LEO gave me a ticket...

It's because of cases like this that I OC I personally dislike the fact that society gives more power to Police than to citizens. Obama (as a senator) supported a bill that would allow retired Police to carry guns but not citizens. People come from everywhere they can be good or bad Police are just people with a different job (albeit a hard one) than me. This is a clear cut case of Police abusing their power. I hope all goes well, please keep us updated if anything new comes up.

Click to expand...

Gunslinger wrote:

joeroket wrote:

So what do you do if the prosecution has done their entire investigation prior to charging you? Would you still not waive your right to a speedy trial?

I bet you wouldn't and if you did not waive it then you may as well have plead guilty, especially if you have a public defender.

Remember prosecutors are afforded the luxury of deciding when they want to charge someone. I realize there are situations when it is highly prudent to not waive but there are also situations that it would be a downfall for you to not waive. I think saying never waive your right to a speedy trial is a statement of ignorance.

Click to expand...

No prosecutor is going to conduct an investigation without your full knowledge that you are being investigated. The logical man has already retained counsel at that point. And your assumption that "you may as well have (pled--I'll spell it correctly) guilty" is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum, and that's saying something. There is a word, 'continuance,' that comes into play, but evidently your "knowledge" of the law is just a bit short. The speedy trial act eleminates the "luxury" you claim the prosecution is afforded and that's why they exist in states and under Federal Statute. But, be my guest. Give up your 6th A protection whenever you choose. Why not give up your 5th and 4th, as well? The prosecution has the harder task--they must prove beyonda reasonable doubt and then supply discovery for your side to look at after they have done the work. I certainly hope you don't claim to be a lawyer.

Click to expand...

So prosecutors only investigate you when you know they are? Where the hell did you pull that from?

Your right to a speedy trial only comes after being charged. Until that time the prosecutor is afforded the luxury of investigating without charging.

A continuance is not what you seem to think it is. You will not be given a fast and speedy trial, that being the key word, if you request a continuance as you will have given up that right. You also lose the ability to make claim that your right was violated.

Thanks for the grammar lesson but next time you might want to break it up into paragraphs.

Click to expand...

joeroket wrote:

Gunslinger wrote:

joeroket wrote:

So what do you do if the prosecution has done their entire investigation prior to charging you? Would you still not waive your right to a speedy trial?

I bet you wouldn't and if you did not waive it then you may as well have plead guilty, especially if you have a public defender.

Remember prosecutors are afforded the luxury of deciding when they want to charge someone. I realize there are situations when it is highly prudent to not waive but there are also situations that it would be a downfall for you to not waive. I think saying never waive your right to a speedy trial is a statement of ignorance.

Click to expand...

No prosecutor is going to conduct an investigation without your full knowledge that you are being investigated. The logical man has already retained counsel at that point. And your assumption that "you may as well have (pled--I'll spell it correctly) guilty" is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum, and that's saying something. There is a word, 'continuance,' that comes into play, but evidently your "knowledge" of the law is just a bit short. The speedy trial act eleminates the "luxury" you claim the prosecution is afforded and that's why they exist in states and under Federal Statute. But, be my guest. Give up your 6th A protection whenever you choose. Why not give up your 5th and 4th, as well? The prosecution has the harder task--they must prove beyonda reasonable doubt and then supply discovery for your side to look at after they have done the work. I certainly hope you don't claim to be a lawyer.

Click to expand...

So prosecutors only investigate you when you know they are? Where the hell did you pull that from?

Your right to a speedy trial only comes after being charged. Until that time the prosecutor is afforded the luxury of investigating without charging.

A continuance is not what you seem to think it is. You will not be given a fast and speedy trial, that being the key word, if you request a continuance as you will have given up that right. You also lose the ability to make claim that your right was violated.

Thanks for the grammar lesson but next time you might want to break it up into paragraphs.

Click to expand...

As I said, you obviously aren't a lawyer. Prosecutors only investigate with a suggestion of wrongdoing. There are many avenues wherein this suggestion becomes known to a suspect. Suspects are named, warrants are issued, witnesses questioned. Do you think this is done in a vacuum? Long before a charge is filed anyone but a complete moron would be aware of what's happening.

Prosecutors don't have the luxury of investigating false leads. They run for reelection or reappointment. They have to follow restrictive laws on questioning, advise of rights, etc. They have to answer for their resource expenditures. If the matter is serious enough for a large expenditure of resources, the investigatee will be well aware and already sought counsel.

My point, which I thought was obvious, is don't waive your rights under the 6th Amendment. If brought to trial and you are somehow so stupid as to be blindsided by the prosecution's amazing collection of a case at bar while you were sleeping, you can seek a continuance, file motions that will delay things, or take other actions such as motion to recuse, change venue, etc, etc. Anyone with common sense will never be in that situation. There may be one in a thousand cases where waiving the speedy trial acts are needed. But that's it. The rest of the time, you're a fool if you do.

Hope you enjoy the paragraphs and you're welcome for the grammar lesson. BTW, while I don't practice, I do have a JD so have a little idea of what I'm talking about.

Click to expand...

I never said I was a lawyer, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Click to expand...

Gunslinger wrote:

joeroket wrote:

Gunslinger wrote:

joeroket wrote:

So what do you do if the prosecution has done their entire investigation prior to charging you? Would you still not waive your right to a speedy trial?

I bet you wouldn't and if you did not waive it then you may as well have plead guilty, especially if you have a public defender.

Remember prosecutors are afforded the luxury of deciding when they want to charge someone. I realize there are situations when it is highly prudent to not waive but there are also situations that it would be a downfall for you to not waive. I think saying never waive your right to a speedy trial is a statement of ignorance.

Click to expand...

No prosecutor is going to conduct an investigation without your full knowledge that you are being investigated. The logical man has already retained counsel at that point. And your assumption that "you may as well have (pled--I'll spell it correctly) guilty" is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum, and that's saying something. There is a word, 'continuance,' that comes into play, but evidently your "knowledge" of the law is just a bit short. The speedy trial act eleminates the "luxury" you claim the prosecution is afforded and that's why they exist in states and under Federal Statute. But, be my guest. Give up your 6th A protection whenever you choose. Why not give up your 5th and 4th, as well? The prosecution has the harder task--they must prove beyonda reasonable doubt and then supply discovery for your side to look at after they have done the work. I certainly hope you don't claim to be a lawyer.

Click to expand...

So prosecutors only investigate you when you know they are? Where the hell did you pull that from?

Your right to a speedy trial only comes after being charged. Until that time the prosecutor is afforded the luxury of investigating without charging.

A continuance is not what you seem to think it is. You will not be given a fast and speedy trial, that being the key word, if you request a continuance as you will have given up that right. You also lose the ability to make claim that your right was violated.

Thanks for the grammar lesson but next time you might want to break it up into paragraphs.

Click to expand...

As I said, you obviously aren't a lawyer. Prosecutors only investigate with a suggestion of wrongdoing. There are many avenues wherein this suggestion becomes known to a suspect. Suspects are named, warrants are issued, witnesses questioned. Do you think this is done in a vacuum? Long before a charge is filed anyone but a complete moron would be aware of what's happening.

Prosecutors don't have the luxury of investigating false leads. They run for reelection or reappointment. They have to follow restrictive laws on questioning, advise of rights, etc. They have to answer for their resource expenditures. If the matter is serious enough for a large expenditure of resources, the investigatee will be well aware and already sought counsel.

My point, which I thought was obvious, is don't waive your rights under the 6th Amendment. If brought to trial and you are somehow so stupid as to be blindsided by the prosecution's amazing collection of a case at bar while you were sleeping, you can seek a continuance, file motions that will delay things, or take other actions such as motion to recuse, change venue, etc, etc. Anyone with common sense will never be in that situation. There may be one in a thousand cases where waiving the speedy trial acts are needed. But that's it. The rest of the time, you're a fool if you do.

Hope you enjoy the paragraphs and you're welcome for the grammar lesson. BTW, while I don't practice, I do have a JD so have a little idea of what I'm talking about.

Click to expand...

I never said I was a lawyer, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I agree that a person of normal intelligence should know they are being investigated, but since when are criminals of normal intelligence? Most of them are not.

Nice back tracking. First you said never waive your right and now you are saying that there are some instances where it might be prudent to waive it. Thanks for agreeing with my whole point.

You might have a JD but that certainly does not prove anything or mean that you are correct. I think I will stick to personal experience over some guy on the internet.

Click to expand...

joeroket wrote:

Gunslinger wrote:

joeroket wrote:

Gunslinger wrote:

joeroket wrote:

So what do you do if the prosecution has done their entire investigation prior to charging you? Would you still not waive your right to a speedy trial?

I bet you wouldn't and if you did not waive it then you may as well have plead guilty, especially if you have a public defender.

Remember prosecutors are afforded the luxury of deciding when they want to charge someone. I realize there are situations when it is highly prudent to not waive but there are also situations that it would be a downfall for you to not waive. I think saying never waive your right to a speedy trial is a statement of ignorance.

Click to expand...

No prosecutor is going to conduct an investigation without your full knowledge that you are being investigated. The logical man has already retained counsel at that point. And your assumption that "you may as well have (pled--I'll spell it correctly) guilty" is one of the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum, and that's saying something. There is a word, 'continuance,' that comes into play, but evidently your "knowledge" of the law is just a bit short. The speedy trial act eleminates the "luxury" you claim the prosecution is afforded and that's why they exist in states and under Federal Statute. But, be my guest. Give up your 6th A protection whenever you choose. Why not give up your 5th and 4th, as well? The prosecution has the harder task--they must prove beyonda reasonable doubt and then supply discovery for your side to look at after they have done the work. I certainly hope you don't claim to be a lawyer.

Click to expand...

So prosecutors only investigate you when you know they are? Where the hell did you pull that from?

Your right to a speedy trial only comes after being charged. Until that time the prosecutor is afforded the luxury of investigating without charging.

A continuance is not what you seem to think it is. You will not be given a fast and speedy trial, that being the key word, if you request a continuance as you will have given up that right. You also lose the ability to make claim that your right was violated.

Thanks for the grammar lesson but next time you might want to break it up into paragraphs.

Click to expand...

As I said, you obviously aren't a lawyer. Prosecutors only investigate with a suggestion of wrongdoing. There are many avenues wherein this suggestion becomes known to a suspect. Suspects are named, warrants are issued, witnesses questioned. Do you think this is done in a vacuum? Long before a charge is filed anyone but a complete moron would be aware of what's happening.

Prosecutors don't have the luxury of investigating false leads. They run for reelection or reappointment. They have to follow restrictive laws on questioning, advise of rights, etc. They have to answer for their resource expenditures. If the matter is serious enough for a large expenditure of resources, the investigatee will be well aware and already sought counsel.

My point, which I thought was obvious, is don't waive your rights under the 6th Amendment. If brought to trial and you are somehow so stupid as to be blindsided by the prosecution's amazing collection of a case at bar while you were sleeping, you can seek a continuance, file motions that will delay things, or take other actions such as motion to recuse, change venue, etc, etc. Anyone with common sense will never be in that situation. There may be one in a thousand cases where waiving the speedy trial acts are needed. But that's it. The rest of the time, you're a fool if you do.

Hope you enjoy the paragraphs and you're welcome for the grammar lesson. BTW, while I don't practice, I do have a JD so have a little idea of what I'm talking about.

Click to expand...

I never said I was a lawyer, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I agree that a person of normal intelligence should know they are being investigated, but since when are criminals of normal intelligence? Most of them are not.

Nice back tracking. First you said never waive your right and now you are saying that there are some instances where it might be prudent to waive it. Thanks for agreeing with my whole point.

You might have a JD but that certainly does not prove anything or mean that you are correct. I think I will stick to personal experience over some guy on the internet.

Click to expand...

There may be one in a thousand cases where waiving the speedy trial acts are needed. But that's it. The rest of the time, you're a fool if you do.

If you consider that agreeing with your whole point, I suggest you stick to cheap hotels.

Click to expand...

The lesson here is obey the orders of the police. Sounds like if you had just covered your gun you would still have it.  Then you could have wrote a letter to the NRA and to the police agency about how you feel your rights were violated.  No ticket and no firearm confiscation.

Click to expand...

Sounds like we have another "CC advocate" that thinks they can convince everyone on the forum to just cover it up and "stop causing trouble" with their impeccable logic and superior reasoning skillzzzzz. :quirky

Click to expand...

Whatever.

Click to expand...

The lesson here is obey the orders of the police. Sounds like if you had just covered your gun you would still have it. Then you could have wrote a letter to the NRA and to the police agency about how you feel your rights were violated. No ticket and no firearm confiscation.

Click to expand...

I am all for open carry, but one thing I've learned in life is that calmer minds prevail. If you want to go toe to toe with a police officer all that will end uphappening is you getting arrested and your gun confiscated.

Click to expand...

I am all for open carry, but one thing I've learned in life is that calmer minds prevail. If you want to go toe to toe with a police officer all that will end uphappening is you getting arrested and your gun confiscated. If you want to make a point like that be my quest. Me I'd rather not use that method. If you want to organize a march down second ave to the federal building count me in. Your not going to change any policies doing it your way, getting arrested then having to petition to get your gun back. Just like going into a private business that says no guns. Its their property, and they should be allowed to make their own rules. So don't show it to start a scene. Just cover it and mind your own business. Then go home and right the business and ask that they consider changing their policy and present your reasons. Perhaps if enough people question the policy they might change it. If they don't its their property. Property rights have been trampled on in this country as much as gun rights have. Each needs to be respected and preserved.

Click to expand...

Perhaps if enough people question the policy they might change it. If they don't its their property. Property rights have been trampled on in this country as much as gun rights have. Each needs to be respected and preserved.

Click to expand...

................Keep those hidden video recordings coming!

Click to expand...