BB62
Accomplished Advocate
imported post
BIG SHAFE wrote:
BIG SHAFE wrote:
I believe his last name is Sayers.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
First encounter with a LEO
- Thread starter bangelo
- Start date
Demarest
Regular Member
imported post
Yes, my last name is spelled Sayers. That would be a bad example. For starters, it involved police pointing a full auto weapon at somebody during a felony stop outside their jurisdiction. The other being that because of that, tensions were high and demeanors were not optimum. I stood up for myself better than most would've under the circumstances, but I think one is better off learning from David Ridley's video that I linked to than mine.
bangelo wrote:
Yes, my last name is spelled Sayers. That would be a bad example. For starters, it involved police pointing a full auto weapon at somebody during a felony stop outside their jurisdiction. The other being that because of that, tensions were high and demeanors were not optimum. I stood up for myself better than most would've under the circumstances, but I think one is better off learning from David Ridley's video that I linked to than mine.
bangelo wrote:
Totally understandable. But you're mindful of that and willing to learn and that's the best any of us can do that are actually there
imported post
Ah yes, ive watched both videos and have taken notes, sorry for all the things that happened to you Dan.
I remember reading about an open carry walk in colombus a while ago but I cant find the link for the life of me. any one know about these walks? is there another one scheduled in the near future?
Ah yes, ive watched both videos and have taken notes, sorry for all the things that happened to you Dan.
I remember reading about an open carry walk in colombus a while ago but I cant find the link for the life of me. any one know about these walks? is there another one scheduled in the near future?
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
imported post
Notice that this was passed in to law in 2006. The ACLU wants to challange this statute as unconstitutional. And it is. The 1st amendment to the US constitution, right to speak also gives you the right to not speak. What was the crime?
2921.29 Failure to disclose personal information.(A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person’s name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following:
(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.
(2) The person witnessed any of the following:
(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;
(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;
(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;
(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one’s personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.
(C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.
(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person’s age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.
Effective Date: 04-14-2006
Notice that this was passed in to law in 2006. The ACLU wants to challange this statute as unconstitutional. And it is. The 1st amendment to the US constitution, right to speak also gives you the right to not speak. What was the crime?
2921.29 Failure to disclose personal information.(A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person’s name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following:
(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.
(2) The person witnessed any of the following:
(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;
(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;
(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;
(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one’s personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.
(C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person’s name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.
(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person’s age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.
Effective Date: 04-14-2006
imported post
So I got a call from my First shirt today and he told me that he talked to the police that detained me the other day. He asked them if I was breaking any laws and they said no, but that I could get in trouble for inducing panic/public disturbance. So I looked up the laws on it and that unless I do something threatining that it wouldnt qualify. I guess my question is, can the police turn something im doing legally into something illegal? Thats like me saying every time I see Hillary Clinton on TV she should be arrested for my disturbance.
Any help on this? Has any one ever gotten arrested for inducing panic while OCing? I printed all the laws out and im carrying them in my wallet from now on.
So I got a call from my First shirt today and he told me that he talked to the police that detained me the other day. He asked them if I was breaking any laws and they said no, but that I could get in trouble for inducing panic/public disturbance. So I looked up the laws on it and that unless I do something threatining that it wouldnt qualify. I guess my question is, can the police turn something im doing legally into something illegal? Thats like me saying every time I see Hillary Clinton on TV she should be arrested for my disturbance.
Any help on this? Has any one ever gotten arrested for inducing panic while OCing? I printed all the laws out and im carrying them in my wallet from now on.
cato
Newbie
imported post
bangelo wrote:
bangelo wrote:
Yes, it's called a false arrest and false report. It can and does happen. Open carry is a constitutional right in Ohio and that trumps that law being applied to peaceful open carry. I suggest carrying a tape recorder or calling a voice mail box from your cell phone (on speaker covertly) if time and circumstances allow. Being situationally aware applies to turning on the recorder (covertly & be careful what your reaching near)just before a police stop as well as to normal situational awareness for OC.
Attachments
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
cato wrote:
This is interesting. What criteria do you consider to use VC all of a sudden to people who are walking down the street. Seems like that is over-reaching (with good intentions, of course).
I agree that using a tool like VC would be a perfect truncheon for LEOs who don't like OC and want to hassle a OCer who is not doing anything illegal. It sounds like a nifty little trick. But it still is over-reaching and subject to wildly varying and discriminatory application.
It actually sounds like it might be illegal...
cato wrote:
This is interesting. What criteria do you consider to use VC all of a sudden to people who are walking down the street. Seems like that is over-reaching (with good intentions, of course).
I agree that using a tool like VC would be a perfect truncheon for LEOs who don't like OC and want to hassle a OCer who is not doing anything illegal. It sounds like a nifty little trick. But it still is over-reaching and subject to wildly varying and discriminatory application.
It actually sounds like it might be illegal...
Demarest
Regular Member
imported post
bangelo wrote:
They do these things because they think they can. I guarantee it's easier to counter BEFORE it goes down than afterwards and the time it takes to write a few letters or make a few phone calls is a lot less than what it takes to take a half day off work for each and every court appearance as you rely on due process to get you out from under their wrongful treatment.
bangelo wrote:
Time to talk to their commanding officer AGAIN. You might also want to talk to that jurisdiction's prosecuting attorney and/or judge to let them know that there are sworn officers threatening to abuse both their oath and our judicial system to harrass law abiding citizens not for breaking the law, but for doing things differently than they would. It wouldn't be the first time that a prosecutor issued a memo informing the police that openly carrying a firearm is NOT inducing panic. You could also write/speak to city council to bring to their attention that the police are wasting taxpayer money to do the same.
They do these things because they think they can. I guarantee it's easier to counter BEFORE it goes down than afterwards and the time it takes to write a few letters or make a few phone calls is a lot less than what it takes to take a half day off work for each and every court appearance as you rely on due process to get you out from under their wrongful treatment.
cato
Newbie
imported post
I personally like VA's misdemeanor laws which make some classifications cite only. In CA all misdemeanors are arrestable if witnessed by the arresting officer or private person. This places a lot of power in the arresting officer / private persons hands to harass the arrestee. Personally I don't like DL's or vehicle registration as freedom of movement (travel)combinedwith private property (cars)should not become a privilege just because you are on a road your taxes paid for.
Yes. Which is why I push people to carry recorders.
Not if the "harassing" officer's PC is good. More academy speak: Bad intentions do not make good law bad. Meaning if the officers intention is to harass because of OC but has valid PC to stop/cite/arrest it doesn't make it an illegal action. Now if it can be shown that the officer routinely tickets/arrests OCers and advises or doesn't stop non OCers for the same violations then that is an unfair application of the law violation under the 14th A I think. (this is why complaints must be filed if you suspect "harassment" - it creates a paper trail)
You run into the same situation for officers who advise white drivers but ticket all purple people. Which is why I ticket all white people so I can also ticket all purple too! Just kidding. I advise everybody about 60-75% for the time.
image by Oleg Volk
Good intentions do not justify the means or in academy speak, good intentions do not make bad law good. One still needs PC to cite/arrest. Peds in CA are regulated by the VC. If someone for instance rides a bike w/o a head lamp or jaywalks they can be cited for an infraction. If they have no ID they can be finger printed and detained until ID is verified (section 40302a Cal. VC).
I personally like VA's misdemeanor laws which make some classifications cite only. In CA all misdemeanors are arrestable if witnessed by the arresting officer or private person. This places a lot of power in the arresting officer / private persons hands to harass the arrestee. Personally I don't like DL's or vehicle registration as freedom of movement (travel)combinedwith private property (cars)should not become a privilege just because you are on a road your taxes paid for.
Yes. Which is why I push people to carry recorders.
Not if the "harassing" officer's PC is good. More academy speak: Bad intentions do not make good law bad. Meaning if the officers intention is to harass because of OC but has valid PC to stop/cite/arrest it doesn't make it an illegal action. Now if it can be shown that the officer routinely tickets/arrests OCers and advises or doesn't stop non OCers for the same violations then that is an unfair application of the law violation under the 14th A I think. (this is why complaints must be filed if you suspect "harassment" - it creates a paper trail)
You run into the same situation for officers who advise white drivers but ticket all purple people. Which is why I ticket all white people so I can also ticket all purple too! Just kidding. I advise everybody about 60-75% for the time.
image by Oleg Volk
Attachments
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
imported post
"The vehemence of the language used is not alone the measure of the power to punish for contempt. The fires which it kindles must constitute an imminent, not merely a likely, threat to the administration of justice. The danger must not be remote or even probable; it must immediately imperil . . . . [T]he law of contempt is not made for the protection of judges who may be sensitive to the winds of public opinion. Judges are supposed to be men of fortitude, able to thrive in a hardy climate." Craig v. Harney, 331 U.S. 367, 376 (1947).
What needs to be discussed is what does and does not p*ss off a LEO when they attempt to harass an OC not doing anything but minding his own business. Depending on the situation saying what's your probable cause for stopping me will usually p*ss off the LEO. I suggest that you say What seems to be the problem officer. There are words that attorneys use in court that LEOs are familiar with and there are words that "patriots" use that LEOs don't like. When I talk to LEOs like an attorney the LEO becomes cautious. Even if the LEO asks if your an attorney and you say no but your best friend is may change to LOE's attitude. Being a smart A** with the LEO gains you nothing.
"The vehemence of the language used is not alone the measure of the power to punish for contempt. The fires which it kindles must constitute an imminent, not merely a likely, threat to the administration of justice. The danger must not be remote or even probable; it must immediately imperil . . . . [T]he law of contempt is not made for the protection of judges who may be sensitive to the winds of public opinion. Judges are supposed to be men of fortitude, able to thrive in a hardy climate." Craig v. Harney, 331 U.S. 367, 376 (1947).
What needs to be discussed is what does and does not p*ss off a LEO when they attempt to harass an OC not doing anything but minding his own business. Depending on the situation saying what's your probable cause for stopping me will usually p*ss off the LEO. I suggest that you say What seems to be the problem officer. There are words that attorneys use in court that LEOs are familiar with and there are words that "patriots" use that LEOs don't like. When I talk to LEOs like an attorney the LEO becomes cautious. Even if the LEO asks if your an attorney and you say no but your best friend is may change to LOE's attitude. Being a smart A** with the LEO gains you nothing.
imported post
I was already handcuffed and threatened with violence when I made the "mistake" of reminding a cop that the law didn't say what he claimed as he was arresting me. I was in jail about 15 minutes after that, including drive time. So - a jerk cop is going to be a jerk no matter what. Do not escalate a situation with raising your voice or using profanity or making threats or any other obviously stupid behavior, but be aware that a real asshole is going to do exactly what he wants to, and you are ultimately at their mercy. I was arbitrarily stopped, illegally searched, improperly charged, and subject to seizure and possible forfeiture of property without any due process. I have yet to see a judge or magistrate over a month into this ordeal. Round one in the courts is at the end of next week. I can only hope that these cops don't lie in their complaint additionally. I do not expect much by way of integrity from people who have done what they have already.
-ljp
p.s. I'm beginning to see a pattern of this shit in Ohio...
I was already handcuffed and threatened with violence when I made the "mistake" of reminding a cop that the law didn't say what he claimed as he was arresting me. I was in jail about 15 minutes after that, including drive time. So - a jerk cop is going to be a jerk no matter what. Do not escalate a situation with raising your voice or using profanity or making threats or any other obviously stupid behavior, but be aware that a real asshole is going to do exactly what he wants to, and you are ultimately at their mercy. I was arbitrarily stopped, illegally searched, improperly charged, and subject to seizure and possible forfeiture of property without any due process. I have yet to see a judge or magistrate over a month into this ordeal. Round one in the courts is at the end of next week. I can only hope that these cops don't lie in their complaint additionally. I do not expect much by way of integrity from people who have done what they have already.
-ljp
p.s. I'm beginning to see a pattern of this shit in Ohio...
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
cato wrote:
Well, that's what I was getting at. Pulling in VC (where applicable by state law) is a reasonable practice--but only if it is applied in some consistent manner. I can envision some anti-OC LEO, pulling it into a stop situation to force production of an ID where none is actually required. Like with the Danbus stops. And the unrequited stop in Alexandria. Stops like that.
There is this continuing tussle, not one that will likely stop, with LEOs and stopees. The LEOs are often desperate to positively identify people they don't really need to positively identify.
The audio recorder is a good idea, of course. But that's primarily to help only in complaining or fixing the problem--not preventing it in the first place. I think the bottom line is that if the stopping LEO really wants to positively ID a citizen (who has really not broken any laws), the LEO will find a way to do that.
He can always say, "Slips." if there is any blow-back. It's not considered a HUGE indiscretion, I gather.
cato wrote:
Well, that's what I was getting at. Pulling in VC (where applicable by state law) is a reasonable practice--but only if it is applied in some consistent manner. I can envision some anti-OC LEO, pulling it into a stop situation to force production of an ID where none is actually required. Like with the Danbus stops. And the unrequited stop in Alexandria. Stops like that.
There is this continuing tussle, not one that will likely stop, with LEOs and stopees. The LEOs are often desperate to positively identify people they don't really need to positively identify.
The audio recorder is a good idea, of course. But that's primarily to help only in complaining or fixing the problem--not preventing it in the first place. I think the bottom line is that if the stopping LEO really wants to positively ID a citizen (who has really not broken any laws), the LEO will find a way to do that.
He can always say, "Slips." if there is any blow-back. It's not considered a HUGE indiscretion, I gather.
reefteach
Regular Member
imported post
Legba wrote:
Legba wrote:
When do motions for discovery get filed?I was under the impression that this should have occured already. But then again, the only thing I know about the legal process is what I have seen on TV.
Splat!!
Regular Member
imported post
Legba wrote:
Legba wrote:
Was there only one officer on the scene while this was taking place.......??
imported post
reefteach wrote:
I haven't even been arraigned yet after a month. 1st hearing is next Thursday and should last about 90 seconds. They'll schedule pre-trial hearings (motion filings) from there - maybe Thanksgiving, ironically.
-ljp
reefteach wrote:
I haven't even been arraigned yet after a month. 1st hearing is next Thursday and should last about 90 seconds. They'll schedule pre-trial hearings (motion filings) from there - maybe Thanksgiving, ironically.
-ljp
imported post
Splat!! wrote:
Oh no. There were, as I recall, something like 4 detectives and 5 uniforms in a total of 5 or 6 cars when I got "nailed" for this bullshit. All that was missing was the guy from America's Most Wanted and cameras for the "perp walk." The uniforms/squad cars showed up after the plainclothes guys, so there's no recording worth a damn. That and they never positioned me in front of a squad car, perhaps deliberately.
-ljp
Splat!! wrote:
Oh no. There were, as I recall, something like 4 detectives and 5 uniforms in a total of 5 or 6 cars when I got "nailed" for this bullshit. All that was missing was the guy from America's Most Wanted and cameras for the "perp walk." The uniforms/squad cars showed up after the plainclothes guys, so there's no recording worth a damn. That and they never positioned me in front of a squad car, perhaps deliberately.
-ljp
reefteach
Regular Member
imported post
Could you filea freedom of info act request to get a sneak peak at the documents regarding the stop?
Could you filea freedom of info act request to get a sneak peak at the documents regarding the stop?
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
imported post
Legba wrote "I can only hope that these cops don't lie in their complaint."
I was not privy to what you wrote (Legba) and then yanked from this blog. But it appears to be for a 4 letter description of your ordeal. So, I'm at a loss as to what the details are.
However, based on what I have read, I'm concerned about your rights and getting railroaded in the Ohio court system. I know that if you have an attorney you are on shaky ground. THAT'S MY FIRST AMENDMENT OPINION. Most attorneys wave time and that is bad. Ohio has a speedy trial act. Waving time destroys one of your best defences.
My big concern is your saying the above quote. You have to have a copy of the complaint to even enter a plea. The limited facts I have, based on your above quote, tells me you ain't got a chance.
I would like to know the facts and what you were charged with. I'm in Cincinnati, I presume you are in Hamilton, Ohio. The web master can give you my E-mail if you which to talk about it.
Being a paralegal, I have some experance with this stuff. And I know most attorneys believe they owe their alligiance to the court and not to the client.
Legba wrote "I can only hope that these cops don't lie in their complaint."
I was not privy to what you wrote (Legba) and then yanked from this blog. But it appears to be for a 4 letter description of your ordeal. So, I'm at a loss as to what the details are.
However, based on what I have read, I'm concerned about your rights and getting railroaded in the Ohio court system. I know that if you have an attorney you are on shaky ground. THAT'S MY FIRST AMENDMENT OPINION. Most attorneys wave time and that is bad. Ohio has a speedy trial act. Waving time destroys one of your best defences.
My big concern is your saying the above quote. You have to have a copy of the complaint to even enter a plea. The limited facts I have, based on your above quote, tells me you ain't got a chance.
I would like to know the facts and what you were charged with. I'm in Cincinnati, I presume you are in Hamilton, Ohio. The web master can give you my E-mail if you which to talk about it.
Being a paralegal, I have some experance with this stuff. And I know most attorneys believe they owe their alligiance to the court and not to the client.
imported post
color of law - the lawyer I'm retaining is in independent private practice. I interviewed several before deciding upon him, and he's even recommended by the Bar Association. If he tries to push through some bullshit "deal," I will not hesitate to remind him that he signed on at a flat rate for the entire case (including trial if it comes to that), not justan expeditious disposition of it, so I'll be happy to go to trial if the best they offer is a bullshit sentencing recommendation for a felony. The process isas speedy as it can be otherwise - no way to speed up hearing dates, although I do have a right to a preliminary hearing within 10 days of arraignement, uless it's waived by both parties. Dunno if they'll get sicker of it and drop it if it gets dragged out, or if I stand and fight. Anyway, what can be done is being done, it just takes time.
I cannot believe a dozen people will find against me, and for what representation costs, I don't care if it takes 6 months of real work on the lawyer's part to get a reasonable outcome. I'm not "copping" to any felony, and anything that invovles forfeiture of my property is not satisfactory either. I did NOTHING wrong or illegal, and the police threatened to "kick the shit out of me" while I was handcuffed. Now they are threatening to keep and auction off my stuff (won't work).I will not submit.
-ljp
color of law - the lawyer I'm retaining is in independent private practice. I interviewed several before deciding upon him, and he's even recommended by the Bar Association. If he tries to push through some bullshit "deal," I will not hesitate to remind him that he signed on at a flat rate for the entire case (including trial if it comes to that), not justan expeditious disposition of it, so I'll be happy to go to trial if the best they offer is a bullshit sentencing recommendation for a felony. The process isas speedy as it can be otherwise - no way to speed up hearing dates, although I do have a right to a preliminary hearing within 10 days of arraignement, uless it's waived by both parties. Dunno if they'll get sicker of it and drop it if it gets dragged out, or if I stand and fight. Anyway, what can be done is being done, it just takes time.
I cannot believe a dozen people will find against me, and for what representation costs, I don't care if it takes 6 months of real work on the lawyer's part to get a reasonable outcome. I'm not "copping" to any felony, and anything that invovles forfeiture of my property is not satisfactory either. I did NOTHING wrong or illegal, and the police threatened to "kick the shit out of me" while I was handcuffed. Now they are threatening to keep and auction off my stuff (won't work).I will not submit.
-ljp