Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Facts of a real Connecticut Case

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    These are real facts about an incident that I am looking into.

    Lessons in life that you can’t learn in School


    COMMENTS OF THE PERSON INVOLVED:

    I consider myself to be college educated, law abiding citizen, who has enjoyed the benefits of close friends and family members who have always supported me in every aspect of my life.


    Having grown up in a law enforcement family, I have never had an incident where I was arrested or issued a traffic summons prior to June 21, 2997.


    I always made it a point to demonstrate my respect and support for every member of law enforcement until the evening of June 21, 2007.


    It was my family up bringing that led me to pursue a career in Advanced Personal Protection which required me to obtain a permit to possess and carry a sidearm. I have gone to great strides and expense to seek out and obtain advance training in the field of Advanced Personal Protection, only to have my career goals put on hold by individuals that do not have an understanding of current Connecticut State Statutes and Regulations, or chose to ignore the laws and regulations as they are currently written.


    But before I could continue my career plans, I found myself in a position where I was forced to learn every aspect of the laws as they pertain to carrying a pistol in Connecticut, together with the principles of Due Process.


    I applied for and received my permit to carry a pistol, by submitting to the extensive process that found me to be a suitable person entitled to carry a pistol or revolver in CT.


    On June 21, 2007, I found myself humiliated, embarrassed, scared arrested, booked, photographed, released on bond and physically sick, because members of the Glastonbury Police Department have no understanding of Connecticut laws regarding an individual in possession of a Valid Permit to carry a pistol.


    The charge made against me by members of the Glastonbury Connecticut Police Department was reckless, improper, illegal and totally without merit.


    The law was properly explained to Assistant State’s Attorney Adam Scott and Judge Raymond Norko in the form of a Memorandum of Law which resulted in the charge against me being dismissed on July 30, 2007.


    But the damage to my ability to seek employment, and my education into Due Process and illegal conduct on the part of public officials had just begun.


    One would think that with the dismissal of the charge, my life would resort back to one of an unblemished criminal history and the return of the improperly seized weapon and return of my permit to carry a pistol or revolver.


    But the incident did not and has not ended, and did not make me whole. It only caused me to open my eyes to the incompetence of the Glastonbury Police Department, The Connecticut State Police Firearms Unit, our criminal justice system, and the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners.


    This situation has enlightened me to the problem, where public officials refuse to educate themselves to the laws they are empowered to enforce, or recognize their shortcomings and mistakes. It has proven to me that many public employees and officials instead chose to put their heads in the ground in the hope that the issue will go away.


    If I was without friends, family or the funds necessary to fight the issues I’ve become aware of, I would be nothing more than another statistic in a long list of statistics that document a system that exploits law abiding citizens and is out of control.


    But fortunately for me, I have the support of my family and people who know me and my background and they collectively chose to make the funds and resources available to expose and fight the illegal actions in this case.


    I have appeared in front of Judge Raymond R. Norko in Manchester who improperly ordered the pistol I was carrying destroyed, and approved the successful extortion of $500.00 by Assistant State’s Attorney Adam Scott.


    I have learned that the Glastonbury Police Department knowingly ignores the mandates of the legislature by refusing to permanently delete photographs of individuals who have had their charges dismissed as mandated by Public Act 06-111.


    Based on this incident, I now have evidence that members of the Connecticut State Police, at every level, are involved in condoning the enforcement of nonexistent laws to suit their own personal agendas, or the agenda’s of their superiors.


    The recent investigation of the Connecticut State Police appears to have done nothing to correct or change the way they conduct business on a day to day basis.


    This whole issue will be placed before, and examined by, a Federal Court where “THAT’S THE WAY WE DO IT” or “BECAUSE I SAY SO”, will be placed under the microscope of a Federal Judge who will agree or disagree with the policies and procedures used.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    So Ed, where did this lead, there have been no follow up posts.

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,627

    Post imported post

    Is this going anywhere? Status please.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    Here is where the issues stand.

    James Goldberg filed two separate Federal Law suits regarding his arrest, the siezure and destruction of the weapon he was carrying and the revocation of his permit to carry.

    M. Peter Kuck filed a Federal Case regarding the requirement to submit proof of citizenship during the renewal of a valid Permit to Carry.

    A very good place to obtain informaiton on these and other Connecticut Firearm issuesis Kuck and James Goldberg.

    These two cases, (Kuck/Goldberg),may be the first Federal Appellate Court decisions rendered after the Chicago/McDonald decision.








Posting Permissions

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