Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 40

Thread: Examiner.com: Alamogordo police pay $21,000 to settle open carry lawsuit

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Please CLICK, SUBSCRIBE, and DIGG this news column to help spread the word!

    http://www.examiner.com/x-2782-DC-Gu...-carry-lawsuit

    SNIP

    As reported in the Alamogordo Daily News today,the Alamogordo, NM Police have paid $21,000 to settle with Matthew A. St. John whom police detained for open carrying a holstered handgun at a movie theater. This settlement follows a host of settlements by police departments around the country with plaintiffs who were detained by police for openly carrying a holstered handgun, including Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Virginia(see another settlement here), and Georgia. More cases are still pending in . . .

  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    ...the Alamogordo, NM Police have paid $21,000 to settle with Matthew A. St. John whom police detained for open carrying a holstered handgun at a movie theater...
    That will get the message spread within the Alamogordo police department...

  3. #3
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    And, hopefully, a few others.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  4. #4
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    Was this 'Jizzle's' incident? Either way, Great job! Spread the word!

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Glad to see that City officials are looking into this in an effort to prevent this kind of thing from happening again.

  6. #6
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    From the newspaper article on the case:

    St. John, 27, also had filed a claim for false arrest and battery, but the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico in Las Cruces denied it.
    I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering, why were the false arrest and battery portions denied?

    TFred


  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    From the newspaper article on the case:

    St. John, 27, also had filed a claim for false arrest and battery, but the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico in Las Cruces denied it.
    I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering, why were the false arrest and battery portions denied?

    TFred
    Read the opinion - judge explains it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    From the newspaper article on the case:

    St. John, 27, also had filed a claim for false arrest and battery, but the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico in Las Cruces denied it.
    I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering, why were the false arrest and battery portions denied?

    TFred
    Read the opinion - judge explains it.
    Hmm... I read it through when it was first released, I thought he was explaining why those portions weren't in the summary judgement, not that they were denied altogether. I was under the impression that they would proceed to trial.

    TFred

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,155

    Post imported post

    As always, the settlement includes no admission of wrongdoing by the police.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    95

    Post imported post

    What happens if one does not accept a settlement and takes this all the way?

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Statkowski wrote:
    As always, the settlement includes no admission of wrongdoing by the police.
    That is rather irritating, but nothing says "I was wrong" quite like a five figure check...

    We all know what really happened.

    TFred


  12. #12
    Regular Member DanM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,937

    Post imported post

    Carondalet wrote:
    What happens if one does not accept a settlement and takes this all the way?
    Then one takes the risk of getting all, some, or none of what one is asking for. That is what settlement is about: eliminating the adverse risks of getting little or nothing, at the expense of giving up your shot at getting most orall.
    "The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi . . ."--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

    “He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.”--M. K. Gandhi

    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." --M. K. Gandhi

  13. #13
    Regular Member DanM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,937

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    Statkowski wrote:
    As always, the settlement includes no admission of wrongdoing by the police.
    That is rather irritating, but nothing says "I was wrong" quite like a five figure check...
    Precisely. If wrongdoing is done, a five figure check from thewrongdoer is about the clearest admission of wrongdoing I can think of, in my book.

    In my opinion, when someone admits a wrong or apologizes, that's nice but it's just words. But if they agree topay significantlyfor their mistakes, then the restitution isreally sincere.
    "The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi . . ."--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

    “He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.”--M. K. Gandhi

    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." --M. K. Gandhi

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    DanM wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    Statkowski wrote:
    As always, the settlement includes no admission of wrongdoing by the police.
    That is rather irritating, but nothing says "I was wrong" quite like a five figure check...
    Precisely. If wrongdoing is done, a five figure check from thewrongdoer is about the clearest admission of wrongdoing I can think of, in my book.

    In my opinion, when someone admits a wrong or apologizes, that's nice but it's just words. But if they agree topay significantlyfor their mistakes, then the restitution isreally sincere.
    I agree; Didn't M. Jackson settle? Who thinks he was guilty? It's not often that someone settles and people don't think they are guilty of whatever wrong doing was accused in the suit.

    I do think it is important though, that these settlements are made public. The one thing a guy should do when settling his case is make sure of that. Otherwise no one knows how much it's costing to infringe on others rights.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  15. #15
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    San Diego, California, USA
    Posts
    405

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    From the newspaper article on the case:

    St. John, 27, also had filed a claim for false arrest and battery, but the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico in Las Cruces denied it.
    I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering, why were the false arrest and battery portions denied?

    TFred
    Judge Black threw out the False Arrest and Battery charges because St. John was not actually "arrested" and the physical contact did not rise to the level of "Battery."

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Holloman AFB, , USA
    Posts
    394

    Post imported post

    Sup guys. Yes that's me. I am glad it's over. Well everything is over besides the media part of it. I did a newspaper interview on friday and a TV news interview this morning. They ask more questions than the defense lawyers..

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tampa Bay, Florida, USA
    Posts
    412

    Post imported post

    flintlock tom wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    From the newspaper article on the case:

    St. John, 27, also had filed a claim for false arrest and battery, but the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico in Las Cruces denied it.
    I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering, why were the false arrest and battery portions denied?

    TFred
    Judge Black threw out the False Arrest and Battery charges because St. John was not actually "arrested" and the physical contact did not rise to the level of "Battery."
    Actually he denied St. Johns request for summary judgement on the battery portion of his lawsuit:
    Whether Defendants' actions would be offensive to a reasonable sense of personal dignity, and would thus constitute battery, is a question best left to a jury. Simply stated, a reasonable person—working with the limited factual record before the Court—may, but would not necessarily, find Defendants' contact offensive to their sense of personal dignity.

  18. #18
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    brboyer wrote:
    flintlock tom wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    From the newspaper article on the case:

    St. John, 27, also had filed a claim for false arrest and battery, but the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico in Las Cruces denied it.
    I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering, why were the false arrest and battery portions denied?

    TFred
    Judge Black threw out the False Arrest and Battery charges because St. John was not actually "arrested" and the physical contact did not rise to the level of "Battery."
    Actually he denied St. Johns request for summary judgement on the battery portion of his lawsuit:
    Whether Defendants' actions would be offensive to a reasonable sense of personal dignity, and would thus constitute battery, is a question best left to a jury. Simply stated, a reasonable person—working with the limited factual record before the Court—may, but would not necessarily, find Defendants' contact offensive to their sense of personal dignity.
    Yes, that is what I remember reading... so why is that part not continuing to trial?

    TFred

  19. #19
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Actually he denied St. Johns request for summary judgement on the battery portion of his lawsuit:
    Whether Defendants' actions would be offensive to a reasonable sense of personal dignity, and would thus constitute battery, is a question best left to a jury. Simply stated, a reasonable person—working with the limited factual record before the Court—may, but would not necessarily, find Defendants' contact offensive to their sense of personal dignity.
    Yes, that is what I remember reading... so why is that part not continuing to trial?

    TFred
    because they settled the case - all claims.

  20. #20
    Regular Member PaxMentis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Grants Pass, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    53

    Post imported post

    Jizzzle wrote:
    Sup guys. Yes that's me. I am glad it's over. Well everything is over besides the media part of it. I did a newspaper interview on friday and a TV news interview this morning. They ask more questions than the defense lawyers..
    Does the $21K cover the attorney fees?

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Hanover County, Virginia, ,
    Posts
    93

    Post imported post

    This case is also being discussed over at the Volokh Conspiracy (a legal blog).

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Holloman AFB, , USA
    Posts
    394

    Post imported post

    we dropped the battery claim because I accomplished everything that I wanted to. The judge made the call I was going for so there was no need to keep pushing for anything else.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Texas, United States
    Posts
    130

    Post imported post

    Good job and congrats. Maybe eventually, these places will leave us alone

  24. #24
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    Congrats on a nice clean win. Thank you for supporting my (our) 2nd Admendment Rights!

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956

    Post imported post

    Congratulations and thank you!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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