• 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.

** Legal Defense fund for Skidmark **

T

Tosta Dojen

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2008
Messages
183
Location
Roanoke, Virginia, USA
riverrat10k said:
§ 18.2-282. Pointing, holding, or brandishing firearm, air or gas operated weapon or object similar in appearance; penalty.

A. It shall be unlawful for any person to point, hold or brandish any firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any object similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another or hold a firearm or any air or gas operated weapon in a public place in such a manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another of being shot or injured. However, this section shall not apply to any person engaged in excusable or justifiable self-defense. Persons violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor or, if the violation occurs upon any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds or upon public property within 1,000 feet of such school property, he shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony.

B. Any police officer in the performance of his duty, in making an arrest under the provisions of this section, shall not be civilly liable in damages for injuries or death resulting to the person being arrested if he had reason to believe that the person being arrested was pointing, holding, or brandishing such firearm or air or gas operated weapon, or object that was similar in appearance, with intent to induce fear in the mind of another.

C. For purposes of this section, the word "firearm" means any weapon that will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel single or multiple projectiles by the action of an explosion of a combustible material. The word "ammunition," as used herein, shall mean a cartridge, pellet, ball, missile or projectile adapted for use in a firearm.

(Code 1950, § 18.1-69.2; 1968, c. 513; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1990, cc. 588, 599; 1992, c. 735; 2003, c. 976; 2005, c. 928.)
Click to expand...

I think subsection (B) is very interesting and useful to the case at hand. To paraphrase a bit, it authorizes a police officer to kill a person who's being arrested for brandishing a firearm. That makes an excellent test for whether certain acts constitute brandishing: Would it be OK for a police officer to kill somebody who's doing X? If not, then X isn't prohibited by this law.
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
riverrat10k said:
§ 18.2-282. Pointing, holding, or brandishing firearm, air or gas operated weapon or object similar in appearance; penalty.

A. It shall be unlawful for any person to point, hold or brandish any firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any object similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another or hold a firearm or any air or gas operated weapon in a public place in such a manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another of being shot or injured. However, this section shall not apply to any person engaged in excusable or justifiable self-defense. Persons violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor or, if the violation occurs upon any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds or upon public property within 1,000 feet of such school property, he shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony.

B. Any police officer in the performance of his duty, in making an arrest under the provisions of this section, shall not be civilly liable in damages for injuries or death resulting to the person being arrested if he had reason to believe that the person being arrested was pointing, holding, or brandishing such firearm or air or gas operated weapon, or object that was similar in appearance, with intent to induce fear in the mind of another.

C. For purposes of this section, the word "firearm" means any weapon that will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel single or multiple projectiles by the action of an explosion of a combustible material. The word "ammunition," as used herein, shall mean a cartridge, pellet, ball, missile or projectile adapted for use in a firearm.

(Code 1950, § 18.1-69.2; 1968, c. 513; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1990, cc. 588, 599; 1992, c. 735; 2003, c. 976; 2005, c. 928.)
Click to expand...

Tosta Dojen said:
I think subsection (B) is very interesting and useful to the case at hand. To paraphrase a bit, it authorizes a police officer to kill a person who's being arrested for brandishing a firearm. That makes an excellent test for whether certain acts constitute brandishing: Would it be OK for a police officer to kill somebody who's doing X? If not, then X isn't prohibited by this law.
Click to expand...

No, no - it does NOT "authorize" taking a life. This section only restricts civil liability of a LEO in the performance of his duty. There are other laws, policies etc that will come into play to determine whether the officer is within the scope of such rules - if not then all bets are off.

I understand your point though - I think that being that if deadly force had been used in reaction to pointing a finger, would the officer have the protection of this clause? That would be determined by separate action(s) to decide whether the officer was following such the guidelines, training, rules and whether he was negligent in his response. Should the officer be so determined to be negligent, he would lose the civil protection described therein.

In this case, it becomes a moot point though because deadly force was not employed by the officer. It is entirely another question as to whether those involved did in fact follow the guidelines/procedures of the respective departments. IANAL
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Sharing a letter

I have been forwarded a letter received by User which I am posting below having redacted certain personal and non-essential parts. This has been approved by the author and is published here with his permission.

Many have expressed their support through emails, PMs and with notes attached to PayPal. My intention here in posting this one submission is that it seems to consolidate on one page what so many have individually expressed. See for yourself.

Dan:

I continue to follow Skidmark's case via the link provided. I understand that the case has been continued until March.

Very interesting commentary regarding "lost" pre-trial filings, altered documents, etc. This is really beginning to smell badly. I expect that you are actively building this case, documenting the trashy tactics, etc.

Life has smiled upon me, from a financial standpoint, and I may be able to provide further assistance to a fellow citizen willing to stand up against (wholesome words fail me in describing those who would knowingly prosecute such cases, using such dubious tactics).

While I regularly support the NRA and other pro-civil rights organizations, Skidmark's case reminds us that there is no one safe from arbitrary and capricious legal action, and no court in which justice will be properly served, unless we choose to stand together in support of each individual's God-given rights as affirmed in our Constitution. This requires each person's best wishes, prayers of every believer, and material support from those having the means to provide.

As an American citizen I am deeply offended by the blatant disregard for the rights of any citizen. As a retired law enforcement officer I am shocked at the continuing abuse of our system of justice in the continued prosecution of this case.

Once again, if the comments of an honorably discharged Vietnam veteran and retired police chief can be useful in encouraging others to support the cause of individual liberty in the face of governmental tyranny, I hope that you will repeat what I have written as you see fit in pursuit of justice for your client, Skidmark.

Best regards,

Ray XXXX
11th generation American.
Police Chief, retired.
formerly Sergeant, US Army Airborne Infantry, Vietnam 1969-1971.
Proud father of two, grandfather of nine, great-grandfather of one fine
American.
Click to expand...
 
G

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
Grapeshot said:
I have been forwarded a letter received by User which I am posting below having redacted certain personal and non-essential parts. This has been approved by the author and is published here with his permission.

Many have expressed their support through emails, PMs and with notes attached to PayPal. My intention here in posting this one submission is that it seems to consolidate on one page what so many have individually expressed. See for yourself.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing that very inspiring letter!

When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle. Edmund Burke, 1770.
Click to expand...
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Thanks, Ray. Skidmark may be the immediate beneficiary of your generosity, but we will all benefit in the long run.
 
P

PWC_Glock

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
78
Location
PWC, Virginia, USA
Grapeshot said:
Skidmark is well educated in the principles and extremely dedicated to the cause - we have all benefited from his council.

Rally 'round the flag boys and girl's - now is the time to show our resolve and help set this right.

This a CALL TO ACTION for one of our own. The trumpet has sounded!
Click to expand...

I am not sure who on this educated me on open carry, however I am quite certain it was Grapeshot and/or Skidmark or both.

That said one of my MAG holders pulls a double duty and instead of a mag; my DAT recorder is running full time when I OC.

I hope skidmark rolled the same way.
 
Last edited:
S

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
Ray,

Thank you so much for standing by a fellow American in need.

Your letter made me smile, and I hope your contributions and your support for skidmark do the same for him.

Again, sincerely, thank you!

Jason
 
CenTex

CenTex

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
276
Location
,,
Very interesting commentary regarding "lost" pre-trial filings, altered documents, etc. This is really beginning to smell badly. I expect that you are actively building this case, documenting the trashy tactics, etc.
Click to expand...


USER, I hope that you take retired Chief of Police Ray's advise and that you will keep thorough records of all the shenanigans taking place with this case. If ever anything smelled in the proverbial Denmark, it is this. If you are able to win this case, it seems the cards are being stacked against you, you should take your incriminating evidence to the State Attorney General and see if the AG will take legal action against these worthless kangaroos. Genuine legal action needs to be dealt their way.


 
Last edited:
HeroHog

HeroHog

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
628
Location
Shreveport, LA
I have a CHEAP 6 year old Samsung YP=U1 1 gig MP3 player that also has voice recording capabilities. I discovered that the battery life when recording is GREAT and the recording quality/sensitivity was well beyond what I expected from it! I know fire that puppy up and verify it is recording before I strap on the gun.

There is no excuse for not having one of these in one form or another. They are just too cheap and easy to get now not to have one.
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
PWC_Glock said:
I am not sure who on this educated me on open carry, however I am quite certain it was Grapeshot and/or Skidmark or both.
.
Click to expand...

We tend to do the Frick and Frack thing.

I'm the one standing on the left ...............'cause Skid is always right. :lol:
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
palerider116 said:
18.2-461. Falsely summoning or giving false reports to law-enforcement officials.

It shall be unlawful for any person (i) to knowingly give a false report as to the commission of any crime to any law-enforcement official with intent to mislead, or (ii) without just cause and with intent to interfere with the operations of any law-enforcement official, to call or summon any law-enforcement official by telephone or other means, including engagement or activation of an automatic emergency alarm. Violation of the provisions of this section shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.


Unfortunately VA code does not anticipate the false reporting to be on the officer's part.
Click to expand...

I don't see how it fails to account for the possibility. The code reads "any person". So, if one "law-enforcement official", also qualifying as "any person", gives a false report as to the commission of a crime to another "law-enforcement official", how is that not a crime?
 
MSC 45ACP

MSC 45ACP

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,840
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
marshaul said:
I don't see how it fails to account for the possibility. The code reads "any person". So, if one "law-enforcement official", also qualifying as "any person", gives a false report as to the commission of a crime to another "law-enforcement official", how is that not a crime?
Click to expand...

I was sitting in the courtroom when "it" happened. It seems to me crimes were being committed so fast and so quietly within 10' of the judge I couldn't keep track with an abacus (and I used to be pretty good with an abacus)!!!
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Surry,Suuuury,sury sury Suuury, here Surry Surry......;)

Ya I know, I've bad - I'll take a time out now. :(
 
ixtow

ixtow

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
5,038
Location
Suwannee County, FL
doug23838 said:
There is some delicious irony in using PayPal to help the legal defense of a firearms enthusiast.
Click to expand...

Not really, they're still taking a cut.

Wanna bet GPal.com (previously GunPal.com) would have waived the Fee? On top of the fact that would wouldn't be feeding the enemy...

PayPal is evil.
 
Last edited:
C

curtiswr

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,133
Location
Richmond, VA, ,
ixtow said:
Not really, they're still taking a cut.

Wanna bet GPal.com (previously GunPal.com) would have waived the Fee? On top of the fact that would wouldn't be feeding the enemy...

PayPal is evil.
Click to expand...

Did Gpal/gunpal ever get the issue straight with people not receiving their money?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top