Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 58

Thread: Maplewood 911 Call and Dispatch Audio from Open Carry Incident

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231

    Maplewood 911 Call and Dispatch Audio from Open Carry Incident

    I was finally able to get a hold of the 911 call and dispatch recordings from March 12th, 2011 when the police responded to the Maplewood Wal-Mart and arrested me.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSV69CAy6Bw


    This was also included in the information that was given:




    Here is a copy of the Maplewood Police Policy involving warrant arrests. You can clearly see the warrant MUST be confirmed before the suspect is arrested. If you remember the video I posted before, the warrant was never confirmed until after I was on my way to jail clearly indicating I was arrested for something besides the warrant. You can hear it in the dispatch recording as well.


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Imperial, Missouri.
    Posts
    105
    hopefully you'll make good use out of this information. "LAWYER/LAW SUIT" BTW have you got your gun back?

  3. #3
    Regular Member xc9subcompact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Secure Undisclosed
    Posts
    106
    Now they will come after you here when they hear the part about assault, weapons, disturbance. (without knowing the history of why that is on the record)

    I like the part where the dispatcher changed the description of your location from near the checkout to near the cash register!

    Any indication when you get the written reports from the responding and arresting officers?
    Last edited by xc9subcompact; 04-16-2011 at 12:04 AM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by jad316 View Post
    hopefully you'll make good use out of this information. "LAWYER/LAW SUIT" BTW have you got your gun back?
    No gun yet. I just went and bought another one this last week because even IF I get this one back, I don't want it after they have played around with it. Likely to have a bullet show up on some crime scene.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    396
    Nature: Weapon Violation.

    Oh really? I wonder what exactly they think the violation was in order to include that. I really hope you can stick them on this entire incident. This whole episode really pisses me off much like that one that you caught on tape earlier where the officer is threatening to make stuff up on you since you didn't cower to him, forfeit your rights and lick his boots. Personally, I think that officer should have went to jail and faced a felony charge for that kind of conduct and am tired of the wrist slapping that goes on when the power granted to people in our government is being abused.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    396
    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    No gun yet. I just went and bought another one this last week because even IF I get this one back, I don't want it after they have played around with it. Likely to have a bullet show up on some crime scene.
    I wouldn't feel too comfortable about it either.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by xc9subcompact View Post
    Now they will come after you here when they hear the part about assault, weapons, disturbance. (without knowing the history of why that is on the record)

    I like the part where the dispatcher changed the description of your location from near the checkout to near the cash register!

    Any indication when you get the written reports from the responding and arresting officers?
    Yes. That is all from when the drunk off-duty cop attacked me in a parking lot back in 2005, nearly shooting me in the head. I got charged with all of that good stuff and the grand jury came back with a no true bill after I testified in front of them. They found I acted in self-defense. This summer I am going to get all of that expunged.

    I probably won't get that report for a while. This is the letter I forced the chief to give me today. After the clerks told me again, "you have to wait for the chief to send you a letter, I told them I am going to be there every hour they are open demanding they give me the documents I requested. She went and got the chief and he typed up this letter for them to give me.





    RsMO 610.100.1(5) defines what an investigative report is. It says it is, “a record, other than an arrest or incident report, prepared by personnel of a law enforcement agency, inquiring into a crime or suspected crime, either in response to an incident report or in response to evidence developed by law enforcement officers in the course of their duties.”

    RsMO 610.100.2 says that, “All incident reports and arrest reports shall be open records.”

    Investigative reports and incident/arrest reports are different documents, but he fails to understand that or just doesn't want to.

    What I find funny, he refers to RsMO 610.100 subsection (5)-2. That makes no sense since that doesn't even exist. I guess he is referring to 610.100.2. There is no 610.100.(5)2. He assumes that subsection 2 goes with the (5) because it is below it? How can a police chief not understand how the statutes are coded? How is he supposed to enforce them? It is scary this is what I'm dealing with.
    http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C600-699/6100000100.HTM

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by MK View Post
    Nature: Weapon Violation.

    Oh really? I wonder what exactly they think the violation was in order to include that. I really hope you can stick them on this entire incident. This whole episode really pisses me off much like that one that you caught on tape earlier where the officer is threatening to make stuff up on you since you didn't cower to him, forfeit your rights and lick his boots. Personally, I think that officer should have went to jail and faced a felony charge for that kind of conduct and am tired of the wrist slapping that goes on when the power granted to people in our government is being abused.
    HA. Yes. That cop is a Sgt. in Velda City right now!
    http://www.veldacitypolice.com/vp/JS...Fu%3D660638172

    I got a phone call from some women not too long ago after she called everyone else in the phone book named Darrow. She said she was stopped by him and harassed in a similar manner and was looking for the attorney I used.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Mo., ,
    Posts
    490
    So your trying reallly hard to get everyone on an OC board to believe you , but won't lawyer up ? Not sure what you will win here, but good luck ... I guess .

  10. #10
    Regular Member xc9subcompact's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Secure Undisclosed
    Posts
    106
    RSMO 571.070? That is the fugitive from justice crap. Still holding on to the hope of a felony to try and justify. How pathetic.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    613
    "He does have previous offenses for assault..." said the dispatcher...

    First, you identified yourself. THAT is one reason you never identify yourself, until you are arrested and facing named charges.
    Second, if you have a (legitimate) conviction record (was she listing convictions or arrests?), you should expect to be harassed by the police.
    Third, if you get arrested, even unjustly, you should shut up, lawyer up and stay off message boards until it is cleared up.

    As far as I can tell, you have done nothing right throughout this incident. If you really do have a record for assault and I was a cop, I might have followed similar actions, including disarming you. People behavior tends to follow patterns.

    Your behavior baffles me (including posting this audio) and every revelation works against you. If you really have NEVER done anything wrong and it is a series of unlucky incidents, why do you stay in that area?? If you have convictions, you should be extra careful to steer clear of law enforcement for awhile, unless you enjoy being in the legal process. Each new piece of information seems to back up law enforcement's concerns about you. I do not trust police because of several unlawful detentions BUT I never ID and I never answer their questions except for "Are you a cop?" and I have changed it from "No" to "My career profession is not something I discuss with strangers".

    If your short history on this board is any indicator, you will continue to make bad decisions. I recommend that you cut your losses and clam up... I wish you all the best of luck if decide to take my advice...

  12. #12
    Regular Member afcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southeast of KC Mossouri
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by peterarthur View Post
    "He does have previous offenses for assault..." said the dispatcher...

    First, you identified yourself. THAT is one reason you never identify yourself, until you are arrested and facing named charges.
    Second, if you have a (legitimate) conviction record (was she listing convictions or arrests?), you should expect to be harassed by the police.
    Third, if you get arrested, even unjustly, you should shut up, lawyer up and stay off message boards until it is cleared up.

    As far as I can tell, you have done nothing right throughout this incident. If you really do have a record for assault and I was a cop, I might have followed similar actions, including disarming you. People behavior tends to follow patterns.

    Your behavior baffles me (including posting this audio) and every revelation works against you. If you really have NEVER done anything wrong and it is a series of unlucky incidents, why do you stay in that area?? If you have convictions, you should be extra careful to steer clear of law enforcement for awhile, unless you enjoy being in the legal process. Each new piece of information seems to back up law enforcement's concerns about you. I do not trust police because of several unlawful detentions BUT I never ID and I never answer their questions except for "Are you a cop?" and I have changed it from "No" to "My career profession is not something I discuss with strangers".

    If your short history on this board is any indicator, you will continue to make bad decisions. I recommend that you cut your losses and clam up... I wish you all the best of luck if decide to take my advice...
    Dude, Chiang and I have argued with this guy and his cohorts for a while now, there is no use. You are completely right, he does have a tendency to do retarded things and it actually causes really heated discussion. These kind of people make it difficult to associate ones self with this effort. We see one major difference between the KC side and STL side: KC tries to change public opinion through demonstrating normal armed daily life. STL tries to change legislation by baiting LEOs and suing municipalities. Results are pretty clear, we haven't caused any ordinances to be passed against our side.
    Last edited by afcarry; 04-16-2011 at 12:51 PM.
    An individual should not choose the caliber, cartridge, and bullet that will kill an an animal when everything is right; rather, he should choose ones that will kill the most efficiently when everything goes wrong

  13. #13
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by peterarthur View Post
    "He does have previous offenses for assault..." said the dispatcher...

    First, you identified yourself. THAT is one reason you never identify yourself, until you are arrested and facing named charges.
    Second, if you have a (legitimate) conviction record (was she listing convictions or arrests?), you should expect to be harassed by the police.
    Third, if you get arrested, even unjustly, you should shut up, lawyer up and stay off message boards until it is cleared up.

    As far as I can tell, you have done nothing right throughout this incident. If you really do have a record for assault and I was a cop, I might have followed similar actions, including disarming you. People behavior tends to follow patterns.

    Your behavior baffles me (including posting this audio) and every revelation works against you. If you really have NEVER done anything wrong and it is a series of unlucky incidents, why do you stay in that area?? If you have convictions, you should be extra careful to steer clear of law enforcement for awhile, unless you enjoy being in the legal process. Each new piece of information seems to back up law enforcement's concerns about you. I do not trust police because of several unlawful detentions BUT I never ID and I never answer their questions except for "Are you a cop?" and I have changed it from "No" to "My career profession is not something I discuss with strangers".

    If your short history on this board is any indicator, you will continue to make bad decisions. I recommend that you cut your losses and clam up... I wish you all the best of luck if decide to take my advice...
    I think the assault comment was fully "assault weapon disturbance". The lady just paused.
    However, he does seem to have a bunch of priors and the dispatch did come back with an "active 99". So I'm assuming the warrant issue remains unclear? Was it bad or was it good? Were you just told it was bad or that it was wrongfully issued but it was technically legit for whatever reason?
    Last edited by ChiangShih; 04-16-2011 at 01:00 PM.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  14. #14
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by afcarry View Post
    ... we haven't caused any ordinances to be passed against our side.
    Lol, this is true, and there is less over all regulation on OC in the KC and mid-mo region.
    Last edited by ChiangShih; 04-16-2011 at 01:04 PM.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  15. #15
    Regular Member afcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southeast of KC Mossouri
    Posts
    206
    Keepin' it real.
    An individual should not choose the caliber, cartridge, and bullet that will kill an an animal when everything is right; rather, he should choose ones that will kill the most efficiently when everything goes wrong

  16. #16
    Regular Member sohighlyunlikely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Overland, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    724
    Quote Originally Posted by afcarry View Post
    Dude, Chiang and I have argued with this guy and his cohorts for a while now, there is no use. You are completely right, he does have a tendency to do retarded things and it actually causes really heated discussion. These kind of people make it difficult to associate ones self with this effort. We see one major difference between the KC side and STL side: KC tries to change public opinion through demonstrating normal armed daily life. STL tries to change legislation by baiting LEOs and suing municipalities. Results are pretty clear, we haven't caused any ordinances to be passed against our side.
    Nice grouping of people through stereo typing. You going to throw in a fried chicken comment next.

    Doc

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by peterarthur View Post
    "He does have previous offenses for assault..." said the dispatcher...

    First, you identified yourself. THAT is one reason you never identify yourself, until you are arrested and facing named charges.
    Second, if you have a (legitimate) conviction record (was she listing convictions or arrests?), you should expect to be harassed by the police.
    Third, if you get arrested, even unjustly, you should shut up, lawyer up and stay off message boards until it is cleared up.
    WOW. Your entire post is as much of a fail as the City of Maplewood.
    I was arrested in the back of the police car when the officer took my ID.

    Next, I already posted this above, but I guess you can't read.
    Yes. That is all from when the drunk off-duty cop attacked me in a parking lot back in 2005, nearly shooting me in the head. I got charged with all of that good stuff and the grand jury came back with a no true bill after I testified in front of them. They found I acted in self-defense. This summer I am going to get all of that expunged.
    It is all from one incident and they are arrests. I have only been convicted of one thing in my life and that is the speeding ticket I am appealing right now. I've never been charged with anything other than traffic tickets and the one night the drunk off-duty cop attacked me. ONCE AGAIN IN CASE YOU MISSED IT. THE GRAND JURY DID NOT INDICT ME. THERE WAS NO PROBABLE CAUSE BECAUSE I ACTED IN SELF DEFENSE!


    Quote Originally Posted by peterarthur View Post
    As far as I can tell, you have done nothing right throughout this incident. If you really do have a record for assault and I was a cop, I might have followed similar actions, including disarming you. People behavior tends to follow patterns.
    You continue to prove you have no idea what happened. I was disarmed within seconds of the cop seeing me.


    Quote Originally Posted by peterarthur View Post
    Your behavior baffles me (including posting this audio) and every revelation works against you. If you really have NEVER done anything wrong and it is a series of unlucky incidents, why do you stay in that area?? If you have convictions, you should be extra careful to steer clear of law enforcement for awhile, unless you enjoy being in the legal process.
    What does posting this audio do? THEY ALREADY HAVE IT! All this does is prove to the skeptics that I am right and the police did not have RAS.

    I have to stay in the area to take care of my 90 & 91 year old grandmothers.


    Quote Originally Posted by peterarthur View Post
    Each new piece of information seems to back up law enforcement's concerns about you. I do not trust police because of several unlawful detentions BUT I never ID and I never answer their questions except for "Are you a cop?" and I have changed it from "No" to "My career profession is not something I discuss with strangers".

    If your short history on this board is any indicator, you will continue to make bad decisions. I recommend that you cut your losses and clam up... I wish you all the best of luck if decide to take my advice...
    Really? I'm pretty sure each new piece of information continues to show that government and continues to break the law when I have done nothing wrong.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by afcarry View Post
    Dude, Chiang and I have argued with this guy and his cohorts for a while now, there is no use. You are completely right, he does have a tendency to do retarded things and it actually causes really heated discussion. These kind of people make it difficult to associate ones self with this effort. We see one major difference between the KC side and STL side: KC tries to change public opinion through demonstrating normal armed daily life. STL tries to change legislation by baiting LEOs and suing municipalities. Results are pretty clear, we haven't caused any ordinances to be passed against our side.
    Tell me how I was not demonstrating normal armed daily life? Did you even listen to the audio???? How was contacting the police and letting them know about open carry, contacting the city manager and getting a voice mail from him that open carry was legal, and peacefully open carrying into a place that has a policy to allow firearms baiting? I think you work for the City of Maplewood. Give me a #@&$ing break.

  19. #19
    Regular Member afcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southeast of KC Mossouri
    Posts
    206
    see?

    Quote Originally Posted by sohighlyunlikely View Post
    Nice grouping of people through stereo typing. You going to throw in a fried chicken comment next.

    Doc
    Stereotyping is one word. Like your user name.

    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    I think you work for the City of Maplewood. Give me a #@&$ing break.
    I may, since that declaration has about as solid a foundation as all of your other arguments.
    Last edited by afcarry; 04-16-2011 at 02:45 PM.
    An individual should not choose the caliber, cartridge, and bullet that will kill an an animal when everything is right; rather, he should choose ones that will kill the most efficiently when everything goes wrong

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    I think the assault comment was fully "assault weapon disturbance". The lady just paused.
    However, he does seem to have a bunch of priors and the dispatch did come back with an "active 99". So I'm assuming the warrant issue remains unclear? Was it bad or was it good? Were you just told it was bad or that it was wrongfully issued but it was technically legit for whatever reason?
    WOW. FAIL AGAIN! Just because something is in the system doesn't mean it is right. That is why it is the policy of nearly every department including Maplewood (SEE POLICY ABOVE) that only SUSPECTS WITH CONFIRMED WARRANTS ARE TAKEN INTO CUSTODY. That means calling the department the warrant was issued to make sure it is still valid. This was done AFTER I was on my way to jail.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    Were you just told it was bad or that it was wrongfully issued but it was technically legit for whatever reason?
    I know you are just $@!%ing with me now. Lets see, the court administrator said it was an error and that it happens 5-6 times a year. The court supervisor said her office made the mistake, the judge issued a order returning my bail and that the fine is stayed until after the appeal.

  21. #21
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    WOW. FAIL AGAIN! Just because something is in the system doesn't mean it is right. That is why it is the policy of nearly every department including Maplewood (SEE POLICY ABOVE) that only SUSPECTS WITH CONFIRMED WARRANTS ARE TAKEN INTO CUSTODY.
    That means calling the department the warrant was issued to make sure it is still valid. This was done AFTER I was on my way to jail.
    You're adding steps into warrant verification the LEOs are not responsible for. Dispatch reporting an active warrant from a computer record reference is probable cause to arrest. They don't have to contact extra departments or judicial offices to confirm if a specific warrant that shows active is legit. They were told the warrant was active and they arrested you on it. The end. Also, you seem quick to respond in a very defensive manner, my questions were honest so I don't see the need or even the logical justification for caps-locking you exclamation of fail.



    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    I know you are just $@!%ing with me now. Lets see, the court administrator said it was an error and that it happens 5-6 times a year. The court supervisor said her office made the mistake, the judge issued a order returning my bail and that the fine is stayed until after the appeal.
    I'm not "$@!%ing" with you I am seeking information I did not previously have. As classes have started back up for me I've not had as much time to follow your several threads and all of the information you've posted. Again my request was honest and not an attempt to probe, so I appreciate the clarification but not your temperamental attitude. I suppose it is excusable because you are undoubtedly feeling ganged up on and you have demonstrated a bewildering ability to put your foot in your mouth.
    Last edited by ChiangShih; 04-16-2011 at 02:59 PM.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    You're adding steps into warrant verification the LEOs are not responsible for. Dispatch reporting an active warrant from a computer record reference is probable cause to arrest. They don't have to contact extra departments or judicial offices to confirm if a specific warrant that shows active is legit. They were told the warrant was active and they arrested you on it. The end. Also, you seem quick to respond in a very defensive manner, my questions were honest so I don't see the need or even the logical justification for caps-locking you exclamation of fail.
    Please read the Maplewood policy about arrests. I am not adding steps. This is what is done all over the country so the department is not liable for not making sure the warrant is still good. Plenty of times they forget to take the warrant out of the database, so police departments have a policy of confirming the warrants when they get a hit.

    "If the warrant is not verified, the officer will not arrest based on the warrant."
    That is Maplewood's official policy. Well two officers asked the dispatcher to verify it, and they did, but only after I was on my way to jail. I have no idea how else I can explain it.


    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    I'm not "$@!%ing" with you I am seeking information I did not previous have. As classes have started back up for me I've not had as much time to follow your several threads and all of the information you've posted. Again my request was honest and not an attempt to probe, so I appreciate the clarification but not your temperamental attitude. I suppose it is excusable because you are undoubtedly feeling ganged up on and you have demonstrated a bewildering ability to put your foot in your mouth.
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...=1#post1504287

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by afcarry View Post
    I may, since that declaration has about as solid a foundation as all of your other arguments.
    That is the only reasoning I see for why you could still support the city and continue to claim I did wrong.

  24. #24
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    Please read the Maplewood policy about arrests. I am not adding steps. This is what is done all over the country so the department is not liable for not making sure the warrant is still good. Plenty of times they forget to take the warrant out of the database, so police departments have a policy of confirming the warrants when they get a hit.

    "If the warrant is not verified, the officer will not arrest based on the warrant."
    That is Maplewood's official policy. Well two officers asked the dispatcher to verify it, and they did, but only after I was on my way to jail. I have no idea how else I can explain it.

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...=1#post1504287
    Ok, well its good that you handled the warrant issue in court, but what i am still reading is the warrant was still verified. What I read is, they verified the warrant through dispatch, although this does not meet (from your perspective) the standard of verification listed in their policy; however, a few minutes later on the ride downtown, they took extra steps to make sure the warrant was verified and active and it was. So they booked you on it. The warrant wasn't fully dismissed and thrown out until a later date on appeal.

    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    ...two officers asked the dispatcher to verify it, and they did,...
    Again, so the clarification here is, the warrant was actually at the time of arrest and incident -technically- legit and active. Despite its origins and possible issuing error, the police had no way of knowing this at the time of arrest and through two verifications it came back as active?
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    Ok, well its good that you handled the warrant issue in court, but what i am still reading is the warrant was still verified. What I read is, they verified the warrant through dispatch, although this does not meet (from your perspective) the standard of verification listed in their policy
    The dispatcher verified the warrant after it was initially said.
    They ran a check at 3:12.
    Dispatcher ran my name through the system and came up with a hit at 3:55
    Officer asks dispatcher to "confirm" at 4:35 (you know the policy that says "verify all warrants"
    2nd officer that arrested me asks to "confirm that" 4:39
    Then the dispatcher "confirms" or "verifies" the warrant is still active at 5:20

    I was already on my way to jail though when they verified it.

    They have to know about a warrant to verify it. They take at least two steps.
    1) find out about warrant
    2) confirm warrant


    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    a few minutes later on the ride downtown, they took extra steps to make sure the warrant was verified and active and it was. So they booked you on it. The warrant wasn't fully dismissed and thrown out until a later date on appeal.
    NO, not extra steps, just what is required.

    I'm not arguing there was an active warrant put into the system for my arrest. I am arguing:
    1) I was under arrest before it was confirmed.
    2) The warrant was issued in error.


    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    The warrant wasn't fully dismissed and thrown out until a later date on appeal.
    I have no idea what this means. The warrant issue was taken out of the system the first day I spoke with the court administrator and she canceled my court date because it was "their fault" and I was never supposed to be issued a warrant. It was not dismissed and throw out because of an appeal. I went to the court date that was canceled and the judge wrote that note saying the fine was not due until after my appeal.


    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    Again, so the clarification here is, the warrant was actually at the time of arrest and incident -technically- legit and active. Despite its origins and possible issuing error, the police had no way of knowing this at the time of arrest and through two verifications it came back as active?
    NO. It was active, but it was not legit. It should have never been there. That is a separate issue though.
    I might agree the police didn't know it was not legit, but only ONE verification came back.
    Last edited by lancers; 04-16-2011 at 03:40 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •