Rockmart police make non-existant charge

Tammy Overstreet at the Polk County Crime Examiner is reporting that the Rockmart police arrested Phillip Lee Woods at a local pizzeria and charged him with carrying a deadly weapon at a public gathering. Unfortunately for the arresting officer, this is a crime that has not existed in this state for at least two years.

http://www.examiner.com/article/roc...that-do-not-exist?CID=examiner_alerts_article

The original law never would have survived Constitutional scrutiny. It would have been deemed unconstitutionally vague had someone been arrested at a place not "specifically" mentioned. Anytime a statute states, "shall include , but shall not be limited to," there is cause for worry. This statute would have allowed an officer WAY too much discretion in enforcement, being as they could classify a "public gathering" as pretty much anything they deemed proper. I am glad the repugnant legislation has been rescinded.

I do believe law enforcement should have to attend more "continuing education" classes and refresher courses after every legislative session. Would it stop this nonsense? Probably not, but atleast they could not claim the department/office had ill-advised training practices.

Looks like an easy lawsuit to file for damages and injunctive relief with attorney fee shifting under 42 USC 1983.

I like the expression on his face.
It's like he's anticipating the results of the various lawsuits his lawyer will file.

And while this is obviously a training issue, it may come out that the department has notified employees about the (not so) new law & they just didn't remember. Or ignored it.

It's happened before. To me.

They amended it to "practicing witchcraft within 5000 ft of a school"

Good job law enforcement

KYGlockster said:

The original law never would have survived Constitutional scrutiny. It would have been deemed unconstitutionally vague had someone been arrested at a place not "specifically" mentioned.

Click to expand...

The "public gathering" language was on the books for a very long time (100+ years). MANY people have been arrested and convicted of violating this statute and it has been upheld by the state supreme court.

A member of another forum said:

1) he was intoxicated prior to this event.
2) He became embroiled in a confrontation inside the restaurant
3) He went out to his vehicle to retrieve his weapon due to this
4) he then re-entered the restaurant to confront the other party, which he did

These are the most basic facts. I was present for much of this, so I will not elaborate to the extent that it may interfere w/ RPD's case. The physical manifestations of severe impairment would have been glaringly obvious to anyone that was near the defendant.

Click to expand...

All the above are unsubstantiated (although perhaps true) allegations. As public intoxication is against the Georgia Code, I'm prompted to wonder why the Rockmart officers didn't make an arrest on something easily proven/disproven?

Fallschirmjäger said:

All the above are unsubstantiated (although perhaps true) allegations. As public intoxication is against the Georgia Code, I'm prompted to wonder why the Rockmart officers didn't make an arrest on something easily proven/disproven?

Click to expand...

Most likely because the poster of that message is a damn liar. There is absolutely no way an LEO would miss the chance to string someone up for being drunk with a gun, and I wouldn't argue with it, either.

Posting those 'details' but doesn't want to interfere? I call bullpoopie.

ixtow said:

Most likely because the poster of that message is a damn liar. There is absolutely no way an LEO would miss the chance to string someone up for being drunk with a gun, and I wouldn't argue with it, either.

Posting those 'details' but doesn't want to interfere? I call bullpoopie.

Click to expand...

Looks like a definite possibility of a LEO or LEOs are always right defender. If true there would be more serious charges pending. These Leo defenders are too much. I remember some idiot claiming that Mrs. Weaver was " laying down suppression fire" before being murdered by the FBI. Even the FBI never claimed that, but the gun store commando ( that proudly exclaimed I'm ex-law enforcement, I know this for a fact) was going around spreading this B.S.

By the way when pressed for what he did within the law enforcement field he said he was a beach cop ( unarmed secuity guard hired for summer that answers to head lifeguard) and loss prevention at Target. He always wore a bullet proof vest while working the counter at the gun shop. That was my first hint that he was a whackaddo.

Holy thread resurrection Batman !