• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

After Council Meeting/Hooters Vid

sccrref

sccrref

Regular Member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
741
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:
Reverend73 wrote:
To make it really easy, here is Dan's good buddy :p

Looks to be at least a SGT (I think that is 3 chevrons I see)
Click to expand...
If this officer was indeed a Sgt., does it not strike anyone else as very unusual that a Sgt. would be patrolling Waterside? Is not a Sgt. generally a supervisor in larger departments?

Questions - we (Dan really) need(s) answers.

Yata hey
Click to expand...
I suspect his actions let you know why he as a SGT is on foot patrol.:what:If he is this good on foot patrol, he must be some kind of a supervisor.
 
HankT

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:
If this officer was indeed a Sgt., does it not strike anyone else as very unusual that a Sgt. would be patrolling Waterside? Is not a Sgt. generally a supervisor in larger departments?

Questions - we (Dan really) need(s) answers.
Click to expand...

The presence of the Sgt. at Waterside is of minor importance. Probably, insignificant. The important question is whether Waterside is legallypublic or private. If public, he can breathe easy. Things will be sorted out.

If private, he is probably in moderately deeplegal trouble.
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

HankT wrote:
snip..... The important question is whether Waterside is legallypublic or private. If public, he can breathe easy. Things will be sorted out.

If private, he is probably in moderately deeplegal trouble.
Click to expand...
Re private - moderately deep trouble - 'tain't necessarily so.

If Private property - no sign for no guns - police officer was "uninvited" or employed as a "security guard"? and alledgedly tells Dan that he cannot carry on "public property."

All indications are that Waterside is public property.

Yata hey
 
HankT

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

All indications are that Waterside is public property.
Click to expand...

"All?"

That's not true.

Of course, it would betrue if one read only information that one, um, agreed with.

:D

Maybe you have something, though. Stick with the Sgt. lead. Maybe it'll be important or something...
 
S

SaltH2OHokie

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
416
Location
Bottom of Suffolk, VA
imported post

Bulldog1967 wrote:
I think we should wire Danbus with a wireless mic and someone should ALWAYS be recording these encounters from across the room/street.
Click to expand...
Well if not for illegally telling the person not to record, it wouldn't be necessary. Hopefully we'll get to a point where a.) recording things isn't necessary or b.) it is necessary, but it will be allowed as the law says...
 
T

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

SaltH2OHokie wrote:
Bulldog1967 wrote:
I think we should wire Danbus with a wireless mic and someone should ALWAYS be recording these encounters from across the room/street.
Click to expand...
Well if not for illegally telling the person not to record, it wouldn't be necessary. Hopefully we'll get to a point where a.) recording things isn't necessary or b.) it is necessary, but it will be allowed as the law says...
Click to expand...
The governments at various levels love to record and surveil everything we do these days, with security cameras all over the place and so forth. While this bothers me, I take solace in the fact that due to the free market and the ingenuity of free men, we can play at this game also, with cellphones and DVRs and all sorts of tiny devices that make it hard for uniformed government employeesto get away with some of the stuff they used to. High technology in the hands of decentralized citizens is something we should be all over, taking full advantage of, just as we have taken advantage of the internet to send mass communications through a decentralized, largely unregulated network. This is real freedom we have at our disposal; use it while it lasts.
 
HankT

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
...I take solace in the fact that due to the free market and the ingenuity of free men, we can play at this game also, with cellphones and DVRs and all sorts of tiny devices that make it hard for uniformed government employeesto get away with some of the stuff they used to. High technology in the hands of decentralized citizens is something we should be all over, taking full advantage of, just as we have taken advantage of the internet to send mass communications through a decentralized, largely unregulated network. This is real freedom we have at our disposal; use it while it lasts.
Click to expand...

Well put.

Information is power. And those audio bits and video bits and the network change the typical balance of power. And that change can definitely be highlyfavorable to the LAC in his or her encounters with LE where the performance of LE is incompetent , unsatisfactory, orunlawful.
 
skidmark

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
imported post

COPSCHARGING TRESPASSON PRIVATE PROPERTY

The question of whether Waterside is public or private still rages on. Once it is settled we will have to deal with the legal authority of cops tocharge trespass on private property when the property owner/agent has not in fact called and asked for police assistance.

An interesting bit of case law here -http://www.courts.state.va.us/txtops/1320974.txt- the property owner executed a power of attorney to permit the cops tocharge trespass on private property.

DISREGARD ALL OTHER ASPECTS OF THE CASE. STAY FOCUSED.

Would there be any other way for NPD tocharge trespassif Waterside was in fact private property?

Yes, danbus knows about this. Thank you for asking. :)

stay safe.

skidmark

* edited to use correct terms
 
A

AbNo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,805
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
imported post

Cross-post in the Hampton Roads thread...

OC'd in downtown Norfolk today, including IN Waterside, and right outside....




Had a nice talk with a public worker about who was about to go into the the NRHA building about the NRHA.
 
A

AbNo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,805
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
imported post

See for yourself.

This is the outside entrance door facing the water, on both of the back doors nearest to the brown sign. These doors will place you next to some place called The Green Goat (?).


And this is seen in between the err, inner entrance doors.



I saw similar clings to the first picture on the doors at the top of the escalator by Bar Norfolk (which would be where Dan was stopped).
 
N

no carry permit ?

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
180
Location
, ,
imported post

My conclusion is as followed: 1) RACIALLY motivated, as I said before Norfolk police has the well deserved reputation for harassing black folks. Disclaimer: I'm not a minority but have seen it too many times.

I hope you consider filing a formal complaint with the Coordination and review section of the Civil Rights division, US Department of Justice. Since the caucasian man accompanying you was not charged ( but observed by the LEO committing the same "offense"you have a slam dunk case.

2) The prosecutor is an idiot, ignorant of the law or aggrogant enough to play around with it.

3) You need an attorney

4) You need to make a list of home improvements, vacation spots your interested in, and maybe a new gun you would like. I think you are in for some unexpected cash.

5) The arrogance of the police no longer shocks me. When I find an officer that is intelligent, courteous and friendly, that shocks me.
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

no carry permit ? wrote:
My conclusion is as followed: 1) RACIALLY motivated, as I said before Norfolk police has the well deserved reputation for harassing black folks. Disclaimer: I'm not a minority but have seen it too many times.

I hope you consider filing a formal complaint with the Coordination and review section of the Civil Rights division, US Department of Justice. Since the caucasian man accompanying you was not charged ( but observed by the LEO committing the same "offense"you have a slam dunk case.

2) The prosecutor is an idiot, ignorant of the law or aggrogant enough to play around with it.

3) You need an attorney

4) You need to make a list of home improvements, vacation spots your interested in, and maybe a new gun you would like. I think you are in for some unexpected cash.

5) The arrogance of the police no longer shocks me. When I find an officer that is intelligent, courteous and friendly, that shocks me.
Click to expand...
I understand that all aspects are being looked into by his council and advisors.

That particular "slam dunk" as a defense for tresspass won't work by itself. It is like being charged with speeding when there are others doing the same thing. You (alone) either were or you were not in violation. In Dan's case, what we hope to show is that he was charged with doing 48 mph in a 55 mph zone or similar.

The first requirement is to defend the criminal charge of tresspass.

Most LEO's are just trying to do there job to the best of their ability. A few bad apples do not make the barrel look bad for most of us.

Yata hey
 
A

AbNo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,805
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
imported post

Perhaps, Grape, but I think at this point, we may be reaching a time when too many bad apples are rotting the barrel.

It is certainly looking that way down there.

What is this, Chicago?
 
peter nap

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:
no carry permit ? wrote:
The first requirement is to defend the criminal charge of tresspass.

Most LEO's are just trying to do there job to the best of their ability. A few bad apples do not make the barrel look bad for most of us.

Yata hey
Click to expand...
I agree Grapeshot and in this case, I suspect most of the rotten apples are in administration and most of their direction comes from City Counsel.

While there are really bad cops, they are rare. Most are just doing what they're told. They should be given more freedom to follow the law, but in most venues, they are not. The majority just want to get their time in and retire to Tahiti where the women don't wear no tops!:shock:
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

skidmark wrote:
COPSCHARGING TRESPASSON PRIVATE PROPERTY

The question of whether Waterside is public or private still rages on. Once it is settled we will have to deal with the legal authority of cops tocharge trespass on private property when the property owner/agent has not in fact called and asked for police assistance.

An interesting bit of case law here -http://www.courts.state.va.us/txtops/1320974.txt- the property owner executed a power of attorney to permit the cops tocharge trespass on private property.

DISREGARD ALL OTHER ASPECTS OF THE CASE. STAY FOCUSED.

Would there be any other way for NPD tocharge trespassif Waterside was in fact private property?

Yes, danbus knows about this. Thank you for asking. :)

stay safe.

skidmark

* edited to use correct terms
Click to expand...
The tresspass statute is very clear - not only must the person be given notice to leave, the person giving notice MUST be the owner or agent; in the power of attorney case cited above, police provided such agency notice in writing; further, as the courts have held this offense to require a willful act, not only is a bone fide if mistaken belief in authority to stay a defense, but I think it faily implied that the person ordered to leave be given notice that the police are acting as agent; finally, if the onwer is the city or its juridical entity, then preemption would appear to apply voiding the alleged rule against gun carry being enforced by resorting to tresspass law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top