• 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.

Another Arrested for Accidental Exposure in Florida - With VIDEO

StogieC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
745
Location
Florida
The jury has been picked. Trial today starting at 9am. I'll send an update when I know more.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
The jury has been picked. Trial today starting at 9am. I'll send an update when I know more.

The primary and historical (and now forgotten) function of the jury is to judge the law, not the facts. Now the judges lie and say the opposite. Juries do nullify from time to time though, even recently in NYC where a Fl man was acquitted of a felony for having his gun in his glovebox.

This is in south Fl right? I guess the jury will be a few retirees from Newark?

Is someone from Fl carry there? Or can we get a transcript? This would be great testimony for the legislature next session!
 
Last edited:

StogieC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
745
Location
Florida
The jury found that Norman did in fact openly carry in violation of the law. Then the jury undertook the extraordinary act of directly addressing Mr. Norman and the court. The foreperson made a statement in open court that went something to the effect that the law itself is without merit. I'll have the audio some time next week. Too bad they didn't know about jury nullification...

But it's not over yet! The Judge will be hearing arguments on the defense's motions to dismiss on July 31st.

One of the motions to dismiss makes the argument that Open Carry bans are unconstitutional. Say tuned!
I am not at liberty to say more on this topic at this time.
 

Xulld

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
159
Location
Florida
The jury found that Norman did in fact openly carry in violation of the law. Then the jury undertook the extraordinary act of directly addressing Mr. Norman and the court. The foreperson made a statement in open court that went something to the effect that the law itself is without merit. I'll have the audio some time next week. Too bad they didn't know about jury nullification...

But it's not over yet! The Judge will be hearing arguments on the defense's motions to dismiss on July 31st.

One of the motions to dismiss makes the argument that Open Carry bans are unconstitutional. Say tuned!
I am not at liberty to say more on this topic at this time.

Ooooh Exciting!
 

rvrctyrngr

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
363
Location
SE of DiSOrDEr, ,
Trial was today. He was convicted of OC.

I, too, find it odd that Motions to Dismiss are being filed with the judge AFTER a conviction.
 

StogieC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
745
Location
Florida
Trial was today. He was convicted of OC.

I, too, find it odd that Motions to Dismiss are being filed with the judge AFTER a conviction.


Actually found guilty by the jury but not yet convicted. There are still motions to dismiss to be considered by the judge.
 

StogieC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
745
Location
Florida
Actually found guilty by the jury but not yet convicted. There are still motions to dismiss to be considered by the judge.

This is a criminal misdemeanor case in a county court. The rules of procedure are quite different from what most people here are accustomed to.
 
Last edited:

Rich7553

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
515
Location
SWFL
This is a criminal misdeminer case in a county court. The rules of procedure are quite different from what most people here are accustomed to.

One would think that an IT guy would have a spell checker at his disposal! :D
 
Last edited:

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Well, there's two testimonies for the Fl senate about good citizens being arrested and having their lives adversely affected by Fl's minority, unconstitutional, and senseless prohibition of openly carried handguns. We also have Oklahoma legalizing it, and we'll be able to point out there was no blood in the streets when it is legal there in a couple months. And, that there will be no loss of revenue at their grocery stores, malls, etc. And how about it's just our freakin rights that they're infringing on!

Do we need to have a fundraiser so all the people harassed by our heroes in blue/black/green can take off work and testify in Tallahassee next winter?

I left out heroes in tan because the FHP seems to not care. Good for them.
 
Last edited:

Wulframn

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
3
Location
Florida
I only have one question.

Why the heavy handed approach by law enforcement against people that inadvertently flash their weapon or choose their method of concealment poorly?

You cannot say that it is because the police know they have a firearm as this would be illogical. When criminals have a firearm and the officer does not know, he is not at any more risk because officers are trained to always be aware of what is going on and what the person they are speaking to is doing.

The officers in the video just immediately take the man to the ground. No questions asked.

If cops were truly here to "Serve and Protect", the conversation should have went like this:

Officer: "Sir, we need to talk. Someone called in and said they had seen a firearm on you. Are you carrying and do you have a CDW Permit?"

Non Criminal: "Yes Sir, I do have a permit and I am concealing it right here on my waist."

Officer: "But we can see your firearm and that is not allowed."

Non Criminal: "What you are seeing is a leather case. It covers my firearm completely. Someone must have seen me bend over."

Officer: "Sir, your permit is to carry concealed and although we knew you had a firearm from a caller, concealing it in the manner you are doing is asking for trouble. Now I suggest you either get a longer shirt or get an IWB Holster. We can agree to disagree on whether the case is sufficient to conceal but I am trying to save you some trouble and do not want to have to ticket you."

Non Criminal: "I will take that under advisement. Thank you for letting me know that my concealment method was not perfect. It can be hard to conceal with the clothes I like to wear and this weather."

Officer: "You are welcome. Have a nice day."

Non Criminal: "You too sir!"

Now wouldn't that be better than what was in the video?

+1 - if the world worked like this we probably wouldn't need guns (or, be closer to not needing them)

Well, there's two testimonies for the Fl senate about good citizens being arrested and having their lives adversely affected by Fl's minority, unconstitutional, and senseless prohibition of openly carried handguns. We also have Oklahoma legalizing it, and we'll be able to point out there was no blood in the streets when it is legal there in a couple months. And, that there will be no loss of revenue at their grocery stores, malls, etc. And how about it's just our freakin rights that they're infringing on!

Do we need to have a fundraiser so all the people harassed by our heroes in blue/black/green can take off work and testify in Tallahassee next winter?

I left out heroes in tan because the FHP seems to not care. Good for them.

It should be enough that they're infringing upon second ammendment to the Constitution; but obviously that ammendment was not worded clearly enough. "Well regulated militia" = National Guard (formed more than 100 years later) of course, and obviously "shall not be infringed" = mangle the aforementioned beyond all ability to recognize.

As to the FHP, all of my experiences with them have been nothing but positive in every definition of the word. I've had several run-ins with the local PD (nothing serious, all ended in my favor) that were horrific, to say the least; but FHP seems to really care about doing their job properly, respectfully, and curteously.

For example: once I was in an auto accident. I had been driving home from work and was in my uniform. It was late and I ended up getting run off the road. Another motorist called 911 and got me help while I got out of the wreckage. The motorist remained at the scene to testify on my behalf that I had been run off the road and the other vehicle had taken off. The officer that arrived was completely belligerent and had completely made up his mind what had happened before he even got there: I had been street racing and was probably drunk/high and deserved jail time. He pulled up with his window down screaming at me, screaming as he got out of the car, then screaming in my face. When I showed him my clock-out slip showing I had been out of work only about 30 minutes (at that time) and explained my story he immediately denied it and threatened to arrest me on several charges. When the witness testified on my behalf the officer interrupted him and commanded that he leave the scene. When the motorist questioned the order the officer threatened to arrest him on several grounds too. At this time another unit had been passing and stopped to see what all the commotion was about; he helped clear up the matter but still wrote me a ticket. (Which I went to court over with the witness, pictures, etc. and got the ticket waved)

In another accident it was a passing FHP that stopped to assist. She was wonderful. She immediately took my account of the accident at face-value and listened to me rage and vent (I had been run off the road again, this time, while transporting a trailer of lumber to a jobsite) while nodding knowingly and reassuringly - even allowing me to sit on the hood of her patrol car with her. When I commented on being hungry she went up the street and got me a hotdog and a soda from the local gas station while we waited on the tow truck. Then she drove me home.

I have other stories; however, my intent is not to derail the thread so I will keep them to myself. I merely wanted to reinforce the statement that local PD's have their own issues they may or may not need to deal with - and I respect that - but FHP really does, in my opinion, employ some of the finest public servants in the State of Florida.
 

Jojo712

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2011
Messages
204
Location
Miami, FL
The jury found that Norman did in fact openly carry in violation of the law. Then the jury undertook the extraordinary act of directly addressing Mr. Norman and the court. The foreperson made a statement in open court that went something to the effect that the law itself is without merit. I'll have the audio some time next week. Too bad they didn't know about jury nullification...

When an attorney makes even the slightest attempt to explain this right to a jury, he/she is met by SCREAMS (literally) from every direction. Even the judge will tell you not to go there. It's a basic jury right that's apparently supposed to remain very hush-hush. I don't get it.
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL

jammer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2008
Messages
85
Location
, ,
Without merit

when an attorney makes even the slightest attempt to explain this right to a jury, he/she is met by screams (literally) from every direction. Even the judge will tell you not to go there. It's a basic jury right that's apparently supposed to remain very hush-hush. I don't get it.

to my way of thinking when a foreman says in open court that this law is flawed and, without merit, i think that, that foreman just made that law null and void, at least according to webster dict. Sorry for all caps guys.
 
Top