• 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.

Illegal detainment at Starbucks in Old Saybrook

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
I seem to be a good magnet for the really odd encounters, but this one takes the cake so far.

This morning I was sitting with my girlfriend at the bar area in the Old Saybrook Starbucks. I was open carrying like I normally do. We were both using our laptops, me doing some work, she was working on school work. The bar area is behind the main seating area, but we sit there because it has more space for us to spread out and get real work done. The area is not highly visible, but plenty of people can see us.

This is not at all our first time working in Starbucks (especially since they made the WIFI free!), and I open carry just about everywhere. Also, knowing Starbucks' national policy, we were even more at ease than normal (which is really relaxed!).

We were there for maybe about an hour when I started noticing various employees looking at me funny. Shortly after, two Old Saybrook police officers walk in. One turns out to be Sergeant Gardner. The other is without his uniform shirt. Sergeant Gardner walks up to where I am sitting and says hello. I turn around, say hello back, and turn back to my work.

He then asks me to step outside with him. I ask him "I'm sorry, am I being detained?". He replies that I am. I say ok, no problem. I then ask him if he minds if I reach in my pocket. He says ok, I do, he for some reason gets a bit alarmed, but I show him it is just my voice recorder. He seems fine with this. I arm the recorder and start recording.

As we walk outside, the officer proceeds to tell me that Connecticut is a 'concealed carry state'. I inform him that it is not. We get outside, where Sergeant Gardner proceeds to request my pistol permit. I reply to this effect:

"I will do that, but I want you to understand beforehand that I do not consent to any searches or seizures and that I am only giving you my permit under duress."

During which he rudely interrupts several times with demands for my ID. I make sure to finish, and supply him with my permit. He pauses for a second and then tells me he needs my drivers license as well. I again protest and tell him I don't understand what he needs it for since he should be more than fine with my permit. He insists (belligerently) and I again make it clear I am doing so under duress.

He takes my ID over to the parking lot where I assume he ran my IDs which obviously turn up nothing. During the time I speak to the other officer (his name escapes me at the moment, but I did get him to introduce himself on the recording). We have a bit of a conversation where I explain that he is incorrect about CT being a 'concealed carry state' and that open carry is legal and that they are not allowed under law to detain me or demand my ID. He of course does not agree. He states that I 'alarmed people' and that I would be subject to arrest for breach of peace. I politely but assertively inform him that breach of peace is a settled issue and that he is incorrect and that making an arrest like he is talking about would be a bad idea legally. We debate very briefly about the language of the statute, but I can tell he is only going to give me the standard drivel that we always get, and I choose to hand over the CCDL documents instead and invite him to take a good look since I think he could stand a refresher course on the law in CT.

He also makes the statement that I should look at my permit and that it is a 'concealed carry permit'. I tell it would be difficult to do so since they had seized it from me, but if he had a permit I would be happy to show him the error in his understanding. He says he does have a permit, but never produces it. What a shame.

A new officer (Patrolman Demarco) arrives on scene and relieves the officer detaining me. The Sergeant is still on the radio, and I think talking to another (possibly superior) officer who has arrived. Patrolman Demarco walks up and I strike up a conversation with him. I indicate "Just so you know I am armed, I am not sure what you know about this". He says that of course he knows I am armed, that is why he is here. No problem, just making sure I don't get shot or tackled by a nervous LEO who is not properly briefed on the situation.

I ask Patrolman Demarco "Are you aware open carry is legal in CT?". He replies "Yes". I laugh a bit and make a point that I shouldn't be detained if it is legal. He backtracks and says they are still trying to determine legality and such. That is fine. Whatever.

We talk a little bit more, I present him the same documents to help him out.

The Sergeant comes back to me and hands me my ID. The way he approached, I thought for sure I was being handcuffed, but obviously could not be too worried considering how wrong they were. It would have been a shame to waste my coffee though.

To my surprise it seems I am free to go. Sounds like someone talked this Sergeant down and explained the error in his thinking. Good on whoever did that. I wish they had been the responder and then maybe I wouldn't have been illegally detained in the first place.

The Sergeant goes inside to talk to the employees. I should mention that the first officer to detain me indicated that an employee (!!) had called them when I asked if this was a citizen complaint. He goes in, comes out a few minutes later and tells me I am free to go, but they don't want me inside. I say I understand that it is their right, but that I need to grab my laptop and my stuff before I go. He escorts me in and I pack up. During this time, I tell him he is letting me go, so he must have found out it is legal. He indicates that he still does not agree.

I find that point interesting. He feels I am breaking the law, but does not arrest me. Surprisingly, he doesn't even mention that I should conceal or anything else (I hear about this from most arrest free encounters).

So here I am. I am at the Meriden Starbucks now, no arrest, but in almost exactly the same condition as St. John from New Mexico.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...olice-pay-21-000-to-settle-open-carry-lawsuit

Interestingly enough, I was never disarmed though. I guess that is a step in the right direction? I still don't think any of this is acceptable, so this a pretty small consolation.

Now, for Starbucks involvement, I have tried contacting them, but they are not open on weekends, so I guess I will pursue this during the week. I think some serious violations of policy and customer relations happened here. We were all made to believe that their policy was that they would defer to state law and they would not provide a problem for open carriers as long as no law is being broken. And yet, I had the police called and I was asked to leave the store.

I cannot imagine it will be too difficult to rectify this through their customer relations, but I guess I will find out. I am more than a little disappointed in them. I wouldn't be able to argue too much if a customer had done this, but this was their employee.

We confirmed this a bit since my girlfriend was still inside when I was detained and listened to the employees mock, criticize and joke about my detainment stating opinions like "he can't do that, it needs to be concealed!" and such nonsense. Apparently she also got the clear impression of the actual employee who called it in, who was boasting about it.

Also, we have information that the police disclosed my permit status to the manager for no reason. Something I will pursue when I have the opportunity. That is another CT statute we need to make sure the Old Saybrook PD learns about.

More later, I will definitely release the recording when I have a chance to go over it and make sure no personal information (like I have any anymore thanks to officers...) is contained. I think I also need to trim the end off the recording since I think I let the recorder run a bit long.

Listened to a bit of it, and I think I got most of it. It is really windy today though and they made me stand outside shivering while I was detained, so it might be a little noisy. I will do my best.

Thanks everyone for beating it into my head to have a recorder. I think this should be a great example for future OCers what a CT police encounter can be like and how to respond appropriately. I will let you guys judge for yourselves though.

More to come... stay tuned...
 
Last edited:

kwikrnu

Banned
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
1,956
Location
Brentwood, Tennessee
Sounds like you did a good job. I hope you can file a lawsuit over the detention. There is nothing more frustrating and illegal than cops who abuse their power under color of law.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
I have contacted Sgt Gardner's supervisor (Sgt Roche) and discussed the incident. I also sent him a long email describubg the issues and with links to the wealth of information his officers need to be aware of.

I will post the email when I have a chance.

I have also made Ed Peruta and the CCDL aware of the issue.

I am anxious to see what starbucks corporate office has to say.
 

KIX

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
960
Location
, ,
I'd be very curious what corporate says as well.

Did your girlfriend get the employees name?

After all he discussions here, I also plan to record. I just tried a nice app for the droid that so far, sounds really good without having to carry another piece of equipment around.

Good call on "asking" about the recording. I'm VERY surprised he said yes!

Jonathan
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
IMHO -in any conversation/correspondence with Starbucks on this matter, it will be to your benefit to not belabor the details of the LEO interaction (details of who said what, illegal requests etc).

What will IMO be most effective is a short description of how long you were there, what you were doing and how the Starbuck employee was laughing and carrying on over your predicament that he/she caused. You were made a "scape goat".

The employee's attitude and actions, not yours, created a problem causing much personal, public embarrassment for you as well as negative publicity for the company.

Good luck - look forward to their response.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
Good call on "asking" about the recording. I'm VERY surprised he said yes!

To be clear, I did not ask permission, I simply showed him what was in my hand so that he would calm down. If he had objected, he would have been recorded or he would have had to arrest me anyway.

We don't have names, but we have been there enough to know each one. I plan to get the calls and radio traffic and such, so that will be important.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
IMHO -in any conversation/correspondence with Starbucks on this matter, it will be to your benefit to not belabor the details of the LEO interaction (details of who said what, illegal requests etc).

What will IMO be most effective is a short description of how long you were there, what you were doing and how the Starbuck employee was laughing and carrying on over your predicament that he/she caused. You were made a "scape goat".

The employee's attitude and actions, not yours, created a problem causing much personal, public embarrassment for you as well as negative publicity for the company.

Good luck - look forward to their response.

Absolutely.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
Find an attorney re possible lawsuit - what reasonable suspicion did the officer have that you were not licensed in order to detain you?

As for the police telling you the establishment did not want you there, that's generally a no go - the police are not agents of the owner, they are agents of the state - the owner or his agent must tell you to leave - possible option would have been to just go back inside and sit down again and continue your meal/drink and see if an owner or agent issues you notice to leave.
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
I would hope the employee faces discipline, but it will probably be for the attitude and comments made, not for calling the police.

We know that CT is an open carry state, but very few other people do. Not even the police, in this case. So while Starbucks' policy is to follow state law, in this case they thought they were.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
snip......

We know that CT is an open carry state, but very few other people do. Not even the police, in this case. So while Starbucks' policy is to follow state law, in this case they thought they were.

Somehow I seriously doubt it.

The gentleman was there for a considerably long time before the call was placed and add to that the witnessed/heard attitude expressed by the caller in talking to others after the police arrived.
 

larch

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
28
Why does the title of the thread say Wallingford but in your narrative you say you were in Old Saybrook?
 

ed

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
4,841
Location
Loudoun County - Dulles Airport, Virginia, USA
I then ask him if he minds if I reach in my pocket. He says ok, I do, he for some reason gets a bit alarmed, but I show him it is just my voice recorder. He seems fine with this. I arm the recorder and start recording.
My guess is "usually" you will get a NO on this request. When I OC, the recorder is ON and RECORDING when the GUN is ON and in OC mode. The recorder lasts all day on rechargable AA batterires and will capture any interaction I may have.. A LEO stop, a passerby, a Bad Guy encounter. YMMV.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
Find an attorney re possible lawsuit

We have a way to go first in figuring this out, but that is certainly an option on the table.

- what reasonable suspicion did the officer have that you were not licensed in order to detain you?

None. His stated reason on my recording is 'for carrying a firearm in the open'. As we all know, that is not an acceptable reasonable suspicion. He insisted it be on the record, and it is.

As for the police telling you the establishment did not want you there, that's generally a no go - the police are not agents of the owner, they are agents of the state - the owner or his agent must tell you to leave - possible option would have been to just go back inside and sit down again and continue your meal/drink and see if an owner or agent issues you notice to leave.

From the best I understand, the officer asked the staff (possibly a supervisor or the caller, not yet sure) if I was allowed to stay after telling the employees that I was not breaking any laws.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
We know that CT is an open carry state, but very few other people do. Not even the police, in this case. So while Starbucks' policy is to follow state law, in this case they thought they were.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law. Especially for the officers involved here.

The employees certainly had the right to call the police to question the legality, although looking it up online on the laptop one of them had open right next to us seems like it would be a far better idea to me. Of course, they could also just ask me too. That is what the majority of curious people do.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
Somehow I seriously doubt it.

The gentleman was there for a considerably long time before the call was placed and add to that the witnessed/heard attitude expressed by the caller in talking to others after the police arrived.

Including one of the employees making a statement about how I need to conceal it.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
My guess is "usually" you will get a NO on this request. When I OC, the recorder is ON and RECORDING when the GUN is ON and in OC mode. The recorder lasts all day on rechargable AA batterires and will capture any interaction I may have.. A LEO stop, a passerby, a Bad Guy encounter. YMMV.

I usually do this as well. However, I have to say my guard was down here. I have been to this starbucks before, sat in the exact same place doing the exact same things. The same staff was even present that time with them inches away from my side working on a pile of merchandise boxes that were stacked there.

If I had not been allowed to record, I would have not said a single word upon any request after being detained and just allowed them to figure it all out for themselves. A LEO should never be shy of having his actions recorded. If they are against it, they are likely not going to be anyone I want to converse or cooperate with.
 

Rich B

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,909
Location
North Branford, Connecticut, USA
Audio for illegal detention encounter on 10-16-10

http://subtlehustle.org/oldsaybrookillegaldetention/Old Saybrook illegal detention.mp3

Sorry about the audio quality, they insisted on us standing outside where the wind was whipping through. I did my best, and I think you can understand all of the relevant parts, but the wind sounds are certainly annoying.

The audio begins after I have already asked if I am being detained, Sgt Gardner says 'Yes'. I am being taken outside, and I had retrieved my voice recorder from my pocket. So you catch me saying "no it isn't" in reply to the other officer's question of "Are you aware that CT is a concealed carry state?".

Things to take note of:

- Sgt Gardner's increasingly aggressive (and unprofessional) attitude when I state my rights despite me being very cooperative and polite. There is no reason he cannot let me speak my part and then get my ID. During this time, I am retrieving my ID from my wallet, so I am already in the process of complying. At no time do I raise my voice, make threats, act rude or condescending. At no point do I indicate that I will not comply with any of his requests. I simply state on record that his requests are not legal. If he is confident of the legality of my detainment, why is he getting agitated and nervous? What is he implying he will arrest me for when he asks if I "want to take this further?". Is he threatening arrest or violence?

- The woman near the end who sees me, armed in detention with two officers squared off against me, who is obviously not at all alarmed or threatened by me who asks me and an officer for directions to the DMV.

- Right at the end as I reenter the store with Sgt Gardner, I ask "So I guess you talked to someone and found out this is legal?" he replies "I am not convinced" and I ask "Can I give you a few resources where you can get more information?" and he declines saying he has enough information. Interesting he is releasing an armed man from detainment when he feels that is breaking a law. Nevermind that he at no time mentions what a supposed charge would look like should he arrest me. Only the half uniformed officer mentions breach of peace to me and demonstrates his lack of understanding of that statute.

- A new officer walks up to relieve the half uniformed officer who is detaining me. I ask "So are you aware open carry is legal in CT?" he replies "Yes". So what am I being detained for? Why is this officer willing to step into what he knows to be an illegal detainment of a law abiding citizen?
 
Last edited:
Top