• 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.

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

J

Jizzzle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
394
Location
Holloman AFB, , USA
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.
 
M

McX

Guest
imported post

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

Batousaii

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
1,226
Location
Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
imported post

Thumbs Up! and congratzz. I am sure that was a very disturbing and turbulent scene, I am glad you accomplished your goal there, and may the rest of your days be uneventful.

:cool:Bat
 
R

rpyne

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,072
Location
Provo, Utah, USA
imported post

The only thing I see wrong with the settlement was that it did not include an admission of wrongdoing.

Settlements are often offered for the purpose of not having to admit wrongdoing and to mitigate the expense of a trial. If this were not the case here, there should have been an admission of wrongdoing. Without that admission, this case does very little for the cause of stopping police from violating our rights. They will view it as "we did nothing wrong, we just had to pay off this guy to avoid the cost of a trial.'

These cases need to demand that they admit wrongdoing or go to trial.
 
R

rpyne

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,072
Location
Provo, Utah, USA
imported post

Alamogordo Department of Public Safety Director Sam Trujillo (and president of the New Mexico Association of Chiefs of Police) told the Examiner.com today that his Department will be "examining that case with in-house counsel" with an eye toward refining police procedures and training to ensure that police officer contacts with open carriers do not offend the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Mr. Trujillo also said his Department will attempt to identify what circumstances, if any, under the law of trespass in New Mexico, police officers may act on behalf of private property owners to ask people carrying guns to leave private property, or if the private owner or his agent must provide this notice.
Click to expand...
In other words, they are going to take the time to figure out how they can continue to violate the rights of OCers and stay out of court.
 
M

mark edward marchiafava

Banned
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
2,269
Location
baton rouge, Louisiana, USA
imported post

rpyne wrote:
Alamogordo Department of Public Safety Director Sam Trujillo (and president of the New Mexico Association of Chiefs of Police) told the Examiner.com today that his Department will be "examining that case with in-house counsel" with an eye toward refining police procedures and training to ensure that police officer contacts with open carriers do not offend the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Mr. Trujillo also said his Department will attempt to identify what circumstances, if any, under the law of trespass in New Mexico, police officers may act on behalf of private property owners to ask people carrying guns to leave private property, or if the private owner or his agent must provide this notice.
Click to expand...
In other words, they are going to take the time to figure out how they can continue to violate the rights of OCers and stay out of court.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY correct. That's almost word for word what the Gonzales, Louisiana police said.
Click to expand...
 
N

Neo

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
181
Location
Huntsville, AL, ,
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..
Click to expand...

Congratulations and Thank You!
 
Statesman

Statesman

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
948
Location
Lexington, Kentucky, USA
imported post

Mr. Trujillo also said his Department will attempt to identify what circumstances, if any, under the law of trespass in New Mexico, police officers may act on behalf of private property owners to ask people carrying guns to leave private property, or if the private owner or his agent must provide this notice.
Click to expand...

Mr. Trujillo,

You sir, are a tyrant, and need to be thrown out of office. How dare you even suggest that police officers should be able "act on behalf of private property owners" to any degree. This shows you have ZERO respect for private property rights. I cannot believe I am reading such a statement made within the borders of the U.S.

New Mexico needs to purge you from office as soon as possible.
 
R

rpyne

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,072
Location
Provo, Utah, USA
imported post

Jizzzle wrote:
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.
Click to expand...
Did you really accomplish everything you wanted? Did the settlement include an admission of wrongdoing by the police? Unless it did, you did almost nothing to stop the abuse.
 
M

Mike

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

rpyne wrote:
Did the settlement include an admission of wrongdoing by the police? Unless it did, you did almost nothing to stop the abuse.
Click to expand...
Wrong conclusion - settlements by nature result in burying the hatchet - but by settling the City did not appeal the summary judgement optinion - that opinion now remains a good and solid rule of law for other judges tio cite to - the law is bilt one brick at a time and we need more bricks like this case.
 
R

rpyne

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,072
Location
Provo, Utah, USA
imported post

Mike wrote:
rpyne wrote:
Did the settlement include an admission of wrongdoing by the police? Unless it did, you did almost nothing to stop the abuse.
Click to expand...
Wrong conclusion - settlements by nature result in burying the hatchet - but by settling the City did not appeal the summary judgement optinion - that opinion now remains a good and solid rule of law for other judges tio cite to - the law is bilt one brick at a time and we need more bricks like this case.
Click to expand...
We will have to agree to disagree on this one. The two major reasons to settle are to avoid the cost of a trial and avoid admitting wrongdoing.

When they refuse to admit that they were in the wrong, the message they are sending to their officers is that what they did was perfectly alright and that the city will defend them in continuing such actions.
 
TFred

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

rpyne wrote:
Mike wrote:
rpyne wrote:
Did the settlement include an admission of wrongdoing by the police? Unless it did, you did almost nothing to stop the abuse.
Click to expand...
Wrong conclusion - settlements by nature result in burying the hatchet - but by settling the City did not appeal the summary judgement optinion - that opinion now remains a good and solid rule of law for other judges tio cite to - the law is bilt one brick at a time and we need more bricks like this case.
Click to expand...
We will have to agree to disagree on this one. The two major reasons to settle are to avoid the cost of a trial and avoid admitting wrongdoing.

When they refuse to admit that they were in the wrong, the message they are sending to their officers is that what they did was perfectly alright and that the city will defend them in continuing such actions.
Click to expand...
Actions and behavior that cost the city $21,000 will not be unaddressed by management.

TFred
 
R

rpyne

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
1,072
Location
Provo, Utah, USA
imported post

TFred wrote:
rpyne wrote:
Mike wrote:
rpyne wrote:
Did the settlement include an admission of wrongdoing by the police? Unless it did, you did almost nothing to stop the abuse.
Click to expand...
Wrong conclusion - settlements by nature result in burying the hatchet - but by settling the City did not appeal the summary judgement optinion - that opinion now remains a good and solid rule of law for other judges tio cite to - the law is bilt one brick at a time and we need more bricks like this case.
Click to expand...
We will have to agree to disagree on this one. The two major reasons to settle are to avoid the cost of a trial and avoid admitting wrongdoing.

When they refuse to admit that they were in the wrong, the message they are sending to their officers is that what they did was perfectly alright and that the city will defend them in continuing such actions.
Click to expand...
Actions and behavior that cost the city $21,000 will not be unaddressed by management.

TFred
Click to expand...
Maybe so, but the police chief already said that they are going to review the case to figure out how to continue the same policies without getting sued.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top