You mean there is actually a process to which they must adhere?
The value of a good education cannot be ignored. It's being suggested that he take them to school.
-
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.
-
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.
Medford Open Carrier Arrested - Speed Trap Warning
- Thread starter We-the-People
- Start date
You mean there is actually a process to which they must adhere?
The value of a good education cannot be ignored. It's being suggested that he take them to school.
We-the-People
Regular Member
Saint John in New Mexico got $25,000 for the unlawful siezure by law enforcement in Alamogordo and they didn't even arrest him.
The young man in Virgina took the city to task several times for cha ching (and did it Pro Per)
In both cases, the city and LEO were "educated"....because cities don't like paying out settlements. Unfortunately, that's the only way to "educate" our "protectors". You'd think showing "law enforcement" the LAW would be sufficient but alas.
The young man in Virgina took the city to task several times for cha ching (and did it Pro Per)
In both cases, the city and LEO were "educated"....because cities don't like paying out settlements. Unfortunately, that's the only way to "educate" our "protectors". You'd think showing "law enforcement" the LAW would be sufficient but alas.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Yeah, but they'll never graduate .. always being held back a grade...:lol:
I can cipher on a 5th grade level! .. Jethro
MKEgal
Regular Member
This all sounds depressingly familiar. :uhoh:Fallschirmjäger said:
Hopefully you'll get a judge with some sense, but don't underestimate the possible corruption & hatred of not only the police, but the prosecutor's office.David West said:
BTDT
It doesn't have to be true, they just have to put it in their report(s) & be willing to testilie if it goes to court.
David West
Regular Member
I got the police report today.
According to the report, the van operator said that I stopped in eastbound traffic and blocked 2 cars for 15-20 seconds before moving to let them pass, which is absolutely NOT true. I ran across the street and only stopped upon reaching the other side. As soon as I can get my hands on my video camera or at least a copy of it's memory card (it's currently locked in the evidence locker) I'll be able to prove this claim patently false.
According to the report, the van operator said that I stopped in eastbound traffic and blocked 2 cars for 15-20 seconds before moving to let them pass, which is absolutely NOT true. I ran across the street and only stopped upon reaching the other side. As soon as I can get my hands on my video camera or at least a copy of it's memory card (it's currently locked in the evidence locker) I'll be able to prove this claim patently false.
They only got the one camera then? That would be a good thing.
Jared
Regular Member
You need to use Qik online streaming backup or a similar program
If you get your hand on the footage you should push the issue of the van operator lying on a police report, it's a felony in most states.
I hope this works out ok for you, but you didn't have online backup, and you put your defense strategy online for the police to read. Don't be surprised if your memory card is wiped clean.
Please keep up posted and for gods sake, use instant online backup software next time because if you are convicted, you will lose your CHL for 4 years.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Unfortunately, its enough to force the thing to go to trial & without any witnesses to back your side of the story up (or evidence) it will be a tough case in reality.
hmmm thinking more..if you were crossing the street though (as opposed to just standing in the street) , during this time period of "interference" , don't you have the right of way since you are a pedestrian? If that's ALL the van operator said then a motion for summary judgment or dismissal may actually win the day, even w/o your video...hard to say.
Courts are not interested in the truth per se .. they are interested in the facts presented in court and if the facts support the charge.
This a criminal , civil, or administrative court you are looking at?
davidmcbeth
Banned
Qik online is for mobile phones.... Right now, when I want to videotape ... I hook my camera up to my telescope and I tape them from about a mile away .. they cannot even see the camera. then if I want to interact, I just walk up & they have no idea I am taping them (no audio though). If I get nabbed, they don't find the camera .. that gets picked up by one of my friends. I can video tape from much longer distances if I choose but line of sight issues usually pop up.
Last edited:
David West
Regular Member
The case is going to municipal court. I wasn't streaming anything live because I was using a camcorder and my cell phone isn't exactly fully operational at the moment.
David West
Regular Member
Talked with an attorney today; a very good guy who is completely on our side. We'll see how things go at my arraignment on Thursday. Hopefully they don't press charges but if they do I'll be retaining this attorney and fighting this thing to the end. The charges are completely bogus.
davidmcbeth
Banned
It sounds like you already have charges .. you're hoping that they'll just drop them? Normally this would require a motion from the defense but they can drop them by their own verbal motion (saves time and expense for everyone +lawyers/DA are supposed to not pursue cases that they know are without merit per their code of ethics).
Post back.
Seems like this is a good reason why we shouldn't have our ID and CHL on us if we don't need them. Can't confiscate them if we don't have them. Is it required for OC in Oregon?
Best of luck, and I look forward to following whatever details are prudent to share as they are made available.
Best of luck, and I look forward to following whatever details are prudent to share as they are made available.
We-the-People
Regular Member
Oregon law is extremely "gun friendly" as well as carry friendly. Shall Issue concealed carry permit system, no license or registration required to OC though with some restrictions, possession of a concealed permit allows carry (concealed or not) in almost any place (courts, jails, federal facilities, and the like prohibited, nearly all else is legal with CHL). Technically, it isn't a crime to CC or carry in places that require a CHL without the CHL in possession but it would almost assuredly result in an arrest due to the police not knowing the law. In court that would (per the law) be a losing case for anyone that chose to try to prosecute after it was known that the individual was issued a CHL.
REFERENCE ORS Chapter 166 starting at 166.170 through 166.380 for most of the regulations that apply to firearms in Oregon.
We-the-People
Regular Member
Monday (finals are approaching so I've been busy) took the bike (sans leathers) and went to my bank to withdrew a chunk of change; to the lawyers (where I disarm per their request); then the Jackson Couny Courthouse (disarmed but empty holster and mag pouch) to file some papers. I then rearmed and stopped at Rogue Community College to talk with a friend (while sitting on the bike on the side of the city street between buildings); then to News & Smokes where I made my purchase and visited with an acquaintence who was there (both inside and outside); then over to the DMV to see about registering my vehicle; and finally out to dinner at the Outback with the GF. No peeps or screeches from anyone.
I'm working very hard not to let my guard down as I know that's the day that I'll need the audio recorder and my wits. It seems that OC in Southern Oregon simply isn't an issue but then we have the "disorderly" arrest of a protestor who was OC and face planted with LEO weapons drawn. Arraignment in that case is 10am tomorrow at Medford Muni Court.
I'm working very hard not to let my guard down as I know that's the day that I'll need the audio recorder and my wits. It seems that OC in Southern Oregon simply isn't an issue but then we have the "disorderly" arrest of a protestor who was OC and face planted with LEO weapons drawn. Arraignment in that case is 10am tomorrow at Medford Muni Court.
David West
Regular Member
Yeah, I was hoping they'd just drop the charges once they looked at the evidence, because if they've watched the video evidence they will know beyond any shadow of a doubt that the charge is completely false. But apparently they didn't because now I have a "jury pre-trial conference" scheduled for the 18th of September. I have a good lawyer, though. I'll be able to beat the charge.
VW_Factor
Regular Member
davidmcbeth
Banned
A lawyer cannot change the law; he can insure that you get the fairest trial possible. They'll drag this out as long as possible. Why? 'cause they're a**holes. Your lawyer can file a motion to dismiss prior to the pre-trial conference, which are jokes. Have a motion pending and then they may drop the case. But your lawyer should be the one directing your trial statergery , not me. :dude:
twoskinsonemanns
Regular Member
Good luck sir. I hope for a positive outcome.
It's so disheartening to see these constant defecation's on our constitutionally guaranteed rights...
It's so disheartening to see these constant defecation's on our constitutionally guaranteed rights...
Last edited:
Fallschirjmäger
Active member
David West said:
Just because you have an appearance scheduled for 18 September doesn't mean the prosecution won't motion for the case to be dropped on the 14th. I had an arrest and was fully scheduled for a pre-trial appearance on 05 July and then was to be "be prepared for a 1-week trial" beginning the next Monday.
The state solicitor 'nolle prossed' the case on 29 June.
Last edited: