Wethersfield 14 JUN 12 hearing --- any thoughts on cases?

I heard the guy , 80+yrs old, who shot at a squirrel .. never charged with anything .. but they took his license away.

A cop testified and said the thought he was mentally incompetent ... what an goof...like he's qualified..and the old man's lawyer said nothing (no objection) to that statement...but said that just give it the weight it deserves (at least she said that .. she was clearly not paying attention during the cop's testimony) in closing arguments.

The guy won his case but it was a total joke and waste of time.

I did get to speak to Knapp .. he's an idiot who flip-flops and lied (I hate liars) to me ; but I made/prepared another objection set and filed it during the hearing time period...I'm sure he'll try to ignore my filing but I got a response out of him before, I can do it again...he'll have to dismiss my case or agree that suitability is not required.

What is it with old guys, they like to shoot at varmints ! I got my father a small caliber pistol just for that purpose .. plink plink plink lol

The old guy at the hearing did get lucky, the cops could have charged him with several gun offenses but decided not to...his neighbor who called the police is a real winner as he does the same thing, shooting varmints ...

Well, I told you how yours was going to go down. Where are you going to go next? What happens with the docs you submitted from here?

Regarding the attorney in question.... Rachel obviously did her job, her client got to keep his permit!

You left early.... there was a few doozies in there. Next month will be hectic though, three hearings!

Newington was real interesting, especially given the thread we have about sealed records. Newington actually got up there and said flat out that they can't comment because the records were sealed (and they also didn't have any other officers present).

I will be researching the case used to allow testimony from memory and not using records soon. My records are in my backpack and I just got in the door. I'll either dig up the other thread or start one with the case in question.

It was indeed educational today.

Jonathan

KIX said:

Newington actually got up there and said flat out that they can't comment because the records were sealed

Click to expand...

Technically they are not even allowed to acknowledge the existance of such records...did the person get their permit?

brk913 said:

Technically they are not even allowed to acknowledge the existance of such records...did the person get their permit?

Click to expand...

I not sure about ct law but i have document from nyc that is very clear about it. Sealed is sealed otherwise it should be called partially sealed.

IH8SPM said:

I not sure about ct law but i have document from nyc that is very clear about it. Sealed is sealed otherwise it should be called partially sealed.

Click to expand...

Sealed is not the same as what is being referred to here. This is 'erasure'.

Connecticut law is crystal clear on this as well.

KIX said:

Well, I told you how yours was going to go down. Where are you going to go next? What happens with the docs you submitted from here?

Jonathan

Click to expand...

Well, its a set of objections, similar to what you saw with the addition of their questionnaire where I wrote OBJECTION on every line item ... this is what Knapp said he needed (so my trip was not wasted per se).

If they don't rule on the objections, then I'll be at the next meeting ... now I did file a foia request to Weston, CT asking them for documents in respect to this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UX4njed_FUY

Looking for their rifle & vest documentation ... OMG they are crying over this & already called DESPP over this request .. I told them comply with FOIA act or get sued per 42 USC 1983 .... threatening them with a FIC case just makes them laugh ...

KIX said:

You left early.... there was a few doozies in there. Next month will be hectic though, three hearings!

Jonathan

Click to expand...

I would liked to stay but I other pressing business ... those hearing judges are a little bit sanctimonious, huh?

brk913 said:

Technically they are not even allowed to acknowledge the existance of such records...did the person get their permit?

Click to expand...

Yes.

KIX said:

Yes.

Click to expand...

Anyone not get their permit who showed? (or an order for the permit to be issued I should say)

There were a few. I can give a tally when I check my notes (on the other laptop).

If I remember, I'll post the tally tomorrow.

Jonathan