• 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.

Maplewood 911 Call and Dispatch Audio from Open Carry Incident

lancers

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
231
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
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:

911callinformation.png



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.

MaplewoodArrestWarrantPolicy.jpg
 

xc9subcompact

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
106
Location
Secure Undisclosed
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):banghead:

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:

lancers

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
231
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
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.
 

MK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
396
Location
USA
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.
 

MK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
396
Location
USA
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.
 

lancers

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
231
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
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):banghead:

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.

S1120006.jpg




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
 

lancers

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
231
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
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/J....com/591_500_csupload_4326854.jpg?u=660638172

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.
 

peterarthur

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
613
Location
Phoenix, AZ
"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...
 

afcarry

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
206
Location
Southeast of KC Mossouri
"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:

ChiangShih

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
628
Location
KC
"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:

sohighlyunlikely

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
724
Location
Overland, Missouri, USA
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
 

lancers

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
231
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
"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!


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.


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.


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.
 

lancers

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
231
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
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.
 

afcarry

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
206
Location
Southeast of KC Mossouri
see?

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.

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:

lancers

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
231
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
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.

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.
 
Top