hope they haven't totally wrecked them.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
It is apparently commonly difficult to regain seized weapons. Wisconsin requires court action too.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
“I knew if I got one felony, my military career would be over,” Mr. Kim told me. Since the case was in civil court, the military officer couldn’t help him with the charges.

Red flags and warning bells. Trying someone for a felony in civil court? No. A felony is supposed to be tried in criminal court/grand jury or not at all.

Something stinks in DC or with this story.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Why do they require a hearing? The charges were dropped, they have no cause or reason to keep his property a minute longer. I just hope they haven't totally wrecked them.

I've been told by reputable legal authority the same is true for Colorado, namely, that if a person's firearm is ever seized in an arrest on suspicion of a crime, that's the last time you'll ever see it. They can hold it forever.

Not that it's right... Unfortunately, the Fourth amendment failed to mention anything about returning property in a timely manner, once seized. It should be amended to read: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. All real and personal property thus seized must be remanded to the person from whom they were seized within 30 days after charges are dropped, within 30 days of the person's release if no charges are filed within that time."

An arrest, particularly a wrongful for unlawful arrest, should NEVER constitute sufficient grounds for failing to remand property back to its rightful owner.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
I've been told by reputable legal authority the same is true for Colorado, namely, that if a person's firearm is ever seized in an arrest on suspicion of a crime, that's the last time you'll ever see it. They can hold it forever.

Not that it's right... Unfortunately, the Fourth amendment failed to mention anything about returning property in a timely manner, once seized. It should be amended to read: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. All real and personal property thus seized must be remanded to the person from whom they were seized within 30 days after charges are dropped, within 30 days of the person's release if no charges are filed within that time."

An arrest, particularly a wrongful for unlawful arrest, should NEVER constitute sufficient grounds for failing to remand property back to its rightful owner.

The founding fathers were smart and insightful not prophets.
It was something they had maybe never run across before. Maybe once the charges were dropped/found not guilty the person got their stuff back the same/next day. In my studies it's something I don't remember coming across before. Either way it time to storm the castle and hang the king.
 
Top