Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: FOIC refuses to hear case where I requested invoices of their AWs

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    FOIC refuses to hear case where I requested invoices of their AWs

    FIC 2013-273 .... against East Lyme....

    I previously requested gun invoices of guns and excluded AW in the request .... well before PA13-3 was passed

    But FOIC would not even hear the case ... saying that this subject matter was ruled on before (where? I don't know).

    But even if they did rule on a similar case, they just stripped me of my right to appeal .. they ruled a notice not to schedule a hearing.

    On the 19th I have a hearing before Judge Prescott .... that case involves like 6 notice not to schedule hearings ... (they are now trying to stagger them out so 6 are not heard in a day to 3/FOIC hearing .... but to no avail as I file more the 6 complaints a month).... I have one meeting violation regarding the metal detectors and being asked a bunch of questions prior to gaining access to the bldg holding the meeting (and since I refused to answer questions ~ I did not gain entry) access to the public hearings on bill 1076 last year. They did not note any reason in their filings before the commission (they stated NO FACTS at all in fact and the respondents filed nothing either) ... so the FOIC said that because they ruled on metal detectors before, you cannot have a FOIC case heard ... retarded retarded retarded. Even if true - I still get appeal rights...

    In today's hearing the assist exe. director (or manager) of the FOIC started orally stating facts to the commission about 5 sec. after that hearing started (now fic regs say its a take papers proposition & the FIC did not provide any pleadings containing any facts prior to the hearing and no respondents filed anything).

    So I objected to the taking of new information not previously made known to me. Ignored. Asked then to be allowed a continuance to file pleadings and affidavits to counter these new facts....told me to "be quite"...then I requested to give oral argument and testimony of they were not going to allow me time to submit written argument against the new pleadings of the assist. exe. dir.... no answer other than, be quite from the chair (no votes taken=objections and motions not heard).

    I had 3 today, all went the same way ....

  2. #2
    Regular Member Baked on Grease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sterling, Va.
    Posts
    652
    Hmm... 1983 Deprivation of Civil Rights lawsuit maybe? Denying you redress of greivences?

    Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
    "A Right Un-exercised is a Right Lost"

    "According to the law, [openly carrying] in a vehicle is against the law if the weapon is concealed" -Flamethrower (think about it....)

    Carrying an XDm 9mm with Hornady Critical Defense hollowpoint. Soon to be carrying a Ruger along with it....

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Baked on Grease View Post
    Hmm... 1983 Deprivation of Civil Rights lawsuit maybe? Denying you redress of greivences?

    Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
    well, I asked for the audio of the proceedings that they can record if they wanted to...response: no record exists.

    Now the FOIC "commissioners" are not true "commissioners" but are actually hearing officers ~ so they would have absolute immunity almost (need to examine this in more detail).

    But the FOIC employee (manager/exe. director) is just a regular state employee with limited immunity. I think a 42 usc 1983 claim against this person is possible as I think that the process for what occurred was actually pre-decided prior to the hearing...

    But to get facts to support such a claim, given no record exists as of right now, I could file a claim with our claims commission to get permission to sue the state; this process allows for interrogatories to be filed and answered by the opposing party so I could list the manager as a defendant in the person's official capacity (ie suing the state) and get answers that would then support a 1983 claim against the person personally via a standard court case.

Posting Permissions

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