Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: A funny thing hapened on my way to court today...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post

    No, really... it WAS funny.

    So Grishnav and I decided to meet-up in the parking lot of Lloyd Center Mall and car-pool into downtown to split the cost of parking at the garage. Since traffic was bad and he was running late I decided to get out, and walk to the corner so he could just swoop in and grab me to save time. As I'm approaching the corner I begin to dial my phone to call grishnav to tell him where to find me.

    JUST as the phone starts to ring, a Portland Police officer pulls up in the left turn lane to my 4 0'clock:

    O: Excuse me, Sir...?
    M: Yes?
    O: You may want to cover that up.
    M: I'm prohibited by law.
    O: Really? Do, uh, do you have a permit?
    M: Nope! That's why it's prohibited by law...
    O: Huh... is it loaded?
    M: Nope! (Grishnav answers and I begin to inform him where to find me. While doing so I pivot around so the officr can see the empty hole where the magazine would be)
    O: (After waiting for me to finish the call...mebbe 10-15 seconds) so...can I ask you a question?
    M: Sure.
    O: Why do you carry a gun?
    M: Same reason you do...to protect myself.
    O: But....what's the point if you don't have it loaded?
    M: Um...(thinking here)...I guess the best way to say it is that I'm illustrating absurdity with absurdity! ( I was prepared at this point to launch into a diatribe about the state recognising my right to carry for self protection, yet mitigating that right by allowing political sub-divisions the ability to force me to keep it un-loaded)
    O: (Chuckles) OK. Well... have a nice day! (I'm assuming this meant I he understood what i meant by the absurdity of the above situation)
    M: You too!

    Light changes, he gives a parting wave, makes his turn and drives away.:P



  2. #2
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    I don’t know if this has been covered, but for suspicion of what crime did they originally detain you in order to discover that you were recording them? Under the rules of Terry, you were seized if you felt obligated to remain with the officer. For the seizure to be legal they had to be able to articulate a crime they suspected you of committing and that your seizure was necessary to the investigation. If the original seizure was illegal, then they have nothing on you even if it is illegal to record them without their knowledge. After all, you wouldn’t have been recording them had they not detained you.

    They cannot claim that they saw you recording and detained you for that, they already admitted they didn’t know you were. (If they did know then there was no crime anyway) They cannot say you weren’t seized if you felt, and any reasonable person would have felt, obligated to remain.

    It just seems to me like there was a big gap in my understanding of what happened to you. You were kicked off the Metro, then you were speaking to the police, then they arrested you for wiretapping. The gap is at the point that they were talking to you. What crime were they investigating that legally allowed them to detain you?

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , Vermont, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    I don’t know if this has been covered, but for suspicion of what crime did they originally detain you in order to discover that you were recording them? Under the rules of Terry, you were seized if you felt obligated to remain with the officer. For the seizure to be legal they had to be able to articulate a crime they suspected you of committing and that your seizure was necessary to the investigation. If the original seizure was illegal, then they have nothing on you even if it is illegal to record them without their knowledge. After all, you wouldn’t have been recording them had they not detained you.

    They cannot claim that they saw you recording and detained you for that, they already admitted they didn’t know you were. (If they did know then there was no crime anyway) They cannot say you weren’t seized if you felt, and any reasonable person would have felt, obligated to remain.

    It just seems to me like there was a big gap in my understanding of what happened to you. You were kicked off the Metro, then you were speaking to the police, then they arrested you for wiretapping. The gap is at the point that they were talking to you. What crime were they investigating that legally allowed them to detain you?
    I'm lost, where did this come from? Doesn't seem to have anything to do with this post. Does it?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Tigard, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    105

    Post imported post

    VtCO wrote:
    Mainsail wrote:
    I don’t know if this has been covered, but for suspicion of what crime did they originally detain you in order to discover that you were recording them? Under the rules of Terry, you were seized if you felt obligated to remain with the officer. For the seizure to be legal they had to be able to articulate a crime they suspected you of committing and that your seizure was necessary to the investigation. If the original seizure was illegal, then they have nothing on you even if it is illegal to record them without their knowledge. After all, you wouldn’t have been recording them had they not detained you.

    They cannot claim that they saw you recording and detained you for that, they already admitted they didn’t know you were. (If they did know then there was no crime anyway) They cannot say you weren’t seized if you felt, and any reasonable person would have felt, obligated to remain.

    It just seems to me like there was a big gap in my understanding of what happened to you. You were kicked off the Metro, then you were speaking to the police, then they arrested you for wiretapping. The gap is at the point that they were talking to you. What crime were they investigating that legally allowed them to detain you?
    I'm lost, where did this come from? Doesn't seem to have anything to do with this post. Does it?
    Perhaps Mainsailspost does not pertain to this thread specifically, rather it eludes to an important question; what was the probable causefor the detentionto begin with. If TriMet were a private transportation system they could institute what ever policy they wished. Fact is, it's not and they can't. It's a public system and state law is quite clear that authority rests with the legislature exclusively.





  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    74

    Post imported post

    VtCO wrote:
    I'm lost, where did this come from? Doesn't seem to have anything to do with this post. Does it?
    VtCO... not sure if you are aware of the entire situation or not. Just for purpose of clarification, Phssthpok and Grishnav were recently picked up during an Open-Carry outing.

    You can read the whole issue here:

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum45/9080.html

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Scappoose, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    394

    Post imported post

    And what happened in court?

  7. #7
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    SetivaSicWood wrote:
    Perhaps Mainsailspost does not pertain to this thread specifically, rather it eludes to an important question; what was the probable causefor the detentionto begin with.
    Yes, I posted here since it was the most recent thread about the incident.

    A point though, Probable Cause pertains to arrest, not detainment. They detain (seize) you based on reasonable articuable suspicion that you have, are, or are just about to commit a crime. It’s a very important distinction.

Posting Permissions

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