Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Guilty up proven innocent

  1. #1
    Newbie
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2

    Guilty up proven innocent

    This video was taken in Florida of two FWC Office talking/giving a presentation at a club meeting. One Officer has 8 plus years experience and the Officer that verbally states Guilty until you prove you are innocent has over 5 years experience. Obliviously they have forgotten or does not care about, One of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant or suspect is innocent until probable cause is their. In other words, the Officer must legitimately have reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, for each essential element of the crime charged. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlcz27iT3Kc

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Welcome to OCDO.

    Unless you can cite the time-stamp where those things are said, I'm calling bullsh!t.

    Listened to it twice - never heard those words. Please cite the time in the video where those things were said.

    FYI - trolls and drive-by posters are not received well here.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    They explained the law, the pitfalls of other citizens/businesses not understanding the law and that if you don't leave it in the darn holster for any reason and someone calls in about it, you're going to have some explaining to do about why you were handling it in public. For an almost entirely CC only state, sounded reasonable, practical and friendly to me.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Welcome to OCDO.

    Unless you can cite the time-stamp where those things are said, I'm calling bullsh!t.

    Listened to it twice - never heard those words. Please cite the time in the video where those things were said.

    FYI - trolls and drive-by posters are not received well here.

    stay safe.
    At about 1:50, the cop on the right says something close enough to recognize what the OPer is talking about, "...its up to you to prove you weren't doing anything illegal."



    In the context of police responding to a call about an OCer unholstering and handling his gun to show another who asked about it (go just a little earlier in the video to see the citizen's question that set the context), the cop gets it wrong.

    Here is my take on it.

    If the cop does not have reasonable articulable suspicion RAS for a detention--whether lacking indicia of reliability in the 911 call, or statutory authority, e.g., the statute forbids removing from holster, etc.--no matter what the insufficiency is, no RAS = cop cannot seize the OCer, and he doesn't have to prove his innocence.

    Alternatively, if the cop for some reason does have RAS, its up to the cop to develop RAS into probable cause, emphatically not up to the OCer to prove his innocence in order to stop the cop having probable cause.

    The cop really has it hind end forward as to who has to prove what. We heard a similar viewpoint in the early days of OCDO--think back to the OCers who reported illegal detentions because the cop "had no way to know whether you're a felon [in possession of a firearm]." And, "How do I know that gun isn't stolen?" And, "How do we know you're not about to (insert crime here)?" Similar viewpoint, just one step earlier in the process and lacking RAS.
    Last edited by Citizen; 05-21-2015 at 03:24 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    I heard that and I can't argue with your interpretation, Citizen. I interpreted it as him saying in essence that if a witness says you're brandishing you are going to have to prove you weren't. Which still may be backwards but it is not as egregious in a colloquial conversation. But yeah, the cop could have said it better or, if he really does think the way Citizen interprets his comments that is certainly problematic.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  6. #6
    Newbie
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2

    Wow

    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Welcome to OCDO.

    Unless you can cite the time-stamp where those things are said, I'm calling bullsh!t.

    Listened to it twice - never heard those words. Please cite the time in the video where those things were said.

    FYI - trolls and drive-by posters are not received well here.

    stay safe.
    Well sir skidmark, I was just showing a video that occurred in the state of Florida and you can call bullsh1t all you like and can fyi me all you care to about the troll issue, but YOU need to watch the video again the words just as the Officer stated is if he is told about the open display so the next time someone is legally carrying a weapon holstered and some anti gun person calls and makes a False statement and the Office arrives you are presumed GUILTY and you have to prove your innocent so good luck as you take the ride to the local cross bar motel.. Try viewing the video from around 1.50 seconds and remember if you were fishing and he arrived this is his stance on this issue.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    I heard that and I can't argue with your interpretation, Citizen. I interpreted it as him saying in essence that if a witness says you're brandishing you are going to have to prove you weren't. Which still may be backwards but it is not as egregious in a colloquial conversation. But yeah, the cop could have said it better or, if he really does think the way Citizen interprets his comments that is certainly problematic.

    Thanks.

    I would take it even further.

    Regarding egregious/colloquial conversation, I have attended a police/citizen meeting. In that meeting, there was a little demonstration of a police consensual contact. Do you know, the danged cops actually asked the CCer which pocket he kept his wallet? Really. As though a free man would consensually let a government agent reach into his pocket and remove his wallet. The mentality of the police who considered that a legitimate tactic boggles the mind. The hubris is staggering. There were one or two other police twisted statements on RAS that I can no longer recall.

    My point is that police set themselves up as authorities on the subject. They're coming into these meetings/discussions to build bridges or whatever. And, use their altitude as experts to influence the ideas the public take away from the meeting. "I'm the professional, the expert, and I am here to answer your questions." So, either they really don't understand the law, or they're trying to give the attendees a certain impression about their rights. Permissible deception of a suspect is one thing, but misleading a few members of the public is a whole different category. Rhetorical question: which street cop does not understand RAS when he uses it every day, multiple times a day, and has testified many times in suppression hearings about his RAS?

    Speaking for myself, it would be too easy for cops to get it right even when speaking colloquially. I did. It only took me a couple seconds to figure out what I wanted to say in my first post in this thread. And, I'm not a professional using this information every day, multiple times a day.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Roughly:

    If a person calls and says you are pulling it out, passing it around, it is going to be up to you to prove you were doing nothing wrong.
    Seems the Florida law is pretty close to Virginia law on brandishing http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/or...or-weapon.html

    Florida Statute 790.10. This statute is officially titled as "improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms", and the statute states that "if any person having or carrying any . . . weapon shall, in the presence of one or more (other) persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree".
    Specifically, http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/...s/0790.10.html

    So if Joe Hoplophobe calls 911 and complains the liklihood of being cited is probably pretty good. Remember, the only "witness" the cops have is the person calling 911, and the contents of that call more than likely do meet the criteria for not only RAS but PC. And once having been cited (even if the complaint does not actually contain the elements of the crime) you are going to have to prove you were not doing nothing wrong.

    Ask me how I know.

    I admit I did not clearly hear the comment the first two times I listened to the clip. I withdraw the bullsh!t accusation.

    I'm still waiting to see if sa4007 is more than a drive-by poster.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Seems sa4007 crosses my path just after I post.

    Guess he is not a drive-by poster either.

    As I mentioned, the cop has limited information to go on - the contents of the 911 call. And as I said, if the complaint contains the elements of the crime you are more than likely going to get cited because the information in front of the cop is not just RAS but PC.

    When it happens to you and the call/complaint is an outright lie it sucks, but that's the way things are. The only thing I can think of that keeps the situation from happening more often is the reluctance of most of the population to lie in order to carry out an irrational agenda, be it firearms control or drug control or animal possession control, to name a few.

    I would be interested in any suggestions you might have in how to change the "system".

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Seems sa4007 crosses my path just after I post.

    Guess he is not a drive-by poster either.

    As I mentioned, the cop has limited information to go on - the contents of the 911 call. And as I said, if the complaint contains the elements of the crime you are more than likely going to get cited because the information in front of the cop is not just RAS but PC.

    When it happens to you and the call/complaint is an outright lie it sucks, but that's the way things are. The only thing I can think of that keeps the situation from happening more often is the reluctance of most of the population to lie in order to carry out an irrational agenda, be it firearms control or drug control or animal possession control, to name a few.

    I would be interested in any suggestions you might have in how to change the "system".

    stay safe.
    I don't know. Wouldn't that depend on things like whether the cop has to witness it himself, indicia of reliability, felony vs misdemeanor, state case law on these poinst, etc?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    I think Skid is saying that you may beat the rap in court (burden of proof not being met) but you won't beat the citation on the street (911 caller said you did it).
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    I think Skid is saying that you may beat the rap in court (burden of proof not being met) but you won't beat the citation on the street (911 caller said you did it).
    I hope its not gotten that bad. Back in the day, cops in VA wouldn't cite for a misdemeanor unless they witnessed it themselves. Now, whether that was a legal requirement for the cop to be able to cite, I couldn't tell you. But, I do know that cops would not cite a misdemeanor without seeing it themselves. A citizen could swear out a warrant himself, and the cops would then execute the warrant, but cops wouldn't directly cite a misdemeanor themselves unless they witnessed it, no matter how convincing the initial complaint, excluding statutory exceptions like shoplifting.
    Last edited by Citizen; 05-21-2015 at 06:04 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I hope its not gotten that bad. Back in the day, cops in VA wouldn't cite for a misdemeanor unless they witnessed it themselves. Now, whether that was a legal requirement for the cop to be able to cite, I couldn't tell you. But, I do know that cops would not cite a misdemeanor without seeing it themselves. A citizen could swear out a warrant himself, and the cops would then execute the warrant, but cops wouldn't directly cite a misdemeanor themselves unless they witnessed it, no matter how convincing the initial complaint, excluding statutory exceptions like shoplifting.
    Back in the day I remember cops in Virginia using the sworn written statement of the complainant as the basis for obtaining a warrant. Slightly different than the citizen swearing out a warrant on their own. Still works that way.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Back in the day I remember cops in Virginia using the sworn written statement of the complainant as the basis for obtaining a warrant. Slightly different than the citizen swearing out a warrant on their own. Still works that way.

    stay safe.
    Now that you mention it, I very vaguely recall something similar. I can't quite get it back with respect to a sworn written statement of a complainant, just a general concept that deputies went to the magistrate with the complainant's report and could obtain a warrant. Its pretty hazy, and for all I know I could be misremembering, but your comment strikes a chord.
    Last edited by Citizen; 05-21-2015 at 07:48 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Now that you mention it, I very vaguely recall something similar. I can't quite get it back with respect to a sworn written statement of a complainant, just a general concept that deputies went to the magistrate with the complainant's report and could obtain a warrant. Its pretty hazy, and for all I know I could be misremembering, but your comment strikes a chord.
    Ask Scouser how it works.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    The FWC officer is mistaken. They often are.

    When authorized by statute 790.25, an individual may carry any legal firearm openly or concealed without benefit of a CWFL. This includes at your home or place of work, the range (or going to/from), hunting, fishing, camping (or going to/from), and a few other situations. Oh and his insinuation that you may carry into Walmart to get bait is not supported in any case law, and is likely unlawful, as you are not going fishing, you are going to Walmart to get bait before you go fishing. But that is an entirely different topic.

    OK, here's the real deal with the "display" of a firearm in Florida.

    As to the display (the legal term here is 'exhibit') it is only unlawful if done in a "rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner" (790.10 - a misdemeanor). Taking your gun out of it's holster to show your buddy is not unlawful. However, 'Flashing it around' is probably going to be a problem.

    Skid, the 911 call may provide enough RAS for an investigative detention (depending on a few variables), but does not provide PC for an arrest. In Florida the LEO must witness a (most) misdemeanor personally or have a sworn complaint/warrant/etc to make an arrest.
    Last edited by notalawyer; 05-23-2015 at 03:39 AM.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    Florida Courts have repeatedly ruled that carrying under 790.25 is an "affirmative defense" that you must prove to the crimes of open or concealed carry. This means that you are treated as guilty until you prove your defense of falling within a provision of 790.25 fla stat.

    We just changed the concealed carry prohibition to make a concealed carry license an element of the crime of concealed carry. That law went in to effect yesterday.

    So, in Florida right now:
    OC - Guilty until you prove yourself innocent.
    CC - Innocent until there is good reason to believe that you are not.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by StogieC View Post
    Florida Courts have repeatedly ruled that carrying under 790.25 is an "affirmative defense" that you must prove to the crimes of open or concealed carry. This means that you are treated as guilty until you prove your defense of falling within a provision of 790.25 fla stat.

    We just changed the concealed carry prohibition to make a concealed carry license an element of the crime of concealed carry. That law went in to effect yesterday.

    So, in Florida right now:
    OC - Guilty until you prove yourself innocent.
    CC - Innocent until there is good reason to believe that you are not.
    Well, that just turned this thread upside down.

    Thanks, Stogie.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    Quote Originally Posted by StogieC View Post
    Florida Courts have repeatedly ruled that carrying under 790.25 is an "affirmative defense" that you must prove to the crimes of open or concealed carry. This means that you are treated as guilty until you prove your defense of falling within a provision of 790.25 fla stat.

    We just changed the concealed carry prohibition to make a concealed carry license an element of the crime of concealed carry. That law went in to effect yesterday.

    So, in Florida right now:
    OC - Guilty until you prove yourself innocent.
    CC - Innocent until there is good reason to believe that you are not.
    Well then ... correctly stated by LE in the video. Interesting. Can't wait for FL OC given that tidbit.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Well, that just turned this thread upside down.

    Thanks, Stogie.
    That's the problem we are faced with. While technically, 790.25 is an affirmative defense, it is also the statute that allows one to carry/transport a gun to the range; carry a firearm in our homes, or while hunting, etc. But I can't imagine any judge in the state that would rule that an arrest (for open carry) of a hunter, while hunting w/ a valid license, or someone in their own home, would be reasonable.
    Last edited by notalawyer; 05-26-2015 at 01:24 PM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Seattle,WA, , USA
    Posts
    266

    Question

    So - according to the guy on the left (@ about 39 seconds into the vid) I can carry my 45 Mag while fishing?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Contrarian View Post
    So - according to the guy on the left (@ about 39 seconds into the vid) I can carry my 45 Mag while fishing?
    If you are at least 18 years of age (and not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm by state or federal law) you may carry any legal firearm, openly or concealed (you don't need a CWFL either.)

  23. #23
    Regular Member ADulay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Punta Gorda, Florida, USA
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by Contrarian View Post
    So - according to the guy on the left (@ about 39 seconds into the vid) I can carry my 45 Mag while fishing?
    Well, I can't speak for the Seattle area, but in Florida, yes you can. I do it every day. (Fish or shoot, it depends on my mood after breakfast)

    AD
    NRA Life - AMA Life - ABATE Life
    Viet-Nam Helicopters Pilots Assn - Life
    IDPA, ICORE and USPSA carry gun shooter - Glock Armorer
    NRA Certified Instructor

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    Well heck, 7 day fishing license for a visitor is $30. I'll borrow a fishing pole and carry it around everywhere while I'm there and just tell the po-po I'm on my way to go fishing and my wife made me stop at ___ on the way.

    /s
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  25. #25
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    Well heck, 7 day fishing license for a visitor is $30. I'll borrow a fishing pole and carry it around everywhere while I'm there and just tell the po-po I'm on my way to go fishing and my wife made me stop at ___ on the way.

    /s
    Then you're on your way to ___ and not on your way to fishing.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

Posting Permissions

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