Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 159

Thread: Arrest and Dismissal of Disorderly Conduct Charges for Open Carry

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    This narative of what is alledged to have happened on the night of May 16th has been taken from public records obtained from the Prosecutor in GA 7 on May 25th when the false charge of Disorderly Condcut was dismissed.



    Mr. Richard Burgess is currently in the process of obtaining more records and recordings that will tell the story. OBVIOUSLY THIS INCIDENT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED AND REVEALED SO EVERYONE CAN GET AN IDEA OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE LAW.



    On 05/16/10 at approximately 1910 hrs, I was dispatched to 950 Yale Avenue in Wallingford along with Ofc. Garcia, Ofc. Gonzalez, Ofc. Fraenza, and Sgt. Colavolpe for the report of a man carrying an exposed firearm inside Yale Billiards. Yale Billiards is a recreational billiards hall with a full service liquor bar and numerous pool tables. We arrived on scene at approximately 1918 hrs and met in the parking lot with the complainant Mark Vanaman (DOB 4/24/65).



    Vanaman explained to me that there was a white male wearing green shorts and a navy blue t-shirt carrying a fully exposed firearm in a holster on his right hip along with two magazines on the small of his back. He explained that he asked the man, later identified as Richard Burgess (DOB REDACTED) to conceal his weapon and the he told him, and Burgess told him that he can legally carry it this way and to get away from him. Vanaman told Burgess again that it was illegal to carry his firearm exposed like that and he was making people uncomfortable. Vanaman told him that if he did not conceal it then he was going to call the police, and Burgess told him to do what he had to do. Vanaman then walked outside and called the Wallingford Police Department to report the incident. While Vanaman was outside, Burgess and his girlfriend, who was later identified as Anna Marie FiIipkowska (DOB REDACTED) went outside and sat on a bench directly to the left of the front door to the establishment. Ofc. Gonzalez and Ofc. Fraenza went to the rear of the building to ensure that Burgess did not try to leave the area while Sgt Colavolpe, Ofc. Garcia, and I approached the front of Yale Billiards. We located Burgess sitting on a bench outside the establishment. Burgess had a semi-automatic handgun in a holster on his belt, along with two magazines. All three items were clearly visible, as the subject had his shirt tucked into his waistband. Sgt Colavolpe immediately seized the firearm along with the two fully loaded magazines from Burgess. The gun was identified as a 40 caliber Glock 23 semi-automatic handgun, was fully loaded, and had a round in the chamber. Burgess was then handcuffed by Ofc. Garcia. Burgess then asked, "What am I being arrested for." Sgt Colavolpe then explained that he was being arrested for Disorderly Conduct and then Burgess said, "If you arrest me then you will have big problems because I am allowed to open carry like this, read the paperwork." Burgess had paperwork on the bench next to him. The paperwork was in a pamphlet format titled, "Is That Legal? A guide to understanding your CT gun rights". Burgess had a CT Pistol Permit in his possession. The handgun was verified by the State Police Message Center as being registered and was negative for any hits in NCIC.



    I then spoke with the owner of Yale Billiards, Robert Hilton (DOB 6/20/68). Hilton stated that Burgess had been in his establishment for approximately one hour when several people began to come up to him and tell him that there was a man with a gun playing pool making them feel uncomfortable. Hilton then asked Burgess to please conceal his weapon while inside his establishment. Burgess then told him that he was trying to make a point and that it is his right to open carry his gun. Burgess then handed him paperwork regarding carrying firearms in Connecticut. Hilton then explained that it would be best if he left the establishment. Burgess agreed and he and Filipkowska went outside and sat on a bench just to the left of the front door.



    Hilton then called the Wallingford Police Department to report the incident because he did not believe that it was legal to have the gun exposed. Burgess told me, as well as Hilton that he was trying to make a point. Burgess undoubtedly made a point and caused inconvenience, annoyance, and alarm to patrons inside Yale Billiards. It estimated that there were approximately twenty to twenty-five patrons inside Yale Billiards while Burgess was there. Burgess was transported to Wallingford Police Headquarters by Ofc. Garcia. He was fingerprinted and processed, UAR #2043924. Burgess was charged with Disorderly Conduct in violation of C.G.S. 53a-182. He was released on a Written Promise to Appear and given a court date of 5/25/10 for 0900 hrs at G.A. 7.



    The 40 caliber Glock 23 handgun, three Glock brand 13 round capacity magazines, and 40 Winchester brand 40 caliber hollow point rounds were seized. The items were returned to Burgess upon his release from headquarters and he acknowledged receipt by signing the Return of Compliance section of the Inventory of Property Seized Without a Search Warrant Form.



    Case closed by arrest, End of Report.

    SUPPLEMENTAL NARRATIVE:



    On 5/16/10 when Burgess was released from custody I escorted him outside to the front of the police department to release his firearm, magazines, and bullets to him. When I handed Burgess his property he said, "Thank you for being so polite, I appreciate it, but you know you are going to see me again." He then shook my hand, took possession of his property, and left.



    On 5/17/10 at approximately 1715 hrs, I went to Yale Billiards located at 950 Yale Avenue, unit25 in Wallingford to speak with the owner Robert Hilton regarding the incident that occurred in his establishment the previous night. Hilton was attempting to download the video surveillance of the incident that occurred on 5/16/1 O. Hilton agreed to provide me with a voluntary sworn statement regarding the incident.



    Summary of Hilton's Written Statement:



    Hilton explained that on 5/16/10 at about 6: 10 pm he arrived to work at Yale Billiards and there were approximately 35 patrons inside the establishment. A white male wearing shorts, a navy blue shirt, and his hair in a pony tail came in at about 6:55 pm with a female with curly blond hair. Sarah Dobensky and Dave Zaborowski were inside the establishment and told Hilton that there was a man playing pool with a fully exposed gun on his hip. Hilton explained that Dobensky told him the man with the gun was making her uncomfortable, so he went and asked the man to cover up his gun. The man told him that he would not cover it up because he was trying to make a point. Another male named Greg (last name unknown) expressed his concern to Hilton about the man with the gun just as another patron, Mark Vanaman was telling the man with the gun that what he was doing was illegal. Hilton then asked the man with the gun to leave because he felt uncomfortable, was concerned for the safety of his customers, and thought that it might be illegal. The man with the gun then went outside and sat on bench with the female that he arrived with.



    Refer to written statement for further details.



    While I was taking the statement from Hilton, Burgess (the man with the gun from 5/16/10) arrived on scene. Hilton went to speak with him and Burgess asked Hilton if it was okay that he was here. Hilton asked him if he was carrying a weapon and he said, "No." Burgess then explained that he wanted to speak to Hilton and that he had a news reporter that wanted to speak to him as well. Hilton explained to Burgess that he was busy, but he could wait if he wanted to. Burgess went outside and waited on the same bench that he sat on 5/16/10.



    I then then spoke to another patron of Yale Billiards, Dave Zaborowski who was present the night during the incident. Zaborowski agreed to provide me with a voluntary sworn statement.



    Summary of Zaborowski's Statement:



    Zaborowski explained that on 5/16/1 0 at about 6:30 pm, he went to Yale Billiards to hang out and play pool. He noticed a white male with shorts, a blue shirt, and a pony tail. He noticed that the male had what appeared to be a fully exposed gun on his hip and two extra clips on his belt. He explained that he never saw anyone carry a weapon like that and wondered why this man needed so much protection. He then told his friend Bobby (Hilton) about the man with the gun and pointed out that he was playing pool right next to a man with a younger kid. Refer to written statement for further details.



    On 5/17/1 0 I spoke to Sarah Dobensky over the telephone because she was in New Jersey for the next week. Dobensky is an employee of Yale Billiards and opened the establishment on 5116/10 at approximately 1650 hrs. I spoke with Dobensky and she explained what occurred to me. I then asked Dobensky if she was willing to provide me with a tape recorded statement of her account of what occurred inside Yale Billiards on 511611O. Dobensky agreed and allowed me to record our conversation on 5/17/10. After finishing the statement, Dobensky swore to it.



    Summary of Dobensky's Statement:



    Dobensky stated that she opened Yale Billiards on 5/16/1 0 at approximately 4:50 P.M. She reported that between 5:30 and 6:30 a bigger white male wearing brown shorts, a blue T-shirt tucked into his shorts, and his hair in a pony tail came in. She then overheard Dave Zaborowski say, "Does that guy have a gun." She looked over and noticed the male with the brown shorts and blue T-shirt had a gun on his hip in an orange colored holster fully exposed. She also noticed that he had two extra clips near his back. She stated that she had never seen this man before, she felt nervous, and uncomfortable especially because there was a man and a young kid playing pool right next to the man with the gun. She asked her boss, Robert Hilton if he would go and speak to the man with the gun because she felt uncomfortable.



    She explained that Hilton went over to speak with the man with the gun then began walking away, when another patron, named Mark Vanaman approached the man. Dobensky explained that Vanaman told the man with the gun that he was not allowed to carry a gun like that not concealed and that he was calling the police. She noticed that just after this, that the two tables next to the man with the gun picked up their things and left the establishment suddenly. Hilton then walked back over to the man with the gun and asked him to leave. Shortly after, the man packed up his things and went outside and sat on a bench outside the establishment.



    Refer to recorded statement for further details.



    On 5/17/1 0 at approximately 2142 hrs Mark Vanaman came to the Wallingford Police Department and agreed to provide me with a voluntary sworn statement regarding an incident that occurred on 5/16/10 at approximately 1900 hrs.



    Summary of Vanaman's Statement:



    Vanaman explained that on 5/16/10 at 6:00 P.M. he went to Yale Billiards located at 950 Yale Avenue, Wallingford to play in a pool league that he is in. (Statement reads 5/17/1 0, should read 5/16/10.)



    Shortly after 7:00 P.M. he noticed about four tables away there was a white male approximately 5'7" to 5'8" tall, approximately 250 pounds with a mustache, goatee, and wearing his hair in a pony tail. He noticed the male was wearing a gun on his right hip in a holster and two extra clips on his belt. He watched the owner Robert Hilton speak to the man with the gun then walk away. He then approached the male and asked him if he was going to cover his gun up. The male asked Vanaman if he was a police officer and he replied that he was a concerned citizen. The male with the gun then said, "Then get the **** away from me." Vanaman told the man that he was going to call the police if e did not cover his weapon. The man with the gun replied, "Good that's what I want you to do." Vanaman explained that he has had a valid Connecticut Pistol Permit for the past 24 years, but was not carrying a firearm on 5/16/10 while he was in the pool hall. He also explained that he has been a Bail Enforcement Agent for the past 8 years and that he has never seen anyone carry their weapon in the open like this man was doing.



    Vanaman explained that he became very concerned for the safety of himself and others in the pool hall because in his opinion this was not normal behavior. He also felt threatened by the man's actions because he did not know him or what he was going to do with his weapon. Vanaman went outside, about 75 feet away from the establishment, called the police, and waited there until they arrived.



    Refer to written statement for further details.



    On 5/18/1 0 at approximately 1645 hrs Detective Houlihan and I went to Yale Billiards to retrieve the surveillance video from 5/16/10. Hilton explained to us that when he went to watch the video that he had downloaded for us, he discovered that it was during the morning hours, 12 hours prior to the time of the incident. Hilton explained that the time on the recorder was off and he had been unaware of it. He then attempted to watch the correct time, but it had already been recorded over. The video was irretrievable.



    End of Supplemental Narrative



    STATEMENT TAKEN BY: Ofc. D. Flood #175.



    I Mark Vanaman do hereby give this statement to Officer Flood of my my own free will and under no threats or promises made to me regarding the following incident which occurred on or about 5/17/10 at approximately 7:05 P.M. I live at the above address with my family and have resided there for the past 12 years. I am employed as a bail bondsman.



    On 5/17/10 at approximately 6:00 P.M. I went to Yale Billiards located at 950 Yale Avenue Wallingford to play pool in a league that I am in. At about 7:05 P.M. I noticed about 4 pool tables away from me a white male approximately 5'0 7" to 5’ 08” tall, approximately 250 pounds with a mustache, goatee, and his hair in a pony tail. He was wearing a blue t-shirt, shorts, and sneakers. I noticed the male was wearing a gun on his right hip in a holster and two extra clips on his belt. I also observed that Robert Hilton, the owner of Yale Billiards was talking with the man wearing the gun. I waited for Robert to walk away from the man to see if-he was going to cover up his weapon. I saw that he began shooting pool again and noticed that he did not cover up his weapon. I then approached the man and asked him if he was going to cover up his weapon. The male then asked me if I was a police officer. I replied, "No", a concerned citizen. The man then replied, "Then get the **** away from me. "I then said back to him, "Are you going to cover your weapon or not." He then said, “No I am not going to cover my weapon." I told him if he was not going to cover his weapon then I was going to call the police. The many replied, "Good that's what I want you to do.



    IMark Vanaman have had a valid Connecticut Pistol Permit for the past 24 years, but was not carrying a firearm this night 5/16/1O. I have been a Bail Enforcement Agent with the State of Connecticut for the last 8 years. In all of my experiences I have never seen anyone carry their weapon out in the open like this man was doing. I became very concerned for the safety of myself and the other people in the pool hall because in my opinion this was not normal behavior. I felt threatened by this man's actions because I did not know him or what he was going to do with his weapon. I then walked outside into the parking lot approximately 75 feet away from the establishment and called the Wallingford Police to report the incident. The Wallingford Police arrived a short time later and I met them in the parking lot. When they arrived I lifted my shirt up and turned around in a circle to show the police that. I was not carrying a weapon.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    This was indeed my incident. I have a long, more accurate version of what happened that night. I have posted my account of that night.

    Remember that the accounts from the aggressor (Mr. Vanaman) and from the officers is not necessarily accurate. There are more than a few inconsistencies and untruthful statements present that I will start to point out here. A written statement has been submitted to the police department who will be submitting the same charge of disorderly conduct on the aggressor (Mr. Vanaman) to the state's attorney.

    There is also a current internal investigation being conducted into the Wallingford Police Department's conduct that night.

    Meanwhile, I am free and clear of any charges, I am just mopping up the mess afterwards. I assure everyone I was in no way provocative, hostile, nor did I say anything that Mr. Vanaman claims that I did. Notice his story told by Officer Flood on 5/16 suddenly inflates into me allegedly using foul language and aggressive behavior when he was brought in for a statement on 5/17 and likely told that I was not arrested for open carry. I have no doubt the change in statement is influenced by Mr. Vanaman's realization that he is the only one who was disorderly that night since I was not breaking the law.

    Carry on!
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, CT
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    "Thank you for being so polite, I appreciate it, but you know you are going to see me again."

    I hope this means what I am reading it to mean. It sounds like a great false arrest, 4A violation, and 1983 case. No such thing as open and shut but this one sounds close.

    Thanks for doing all the leg work on this Ed.


  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, CT
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    Question for you Rich: Did you willingly hand over your permit before they cuffed you? Did you hand over any other ID or was it taken from you as a result of a search?



    Also, what does this mean: "The handgun was verified by the State Police Message Center as being registered . . . ."

  5. #5
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    GunTotingLawyer wrote:
    "Thank you for being so polite, I appreciate it, but you know you are going to see me again."

    I hope this means what I am reading it to mean.*
    I believe it was a little misquoted, although I don't have too much of a complaint with it. My actual statement was more along the lines of "Thank you for your help, I appreciate it, I am sorry this is going to turn out badly for you."

    I intend to use this to make as much of a big deal out of it as possible. Like I said in my last post, I am hoping charges will be filed against the aggressor (a decade in Bail Enforcement and you think verbally assaulting someone in public for a lawful activity and then lying on sworn statements is acceptable?), I have a wrongful arrest complaint in at the PD which is being actively investigated, and I have vowed to make this as public as possible with Ed's help.

    So far we were able to get all of this dismissed and make all of this progress without legal counsel. I did not want to retain legal counsel for a base rate of $1500 just to see this case dismissed. However, I am completely open to ideas if a lawyer wants to take up this fight. Like you said, it should be a slam dunk.

    I will take this as far as resources allow since I think it is great example case.

    Feedback welcome.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  6. #6
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    GunTotingLawyer wrote:
    Question for you Rich:* Did you willingly hand over your permit before they cuffed you?
    No. I was handcuffed immediately after they removed my firearm from my holster which was immediate as well. It actually took a surprising amount of time for them to finally look at my permit. I assume they didn't care about my permit since they just immediately assumed I was a criminal. After all, I was carrying a firearm!

    * Did you hand over any other ID or was it taken from you as a result of a search?
    It was all taken from my wallet after they emptied my pockets when they searched me on scene. See my original reply to Ed's post for a complete (and very accurate account of this incident).

    Also, what does this mean: "The handgun was verified by the State Police Message Center as being registered . . . ."
    I have no clue. I was hoping someone else would explain that to me.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    I have just ended a phone conversation with Mark Vanamanthe person who confronted Richard Burgess and called the Wallingford Police Department.

    I called to give him a courtesy heads up that this information is posted on open carry.

    Mr. Vanaman a 24 year permit holder is convinced that he had the right to confront Mr. Burgess and call the police and appears willing to do it again.

    Mr. Vanaman was politely advised that open carry is legal in CT and remains convinced that it is NOT.

    With uneducated permit holders we are all in trouble.

    In the New Mexico St. John case the Federal Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff Mr. St. John and he walked with a very nice settlement for being detained. St JohnWAS NOT ARRESTED.


    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 Ohio, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.


    Mr. Vanaman should have kept his nose out of this situation and left it up to the owner to resolve the problem.

    If anyone was disorderly it was Mr. Vanaman.

    There also seems to be problems with the informaiton he provided to the Wallingford Police Department about what was or was not said by Mr. Burgess.

    Let the attorneys sort it out, I'm sure that this is not over.

    Taken from the DPS website for Bail Enforcement agents.

    VANAMAN, MARK J 315 Approved 04/22/2011 313 GROVE ST MERIDEN CT 06451 (203) 537-9030


  8. #8
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    Edward Peruta wrote:
    Mr. Vanaman a 24 year permit holder is convinced that he had the right to confront Mr. Burgess and call the police and appears willing to do it again.
    Lets hope that the State's Attorney will pursue the disorderly conduct charge and (hopefully) the charge for lying on a sworn statement that I brought up with the Sgt I filed my statement with.

    I would feel differently if someone in this position was apologetic upon being corrected on the law, but the (defamatory) lying on the statement he wrote made it clear to me that he is not interested in being reasonable.

    I hope either the police or the courts can make him understand the law in the necessary manner.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, CT
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    Edward Peruta wrote:
    In the New Mexico St. John case the Federal Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff Mr. St. John and he walked with a very nice settlement for being detained. St JohnWAS NOT ARRESTED.

    The St. John case may not hold much water in CT because our carry laws are considerably different. A permit is required to carry in CT whereas NM has no such requirement for open carry.

    I do not have time to go through a full legal analysis right now (I have to work sometimes) but you can read the analysis I worked out last night on the Alabama board.

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum59/44464-3.html

    My post is near the bottom.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    I understand open carry is legal but if you were making people uncomfortable why not conceal . Its the polite thing to do,.much like not smoking and chocking everyone else. Of course its our right to carry but stilll???

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, CT
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    dadpharm wrote:
    I understand open carry is legal but if you were making people uncomfortable why not conceal . Its the polite thing to do,.much like not smoking and chocking everyone else. Of course its our right to carry but stilll???
    Smoking produces smoke that contacts other people. Having a holstered pistol does no such thing. We are talking apples and oranges. Just because you do something that is completely legal that happens to make people "uncomfortable" does not justify an illegal arrest, search, and seizure. If anything, it justifies the owner of the establishment to kick him out which I believe happened here.

    Are we really at the point where people can say with a straight face that others should just avoid doing things that make others "uncomfortable"? If I stand on a street corner and spout religious retoric (which some guys do every time there is an event at the XL center), it probably does make people uncomfortable but would you really tell me to stop? Would you support me being arrested? That example is much closer to what is going here than cigarette smoke.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    Edward Peruta wrote:
    The male then asked me if I was a police officer.
    Incorrect. I asked "Are you the owner? Are you an employee? Are you a police officer?". I had just talked to someone who represented themselves as the owner and that person was still visible. I was understandably confused why this person felt the need to be involved.

    I replied, "No", a concerned citizen.
    Very incorrect. He never at any time lowered his voice (he leaves out the fact that he was yelling at me at a volume that had the 35-40 people in the busy pool hall all paying attention to what was happening. He also never answered any of my questions. He only continued to yell that I needed to conceal or he was going to call the police. After that, he went to the middle of the room yelling at/to the owner and other patrons that what I was doing was illegal and that I could not carry a firearm 'like that' in a place that served alcohol.

    The man then replied, "Then get the @#$% away from me.
    Absolutely false. I never said any such thing. Never. I am confident the witnesses I have from that night will not back up Mr. Vanaham's assertion. As you can see, this important fact was also not in the original police reports, nor were they present in anyone else's statements.


    "I then said back to him, "Are you going to cover your weapon or not." He then said, “No I am not going to cover my weapon."
    I don't think he ever actually waited for a response, but this was correct. I was not going to cover my firearm.

    I told him if he was not going to cover his weapon then I was going to call the police.* The many replied, "Good that's what I want you to do.
    False. I did not reply that. I said "That is fine.". I certainly did not want the police called, but I certainly was not afraid of them. The owner had already asked me if it would be alright if he called the police to check on the legality and I told him it would be fine as well. I figured this was going to be inevitable after my conversation with the owner, but I was confident I could work this out with the police and the owner.
    *
    In all of my experiences I have never seen anyone carry their weapon out in the open like [/b]this man was doing.
    I guess he has never seen a police officer. Never been to Hoffman's?

    I became very concerned for the safety of myself and the other people in the pool hall because in my opinion this was not normal behavior. I felt threatened by this man's actions because I did not know him or what he was going to do with his weapon.
    But not threatened enough to not charge me, get into my face and verbally assault me?


    When they arrived I lifted my shirt up and turned around in a circle to show the police that. I was not carrying a weapon.
    Why on earth would this be something necessary if he had a clear conscience and he was operating under clear judgement? There would be no crime in carrying a firearm if he has 'had a permit for 24 years' and did not engage in verbally assaulting someone just minutes before.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  13. #13
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    dadpharm wrote:
    I understand open carry is legal but if you were making people uncomfortable why not conceal .
    I offered to leave twice to the owner if I were making anyone uncomfortable in our original conversation and he told me not to. He never asked me to conceal, and I had no obligation to do so. I also informed him I was leaving (of my own accord) after the verbal assault to not be involved in any further disruptions to his business.

    Its the polite thing to do,.much like not smoking and chocking everyone else. Of course its our right to carry but stilll???
    Apples and oranges.

    I should also mention that there would have been no time for me to conceal had I felt the need to between the time the owner finished talking to me and Mr. Vanaham attacked me verbally. If I did have time, it would not be something I would be comfortable doing in a room full of people, and it would only result in a thin piece of cloth hanging over said firearm. I somehow doubt this would alleviate anyone's concerns.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  14. #14
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    GunTotingLawyer wrote:
    If anything, it justifies the owner of the establishment to kick him out which I believe happened here.
    Incorrect. Despite the owner's statement, I offered to leave twice in the first conversation. After the verbally assault by Mr. Vanaham, the owner approached me again and I told him we were going to leave. He agreed that that would be a good idea. I left of my own accord, I was never 'kicked out'. After the first conversation where I offered to leave twice, the owner actually told me to 'stay and play pool'.

    Are we really at the point where people can say with a straight face that others should just avoid doing things that make others "uncomfortable"?* If I stand on a street corner and spout religious retoric (which some guys do every time there is an event at the XL center), it probably does make people uncomfortable but would you really tell me to stop?* Would you support me being arrested?* That example is much closer to what is going here than cigarette smoke.
    If I was a minority race in this pool hall, would anyone support the same actions taken against me simply because of my race?
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, CT
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    Rich: I stand corrected on the facts of your case. I was trying to explain that a private property owner has the right to ask you to leave and if you do not, to call the police and possibly have you arrested for tresspass.

    As for the racial question - I think that is a perfect hypothetical.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    In the statement of the owner, he acknowledges that Rich offered to leave without being asked to do so which is not what the police report says.

    The statements will be posted in PDF form in the near future.

    As for the New Mexico case being different, this is correct. New Mexico does not require a permit. But with a valid permit in the possession of Mr. Burgessthe playing field is leveled and the situations become almost identical.

    The fact that the complainant approached and confronted a person who was acting legally is the problem, especially since the individual has had a permit for 24 years.

    If he was truly distressed, he would never have approached Mr. Burgess unarmed for the purpose of confronting him in a loud and disturbing manner.


    What upsets me is the fact that the owner and the instigator who confronted Rich both have permits and don't know the law.



  17. #17
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    Edward Peruta wrote:
    He then told his friend Bobby (Hilton) about the man with the gun and pointed out that he was playing pool right next to a man with a younger kid.
    This is true, and the child and the two adult males with him seemed to have no issue with me carrying a firearm. We remarked several times in fact about how much better the child was than we were.
    *
    Vanaman told the man with the gun that he was not allowed to carry a gun like that not concealed and that he was calling the police[/b]. She noticed that just after this, that the two tables next to the man with the gun picked up their things and left the establishment suddenly.
    Agreed. No one was fleeing the establishment when I entered with my handgun in plain site. No one appeared angered or threatened. The disruption in business was caused by Mr. Vanaham as noted in my second discussion with the owner.

    *
    He watched the owner Robert Hilton speak to the man with the gun then walk away. He then approached the male and asked him if he was going to cover his gun up.
    And Mr. Vanaham even admits to purposely causing a scene despite the fact that he was aware that the owner and I were dealing with the situation politely and calmly.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  18. #18
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    GunTotingLawyer wrote:
    I was trying to explain that a private property owner has the right to ask you to leave and if you do not, to call the police and possibly have you arrested for tresspass.
    And this is exactly what I explained to the owner who did not seem aware of this at first.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  19. #19
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    Edward Peruta wrote:
    What upsets me is the fact that the owner and the instigator who confronted Rich both have permits and don't know the law.
    What disturbs me even more is that we have a BEA who has been a permit holder for 24 years and not only did he not understand the law, he also continues to ignore the fact that he was wrong about the law even though he has been informed of his error. I wasn't even arrested for having the firearm open and I had the police admit that open carry is legal and that they 'need to be more educated' about open carry after I was booked.

    He has now stated (on the phone with Ed) that he would perform the same criminal behavior against a law abiding citizen again.

    This is a dangerous person IMO.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    I cannot attached the PDF but will try a link so all can readthe hand written statement of the owner which DOES NOT match what was written in the police report of the Wallingford Police Department.


    Having trouble posting the link, so Copy from www to the end of PDF and paste this link into your browser to view statement.


    http://www.ctgunrights.com/01.News/Billiard%20Hall%20Owner's%20statement0001.pdf


    Here is what the owner said in his statement:

    "I asked him to please cover the gun up. He replied, "No I won't do that, but I will leave if you want me to." I told him to just hang out a while and he handed me a pamphlet on CT gun laws. I started to walk back to the front to call the Police to see if it was legal or not. As I was walking away another male named Greg came up to me and told me that the guy over there was carrying a exposed gun. I also heard Mark Vanaman telling the male with the gun that what he was doing was illegal. At this point I told the male that he would have to leave because people were getting upset and uncomfortable. The male agreed and went outside and sat on a bench outside and said that he would wait for the Police........

    This is a very telling statement about what really happened. Rich Burgess appears in this statement to be very polite and professional even when confronted by others in a very loud and disturbing manner.









  21. #21
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    Edward Peruta wrote:
    At this point I told the male that he would have to leave because people were getting upset and uncomfortable.* The male agreed and went outside and sat on a bench outside and said that he would wait for the Police
    And not that it is a big deal, but again, the truth of the matter is that the owner seemed bewildered and confused and did not get the chance to ask me to leave. I told him as soon as he came over (maybe 30 seconds after Mr. Vanaham's tantrum) that I would leave.

    That being said, I can understand the confusion and haze many people probably have from that night. I certainly don't remember every single thing said to me verbatim in the two hours, but I am sure of these things. It also really doesn't matter who spoke first since I was within the law regardless. Just like to see the truth rise to the top.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Post imported post

    Off to the State Appellate Court to listen to two gun cases being argued today at 2pm.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    12

    Post imported post

    While I think we all agree this was not a perfect experience, look how far we've come in CT since James Goldberg's experience in just a few years!

    While he was arrested (completely without justification, mind you), he is already cleared of all charges, didn't have his pistol permit illegally seized and revoked, and received his weapon back, sounds like on the same night after being arrested. As opposed to having your permit seized, waiting years for an appeal to the board, fighting lingering criminal charges, and having your weapon destroyed, this is huge.

    Well done!

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Agreed, this has been an interesting (for me) journey watching how things unfolded (and in the case of the charges unraveled).

    I agree with you Rich that the aggressor is a problem and will likely remain one, if he is willing to cause these disturbances after being told they are legal then he will hopefully find himself on the end of a judge's wrath for wasting police time or filing false reports.

    I'm sure there is going to be more coming out, I sure hope so and that the aggressor winds up with more than a smack on the wrist.

    Thanks to you for doing the right thing, and also keeping us informed about it. Thanks also to Ed for spending your time helping all of us with our rights.

    Good to have you back in the state again.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    lcatct wrote:
    While I think we all agree this was not a perfect experience, look how far we've come in CT since James Goldberg's experience in just a few years!

    While he was arrested (completely without justification, mind you), he is already cleared of all charges, didn't have his pistol permit illegally seized and revoked, and received his weapon back, sounds like on the same night after being arrested.* As opposed to having your permit seized, waiting years for an appeal to the board, fighting lingering criminal charges, and having your weapon destroyed, this is huge.

    Well done!
    Thank you, but we have a lot of work to do. They never even talked to me before taking my firearm and handcuffing me. Even when I was in handcuffs I was ignored and treated like a criminal.

    Their only reasoning for this was that they were sure that open carry was illegal. I was originally to be charged for breach of peace, but when I was being booked the police apparently found out I was right and they were wrong. The police don't seem to want anyone to know this, because one of Officer Flood's reports states that I asked what I was being arrested for when they placed me in handcuffs and that they told me 'Disorderly Conduct'. This is a lie. I was told 'Breach of Peace' for carrying a firearm openly.

    I told them that would not work and that they would all be in a lot of legal trouble should they choose to pursue that. I was told again I was being arrested for breach of peace when Officer Garcia was about to transport me. I was only informed of 'Disorderly Conduct' while I was being booked and Officer Garcia tried to get me to consent to waive my rights. I asked him what I was being charged for , if anything, and he replied 'Disorderly Conduct'. I told him "No thanks, I will not be waiving any rights today." and I clammed up about the incident. I was far too confused about why the charge had changed and what possible reason they were coming up with for charging me with disorderly conduct. I asked them if they had heard about the James Goldberg case and what happened to Glastonbury PD when I was on the scene, but they informed me they had no idea what I was talking about.

    So there is a lot to be fixed still. GunTotingLawyer is absolutely right. They really messed this up, right from their very first contact. Mr. Vanaham should have been arrested that night, not me. Hopefully we are fixing this little issue.

    Don't look at this as proof of some big step. I would say this is a baby step from the James Goldberg case. We will have made real progress when the police take our side on scene instead of a criminal's simply because we are polite and professional and completely within the confines of the law.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

Page 1 of 7 123 ... 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
  •