Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Connecticut Carry - Press Release - The State Furthers their Hypocrisy in Pennell Cas

  1. #1
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA

    Connecticut Carry - Press Release - The State Furthers their Hypocrisy in Pennell Cas


    The State Furthers Its Hypocrisy in Pennell Case

    DESPP Caught Lying in Court Complaint

    Middletown CT, July 15, 2013: On June 21, 2013 the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) filed suit against the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners (BFPE) and a Mr. Glenn Pennell. The lawsuit is an appeal to the courts to overturn the decision of the BFPE to return Mr. Pennell’s pistol permit.

    Paragraph #17 of the complaint alleges:
    “17. By reinstating Pennell’s Permit at a future time and subject to one or more conditions, the Board has exceeded its statutory authority and created obligations for the plaintiff with respect to the issuance of this permit that are not permitted by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 29-32b. These conditions are not available to issuing authorities such as the plaintiff and other municipalities as set forth in [sic]”

    The above cited allegation is particularly interesting given an exchange in a BFPE hearing, the recording of which was captured and pointed out by Connecticut Carry Director Edward Peruta. Kenneth Tramadeo, a public member of the BFPE inquired of Detective Barbara Matson why and how she was making ‘deals’ with permit appellants before BFPE hearings and how those appellants were chosen.

    The particular ‘deal’ discussed in that recording is extremely similar to the ruling that the BFPE made regarding Mr. Pennell’s permit being returned. The ‘deal’ directly conflicts with the DESPP’s assertion in its complaint that both the DESPP and BFPE lack the authority to make this kind of a deal. Detective Barbara Matson, in fact, indicates that this kind of thing is quite common.

    Connecticut Carry has made the Detective Matson audio available on its YouTube channel, for public consumption. Also, please review the court complaint from the DESPP’s court case.

    Has the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection been knowingly violating its authority for years? Or is it suddenly trying to forget its common practices so that it can push a political agenda that smears the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners?
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues:

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    earth's crust
    WTF is this, huh? The board already said he is SUITABLE .. "of the current suitability"

    Section of BFPE ruling :
    It is the order of the Board to reinstate Mr. Pennells pistol permit in one year, on May 9, 2014, on the condition of the current suitability and that he hasn’t committed any offence that violates the criminal law and doesn’t have any statutory disqualifying events and at that time he presents his letter from his neurologist stating that he is seizure free.

    If anything, the board was wrong not to issue the permit immediately...they bent over backwards for DESPP IMO.

    And these "deals"... its the state taking advantage of its position. A most dishonorable thing to do. But DESPP is not an honorable organization. Either is the AG's office.

    Pennell should file an answer and counterclaim ... counterclaim to include:
    1) striking the need for a delay in the permit being issued and any further requirements needed for the permit
    2) argue that he has his gun, has a right to practice, so that's all "suitability" requires now (after various federal court cases detailing these rights) because one needs a permit to go to a gun range. Nothing in the board's ruling has a finding that he cannot own.

    If some DESPP employee came up to me with this type of "deal" I would shove my foot so far up his bum that they would not be able to sit for years.

    And O'Neill? He's a POS ... he called me a "monster" at the last FOIA hearing I was at, seeking records of firearms of a town (what's new?), because he argued that the Newton Sandy Hooking shooting demonstrates that the records should not be disclosed but when I argued that the release of the information (because the shooter did not know the firearms the town had) may actually have prevented the event due to a deterrence affect. He got all prissy and whinny upon that argument ~ his only response was "you're a monster". Yeah, nice argument ya POS. He is nothing but a liar.

    Jepsen? He's a POS too ...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts