Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32

Thread: What would you do?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Saline, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    21

    Post imported post

    Say your driving in a parking lot and you cut someone off with your car on accident. You park, get out, and the guy starts arguing with you and notices you have a gun with you (concealed but he sees it). You part ways and go into the store even though he is still upset. Meanwhile, he calls the police and says that you pulled a gun on him even though you didn't. The cops get there and they trust his word over yours after finding the gun on you.

    What would you guys do in this situation? If you or someone you know has been in this situation, how was it handled? If your a LE agent, how would you handle this situation.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    .
    Last edited by T Vance; 09-20-2010 at 01:28 PM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    123

    Post imported post

    "(concealed but he sees it)."
    is this a trick question? Sort of like a "live corpse" isn't it?


    This is where my digital recorder comes in. His version wouldn't match up with my version and the recording. Obviously not as good as a video recording, but the words that were exchanged would throw doubt on his story. "He pulled his gun out and said he was going to blast me. officer!"

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Arizona, ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    yeah I would tell the cop what happened. Hopefully you have a few years of carrying behind you to show a trend of lawful activity and that brandishing is not what you do and you have the years of experience to prove it.
    Freedom isn't free, but this is America! We will find a way to outsource it and save some money - Jeremy

  5. #5
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290

    Post imported post

    Dunno if anyone else is bothered by it, but I see a basic flaw in this thread. Everyone is jumping to prove themselves innocent. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    jeremy05 wrote:
    yeah I would tell the cop what happened. Hopefully you have a few years of carrying behind you to show a trend of lawful activity and that brandishing is not what you do and you have the years of experience to prove it.
    That wont work in court, trust me, I know. I tried to bring in police reports about me OC in the past, my lawyer said they couldnt be used becausethey would be consideredhearsay.

    I would have brought them up anyhow, if the prosecutor said "objection" it gives you an opportunity to discuss it more. You cant unring the bell.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Innocent untill proven guilty? HA! that holds about as much weight as the constitution.

  8. #8
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290

    Post imported post

    stainless1911 wrote:
    Innocent untill proven guilty? HA! that holds about as much weight as the constitution.
    In your case it was a civil infraction which only requires 51% of the evidence one way or the other. In the scenario posted by the OP it would be a misdemeanor at least and possibly a felony which would entitle you to trial by jury and the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

  9. #9
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811

    Post imported post

    TheSzerdi wrote:
    Dunno if anyone else is bothered by it, but I see a basic flaw in this thread. Everyone is jumping to prove themselves innocent. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
    i fear that these days it has basically became guilty until proven innocent.

    especially with OC
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  10. #10
    Regular Member eastmeyers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,383

    Post imported post

    Quick story. I was out with a few people, and we were drinking (I was obviously not armed because of drinking), someone started a fight with me so I defended myself. He called the police and told them I pistol whipped him, police came out asked me what happend and told me to have a good night, and not to drive. End of story, now I'm sure if it was some ***** cop things could have been worse but not this time.

    Oh the guy that called PD is someone I use to hang out with and knew I normally carried.

    God Bless
    "Bam, I like saying bam when I cite something, in fact I think I shall do this from here on out, as long as I remember.
    Bam!" - eastmeyers

    "Then said he to them, But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his sack: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
    Luke 22:36
    God Bless

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Yes, I was referring to it in general, not my case in particular.

    For instance, my license was suspended before I was found responsible. --before = guilty without conviction, = guilt untill proven innocent.

    I once had to take random alcohol/breath tests at my cost, before even a pretrial. Thecase was dismissed, but still, punishment without conviction = guilt without conviction, = guilty until proven innocent.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Clio, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    363

    Post imported post

    This kind of possible scenario is exactly why i love my recorder. I have hard evidence of a non-threatening encounter they have hearsay.

    JMO

    Devery

  13. #13
    Regular Member eastmeyers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,383

    Post imported post

    So to answer your question I guess it would

    1. Depend if I knew the cop, if so just tell him what happened

    2. Didn't know that cop and was a dick head, than I would Shut The F*ck Up

    3 Cop seemed annoyed that this other guy called him out for some BS, than I would be up front, and suggest he go talk to the people in the store I was going into and see how I was acting when I came in.
    "Bam, I like saying bam when I cite something, in fact I think I shall do this from here on out, as long as I remember.
    Bam!" - eastmeyers

    "Then said he to them, But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his sack: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
    Luke 22:36
    God Bless

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    manicdevery wrote:
    This kind of possible scenario is exactly why i love my recorder. I have hard evidence of a non-threatening encounter they have hearsay.

    JMO

    Devery
    Just remember a recorder can easily be confiscated and your tape removed or erased. Especially when you have incriminating evidence on an officer. The only real safe way is broadcast it offsite where it can be stored offsite. Also carry multiple recorders.

  15. #15
    Regular Member eastmeyers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,383

    Post imported post

    mikestilly wrote:
    manicdevery wrote:
    This kind of possible scenario is exactly why i love my recorder. I have hard evidence of a non-threatening encounter they have hearsay.

    JMO

    Devery
    Just remember a recorder can easily be confiscated and your tape removed or erased. Especially when you have incriminating evidence on an officer. The only real safe way is broadcast it offsite where it can be stored offsite. Also carry multiple recorders.
    If you have a smart phone than download the "Cop Recorder", its a free app! It hides the recorder, and its hard to turn off! And nearly impossible to earase, its sneaky!
    "Bam, I like saying bam when I cite something, in fact I think I shall do this from here on out, as long as I remember.
    Bam!" - eastmeyers

    "Then said he to them, But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his sack: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
    Luke 22:36
    God Bless

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    The key is still broadcasting. Your phone can be seized and or broken beyond repair in which the most fancy recording app with be rendered useless..

  17. #17
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756

    Post imported post

    eastmeyers wrote:
    So to answer your question I guess it would

    1. Depend if I knew the cop, if so just tell him what happened

    2. Didn't know that cop and was a dick head, than I would Shut The F*ck Up

    3 Cop seemed annoyed that this other guy called him out for some BS, than I would be up front, and suggest he go talk to the people in the store I was going into and see how I was acting when I came in.
    Police are not much interested in how folks act before or after a possible crime... they want to know who did what at the time it happened in order to arrest the person who did the thing at the time the thing was done.

    Later... in court... character witnesses, including those folks you mentioned being in the store you were going into, might... I say might, carry some weight with the judge/jury.

    I have no doubt that officers have heard someone say... "Don't you know who I am!!!????" as they put the cuffs on them... and the officer says something on the order of... "Yes Sir. I do." or "You will have an opportunity to explain that to the judge." ...as he locks the cuffs down.

    So, to the cop, it just doesn't matter who you are or how great a citizen you have been nor how long you have been such a great citizen.... as long as he/she has evidence that will stand up in court to prove that a crime was committed by you... regardless of how upstanding you were before, or after, the crime.

    The above is not to say that the Mayor's story wouldn't be more believable to an officer than a skid row bum's story......:what:

    I gotta go buy a voice recorder!!!! The comment by Manicdevery about hard evidence as opposed to hearsay is one of the best things I've read so far!
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    If the cop erases or breaks something couldnt the cop be charged with tampering, obstroction or malicious destruction? He may even be violating some fedral FCC thing?

    A cop like this should be fired, and sent to prison, but should not be allowed to hide his identity as a former LEO while in prison.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    Ability to transmit to off site recording device is the way to go. This "Cop Recorder" on smart phone is a good idea. Even if they take your smart phone, whatever is already on record will be out of reach

    eastmeyers wrote:
    mikestilly wrote:
    manicdevery wrote:
    This kind of possible scenario is exactly why i love my recorder. I have hard evidence of a non-threatening encounter they have hearsay.

    JMO

    Devery
    Just remember a recorder can easily be confiscated and your tape removed or erased. Especially when you have incriminating evidence on an officer. The only real safe way is broadcast it offsite where it can be stored offsite. Also carry multiple recorders.
    If you have a smart phone than download the "Cop Recorder", its a free app! It hides the recorder, and its hard to turn off! And nearly impossible to earase, its sneaky!

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    I know in a court for a person to be found guilty it requires that the prosecution demonstrate by a preponderance of evidence or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime. In other words that the prosecution must prove guilt rather than the defendant prove innocence. I have seen this in and actual case where I wa on the jury that the defendant did not provide any testimony or witnesses on his behalf, rather depended on the jury to determine if the prosecution had proved their case.

    The Constitution phohibits unreasonable bail so if a person in Innocent until proven Guilty then why do they even have to put up bail. The question I want to know is where the "Innocent until proven guilty" phrase come from and what exactly does it mean? In the OP we do have a good case where someone is accused of something that we feel that he did not do but how does he prove it? He should not have to prove that he did not pull a gun but since we have a witness that says that he did how do we determine who is lying? This is very similar to many rape cases where the woman says he did and the man says he did not. We can hope that the LEO or someone is a witness and can provide actual truth but I am afraid in the OP's case he is going to be in trouble and hopefully that if there are not other witnesses that he can tell a more believable story than the other person.

    Most have advised the OP to not say anything without a lawyer but that will probably result in an arrest and trial. But if you should decide to talk to the police be sure of a couple of things, one is that you tell the truth and not give opinions or make accusations. Second is that be sure of your story before you say anything and never change your story. A changing story is sure to sway the jury that you were lying at some time.

    On a different note I just left the courtroom from being called for jury duty. I was struck from the case as they didn't want anyonewho looked like theyhadsome sense on the jury.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    stainless1911 wrote:
    If the cop erases or breaks something couldnt the cop be charged with tampering, obstroction or malicious destruction? He may even be violating some fedral FCC thing?

    A cop like this should be fired, and sent to prison, but should not be allowed to hide his identity as a former LEO while in prison.
    Sure but just like your case it's your word versus another. You know how that crap goes. Not only that look at the long history of the law enforcement code of silence. Did you like the outcome of your case? Think how different it would have been if you had a video of everything to play in court.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    I know in a court for a person to be found guilty it requires that the prosecution demonstrate by a preponderance of evidence or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime.┬* In other words that the prosecution must prove guilt rather than the defendant prove innocence. I have seen this in and actual case where I wa on the jury that the defendant did not provide any testimony or witnesses on his behalf, rather depended on the jury to determine if the prosecution had proved their case.┬*

    The Constitution phohibits unreasonable bail so if a person in Innocent until proven Guilty then why do they even have to put up bail.┬* The question I want to know is where the "Innocent until proven guilty" phrase come from and what exactly does it mean?┬* In the OP we do have a good case where someone is accused of something that we feel that he did not do but how does he prove it?┬* He should not have to prove that he did not pull a gun but since we have a witness that says that he did how do we determine who is lying?┬* This is very similar to many rape cases where the woman says he did and the man says he did not.┬* We can hope that the LEO or someone is a witness and can provide actual truth but I am afraid in the OP's case he is going to be in trouble and hopefully that if there are not other witnesses that he can tell a more believable story than the other person.┬*

    Most have advised the OP to not say anything without a lawyer but that will probably result in an arrest and trial.┬* But if you should decide to talk to the police be sure of a couple of things, one is that you tell the truth and not give opinions or make accusations.┬* Second is that be sure of your story before you say anything and never change your story.┬* A changing story is sure to sway the jury that you were lying at some time.

    On a different note I just left the courtroom from being called for jury duty.┬* I was struck from the case as they didn't want anyone┬*who looked like they┬*had┬*some sense on the jury.
    Yeah your talking a criminal trial only. Civil trial is much different and much less of a burden. A simple false charge of a violation of your CPL is a civil infraction. I will in no way let that one happen to me if I can have anything do with it.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    mikestilly wrote:
    PT111 wrote:
    I know in a court for a person to be found guilty it requires that the prosecution demonstrate by a preponderance of evidence or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime. In other words that the prosecution must prove guilt rather than the defendant prove innocence. I have seen this in and actual case where I wa on the jury that the defendant did not provide any testimony or witnesses on his behalf, rather depended on the jury to determine if the prosecution had proved their case.

    The Constitution phohibits unreasonable bail so if a person in Innocent until proven Guilty then why do they even have to put up bail. The question I want to know is where the "Innocent until proven guilty" phrase come from and what exactly does it mean? In the OP we do have a good case where someone is accused of something that we feel that he did not do but how does he prove it? He should not have to prove that he did not pull a gun but since we have a witness that says that he did how do we determine who is lying? This is very similar to many rape cases where the woman says he did and the man says he did not. We can hope that the LEO or someone is a witness and can provide actual truth but I am afraid in the OP's case he is going to be in trouble and hopefully that if there are not other witnesses that he can tell a more believable story than the other person.

    Most have advised the OP to not say anything without a lawyer but that will probably result in an arrest and trial. But if you should decide to talk to the police be sure of a couple of things, one is that you tell the truth and not give opinions or make accusations. Second is that be sure of your story before you say anything and never change your story. A changing story is sure to sway the jury that you were lying at some time.

    On a different note I just left the courtroom from being called for jury duty. I was struck from the case as they didn't want anyonewho looked like theyhadsome sense on the jury.
    Yeah your talking a criminal trial only. Civil trial is much different and much less of a burden. A simple false charge of a violation of your CPL is a civil infraction. I will in no way let that one happen to me if I can have anything do with it.
    If I proclaim that you pulled a gun on me, isthata civil infraction? I would have thougt that was a criminal infraction much like assault. Or is that a civil infraction also?

  24. #24
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Smithc11369 wrote:
    Say your driving in a parking lot and you cut someone off with your car on accident. You park, get out, and the guy starts arguing with you and notices you have a gun with you (concealed but he sees it). You part ways and go into the store even though he is still upset. Meanwhile, he calls the police and says that you pulled a gun on him even though you didn't. The cops get there and they trust his word over yours after finding the gun on you.

    What would you guys do in this situation? If you or someone you know has been in this situation, how was it handled? If your a LE agent, how would you handle this situation.

    First thing I would do is kick myself for letting the other fellow see my gun. That's my bad.

    Next thing I do is hope the cops will listen to my side of the story and explain it them as convincingly as possible.

    If they don't buy it and charge me, then I kick myself again--for the money I'll have to pay my lawyer to either a) defend me against the charge, or, b) prove my innocence.

    What's the old saying around here?

    Ah, it is:

    Concealed means concealed!




  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Smithc11369 wrote:
    Say your driving in a parking lot and you cut someone off with your car on accident. You park, get out, and the guy starts arguing with you and notices you have a gun with you (concealed but he sees it). You part ways and go into the store even though he is still upset. Meanwhile, he calls the police and says that you pulled a gun on him even though you didn't. The cops get there and they trust his word over yours after finding the gun on you.

    What would you guys do in this situation? If you or someone you know has been in this situation, how was it handled? If your a LE agent, how would you handle this situation.

    First thing I would do is kick myself for letting the other fellow see my gun. That's my bad.


    What's the old saying around here?

    Ah, it is:

    Concealed means concealed!


    Um, this is an open carry forum. Why not check out USCCA.

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
  •