Troll much do you?
Any evidence he has would be correctly NOT posted here, but saved for court.
The media being traditionally anti-police has to be one of the biggest jokes of the year - you funny G.I. :lol:
-
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.
-
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.
Fox 2 is going to do an ANTI-OC news story, probably tonight
- Thread starter lancers
- Start date
Troll much do you?
Any evidence he has would be correctly NOT posted here, but saved for court.
The media being traditionally anti-police has to be one of the biggest jokes of the year - you funny G.I. :lol:
point is you have you rights. you tell them you have done nothing illegal and then shut the hell up. the more you talk and say useless bullcrap is most likely part of the reason they wanted to do this piece, the other half was probably your past.
you get arrested, stop talking. they try to make conversation in the car, stop talking. you of all people should of knows they have a/v equipment in jails. stop talking.
everthing this LEO did was wrong, and you should have asked for a lawyer and sue the **** out of the department. yuo had no reason to produce id because you were doing nothing illegal. did you ask what reasonable suspicion he had for detaining you?
you get arrested, stop talking. they try to make conversation in the car, stop talking. you of all people should of knows they have a/v equipment in jails. stop talking.
everthing this LEO did was wrong, and you should have asked for a lawyer and sue the **** out of the department. yuo had no reason to produce id because you were doing nothing illegal. did you ask what reasonable suspicion he had for detaining you?
YOu can check it out on fox2news webspace, the video is onlne.
You really talked some serious smack in the cell, your going to have a tough time and represented rights advocacy very poorly.
I will grant that they did some spin, but dude, you came off like some punk that WANTS to shoot someone.
Your going to have to get a grip on the 1st amendment and learn to keep your mouth shut. There is no right to privacy inside jail, booking or your cell, only when you are talking to your lawyer.
IMHO you blew it huge and are going to have more issues than you bargained for and saying that you did it on purpose, sounds like a set up and your comments will help them sell that very theory, any case you had went to NADA even though you did nothing illegal.
You really talked some serious smack in the cell, your going to have a tough time and represented rights advocacy very poorly.
I will grant that they did some spin, but dude, you came off like some punk that WANTS to shoot someone.
Your going to have to get a grip on the 1st amendment and learn to keep your mouth shut. There is no right to privacy inside jail, booking or your cell, only when you are talking to your lawyer.
IMHO you blew it huge and are going to have more issues than you bargained for and saying that you did it on purpose, sounds like a set up and your comments will help them sell that very theory, any case you had went to NADA even though you did nothing illegal.
Superlite27
Regular Member
Nevermind.
My momma always said......
My momma always said......
Last edited:
ChiangShih
Regular Member
http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-ff-police-watchdog-arrested-20110321,0,4193285.story
I'll throw my opinion into this mess when i catch up.
I'll throw my opinion into this mess when i catch up.
ChiangShih
Regular Member
Alright, yeah that news story was pretty bad. If you did have a case built up I doubt it would go anywhere especially after this. I also find it strange that they launch a huge news story on you after you threatened to take the mishaps of the arresting officers to the media.
Some of what you said in the jail cam blows my mind. I understand adrenaline was high and you were mouthing it up to another inmate, but seriously who were you trying to impress. Honestly, this whole thing is one great big PR nightmare and has probably set the movement back quite a bit.
I know this has probably already been said, but when we go to our meets, we should discuss and reinforce the proper way to speak and handle one's self in an event like this.
Don't get me wrong, I feel bad for OP; however, we might want to consider PR damage control.
Some of what you said in the jail cam blows my mind. I understand adrenaline was high and you were mouthing it up to another inmate, but seriously who were you trying to impress. Honestly, this whole thing is one great big PR nightmare and has probably set the movement back quite a bit.
I know this has probably already been said, but when we go to our meets, we should discuss and reinforce the proper way to speak and handle one's self in an event like this.
Don't get me wrong, I feel bad for OP; however, we might want to consider PR damage control.
jad316
Regular Member
like I said earlier waiting to see if Maplewood changes there policy on open carry in the future?
Jim
Jim
sohighlyunlikely
Regular Member
Sad indeed
I am a lose for words for this whole thing. It will not change How I carry or where I carry but I am considering giving the OC city hall tour a break for a couple of weeks to let this pass. My biggest issue is I have lost what little hope I had on HB841. I think your actions as portraying yourself as even having the vaguest thought of what you said to the other gentleman in your cell. Will at least for now tarnish the OC accomplishments and reputation.
Doc
I am a lose for words for this whole thing. It will not change How I carry or where I carry but I am considering giving the OC city hall tour a break for a couple of weeks to let this pass. My biggest issue is I have lost what little hope I had on HB841. I think your actions as portraying yourself as even having the vaguest thought of what you said to the other gentleman in your cell. Will at least for now tarnish the OC accomplishments and reputation.
Doc
lancers
Regular Member
Well the jail video was clearly snipped and clipped. The whole thing was about the officer's being nonchalant and that if I was a bad guy, I could have shot them. They obviously weren't worried about me was the point I made in the video. Of course after it was cut up, that is not how it came out. Why the **** would I ever shoot a cop? I wasn't even doing anything wrong.
Last edited:
as I stated earlier, you need to become familiar with the 1a issues as well. It has nothing to do with your civil rights and everything to do with your motive and you as Sohighly alluded to have dealt a blow to the OC movement due to your jail house talk.
Cut tape? perhaps, but here is a CLUE, perception is the rule and it is the rule of law and the perception of Brett as unfair as it is, is not positive sir.
This sucks for all of us and damage control may be non-existent. you wiped out the victim status and you do not even know it.
As a HARSH critic of yourself in the past, yet an advocate of yourself within this situation, I find myself hard pressed and embarrassed for my support. You let your self serving mouth override your butt sir and while I shared my families namesake and a law firm that would assist you and possibly discount the fees, I doubt there will be much anyone can do for you beyond charges dropped and you finish your fuss with the speeding issue of your own accord.
You might want to dial it down a LOT, but that is your call. After your comments, expect nothing beyond neutrality as I feel I have been burned the second time.
As much as I hate to say it Doc, I agree with you completely. What lancers said in the jail cell was pretty much inexcusable, as it was presented on the video. Of course, there were probably other words than that, and we all know that TV stations are good at editing. In general, I would not encourage talking about shooting police and laughing about it, no matter the circumstances. That's going to always be viewed in a dim light.
A lot of the channel's story is at odds with what lancers told us. But, the damage has been done, and I doubt that they will follow up should lancers' story checks out. For example, lancers says that St. Louis County filed the warrant for his arrest in error. The story said that he was arrested for a warrant, which is technically true, but never discovered that the warrant was in error. That's not necessarily lazy reporting on their part, but there was no one to explain it to them. Certainly the chief wasn't in a mood to be forthcoming about things that would make him look bad.
I suppose the damage can be repaired, but it's going to require a series of near miracles. And I'm sure none of it will be without lancers prevailing in a bunch of legal actions.
lancers
Regular Member
I told them about the warrant and even gave him the phone numbers of people to call, but he said since I dind't give him the story from the start, he was taking "another angle".
ChiangShih
Regular Member
Hopefully these legal actions don't hang on the bad warrant defense.
This reminds me of the USSC case U.S. vs. Leon where the police conducted the search, but the search warrant was later found to be invalid because the police lacked the probable cause for a warrant to be issued in the first place. The evidence obtained in the search was upheld anyway, because the police performed the search in reliance on the warrant, meaning they acted in good faith.
This may not be directly applicable but you get my point.
The damage control aspect from this would have to be counter PR, a press release response or something. Some way for the community to put out a firm response and position on the matter supporting OC and condemning all unlawful actions on behalf of police and condemning all half brained remarks on behalf of OP.
A press release may not get much play on the news (if any) but we could upload it to MOOC.org, youtube, facebook, and if we are lucky they'll publish the response at minimum on their website, or we can post it directly into the comments of the article they posted online. It is a thought.
ChiangShih
Regular Member
A bad warrant does nothing to negate the arrest. If it is shown as active that is probable cause to arrest. Also the LEOs can not be held responsible for filing issues within the court house.
Last edited:
The warrant remains secondary, no matter the opinion of his jailhouse comments, I believe Brett on that part.
The rest is a wash and have been rendered moot, but without regard, his status as a citizen was not in question prior to the stop, his comments afterward are POINT of LAW.
I am not happy to learn of those comments however, I am not a supporter of his rights being violated, I am just sad he is not able to control his PIE HOLE!
Was Mr. Darrows actions PRIOR to contact adequate for engagement? Open carry has been defined by SCOTUS as not enough, the unfortunate part is Mr Darrows actions post haste indicate to a jury perhaps not, perhaps so but the bottom line is simple, it remains an unknown and if NOT his case leaves a lot to be desired.
I am disappointed.
The rest is a wash and have been rendered moot, but without regard, his status as a citizen was not in question prior to the stop, his comments afterward are POINT of LAW.
I am not happy to learn of those comments however, I am not a supporter of his rights being violated, I am just sad he is not able to control his PIE HOLE!
Was Mr. Darrows actions PRIOR to contact adequate for engagement? Open carry has been defined by SCOTUS as not enough, the unfortunate part is Mr Darrows actions post haste indicate to a jury perhaps not, perhaps so but the bottom line is simple, it remains an unknown and if NOT his case leaves a lot to be desired.
I am disappointed.
lancers
Regular Member
They should have never checked to see if I had a warrant.
ChiangShih
Regular Member
I understand that; however, before they ran the check, did you physically hand them your ID or verbally and willfully identify yourself in anyway? What I'm asking is, did your identification come as a direct result of your willful action?
lancers
Regular Member
They got my ID after I was in cuffs in the back of the police car and they took it from me.
That is NOT true.
I HATE to side with others on such issues, but that is dependent upon RAS and since the initial contact is questionable and your own honesty post event comes into question I have no idea if RAS requirements were met or not.
Here is a clue, if RAS is to not exist, there had better be 0 reason for it to exist. The average joe will give name, you opted not to, you had a warrant. Convince me you did so because of your rights vs a warrant after your cop shooting comments make it to court!
Sorry Mr Darrow, tis is not a good case again, the problem is, this time YOU got screwed!
I got NOTHING to help you out of it and I think you were indeed violated.
ChiangShih
Regular Member
I have to agree with LMTD. The case doesn't sound very strong. I could be wrong, you may be able to fight the detainment angle, but the fact that you had a warrant would only support the LEOs, who will undoubtedly argue all the right things and back each other up.
Also, my bet is the news story is in response to your media threats. It was probably an attempt to preempt bad media coverage and make you look as bad as possible. It worked.
-edit- It also succeeded in making the rest of us look bad too.
Also, my bet is the news story is in response to your media threats. It was probably an attempt to preempt bad media coverage and make you look as bad as possible. It worked.
-edit- It also succeeded in making the rest of us look bad too.
Last edited: