Detained at Lowe's Marero

[1Grizzly1]

imported post

Putting you in handcuffs and seizing your weapon was a violation of your 4th amendment rights. LEO's must think you have or are about to commit a crime before stopping you (Ohio vs. Terry). Refer to the case that just happened in New Mexico where the 9th district circuit court awarded a man $25k dollars when LEO's removed him from a movie theater and disarmed him. All he was doing was watching a movie. This cop illegally seized you and your firearm.

 

[georg jetson]

imported post

HankT wrote:

witerango wrote:

...i did talk to a few criminal lawyers in Gretna and they all said "if i have a gun they can do whatever they want" one went was far to say "that apprently you know more about what the f***ing laws are than i do" and hung up on me

Lawyers....can't live wit 'em. Can't live witout 'em....

We CAN live without them. If your car is broken, do you abandon it because you can't find a mechanic... or do you learn how to fix it yourself?

There's no need to talk to a criminal attorney if you haven't been charged with a crime.

Filing a civil suit is not difficult, particularly a 42 USC 1983. Courts hold such pro se complaints to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by an attorney and liberally construe such complaints when determining whether they state a cause of action. Alternatively, your first move does not have to be a federal suit. You can seek relief in a statecourt and you would probably have better luck finding council.

Did you try contacting the ACLU?

 

[mark edward marchiafava]

imported post

Now that is just too funny.............

ACLU ? Obviously, you've never dealt with the LOUISIANA version of the ACLU.
Yes, the chapter director is finally gone, but it doesn't appear they've gotten any friendlier towards white, caucasian, Christian males.

It's truly sad this site doesn't take the lead by recruiting just ONE motivated, gun-friendly attorney willing to handle matters exactly like this one.

At least that arse-whole attorney spoke the truth when he admitted this poster DOES know more about the law then he did.

 

[Mike]

imported post

The larger issue here is police miscnduct - attack both problems - Lowes + police

 

[mark edward marchiafava]

imported post

In the POLICE STATE OF LOUISIANA, quite a few "lawyers" will come right out and admit they do NOT litigate against government folks, ESPECIALLY cops.

The cure is simple: bring in an out-of-state attorney who owes no allegiance to any of them, clean their clock.

I'd be willing to kick in at least $25.00 monthly to get such a thing up and running.

 

[georg jetson]

imported post

1Grizzly1 wrote:

Putting you in handcuffs and seizing your weapon was a violation of your 4th amendment rights. LEO's must think you have or are about to commit a crime before stopping you (Ohio vs. Terry). Refer to the case that just happened in New Mexico where the 9th district circuit court awarded a man $25k dollars when LEO's removed him from a movie theater and disarmed him. All he was doing was watching a movie. This cop illegally seized you and your firearm.

New Mexico is in the tenth district... I'd put a link here but you can justsearch "Mathew St John" and "federal court". Pick the article you want to read. This is binding in the tenth district only, but if the 5th district ruled contrary then the SCOTUS would take an appeal based on contradictory opinions.

 

[georg jetson]

imported post

The ACLU is a possible option... I suggest you look into it...



http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/275781

 

[georg jetson]

imported post

witerango wrote:

turbodog wrote:

I believe you would request copies of any phone calls (911) made to the sheriffs office relating to your incident, any radio calls by the sheriffs office relating to your incident and any documents (officers reports) relating to your incident.

Some people have also requested copies of cell phone calls made by officers relating to an incident when they knew the officer was calling someone about it.

You can also file a complaint with the internal affairs dept.

there were no 911 call made he made sure to inform me if there had then i would be under arrest for creating a disurbance. And i've given up on internal affiars... i had a LEO run a red light and would have ran right into the side of me had i not seen him coming... i had it on video and it was "insufficient" for them to do anything

Ok... that's the wrong attitude. If you don't think IA is doing its job, there are LEGAL ways to motivate them. If you feel the officer was acting outside his duties then report it.

 

[KBCraig]

imported post

mark edward marchiafava wrote:

It's truly sad this site doesn't take the lead by recruiting just ONE motivated, gun-friendly attorney willing to handle matters exactly like this one.

"This site", meaning opencarry.org and its two founders/owners, are busy becoming motivated, gun-friendly attorneys.

 

[Mike]

imported post

The poster needs to find legal representation in Louisiana if he wants to pursue the matter - usually state bar associations have referral services - he may be able to find an attorney to represent him on a contringency basis.

if thefacts are true, and the police just grabbed him like he explained, it would appear to be an unlawful sezure from its inception.

 

[VORiaSOI]

imported post

thats true... few if any attorneys will fight "the man" and that includes federal court............

my own experience.....

 

[witerango]

imported post

I was reffered to the New Orleans Bar by a very large law firm downtown. According to the bar i need a civil rights lawyer and "there are no practicing civil rights lawyers in the metro area" so they told me to call Common Grounds legal clinc adn the NOACLU.

 

[mark edward marchiafava]

imported post

Mike wrote:

The poster needs to find legal representation in Louisiana if he wants to pursue the matter - usually state bar associations have referral services - he may be able to find an attorney to represent him on a contringency basis.

if thefacts are true, and the police just grabbed him like he explained, it would appear to be an unlawful sezure from its inception.

Been there, done that on lots of occasions.............
not just gun issues, either.

You have NO idea how things are down here. Don't take my word for it, call any lawyer referral service in Louisiana, find out for yourself just what an exercise in futility it is.......

Louisiana "law enforcement" grab folks all the time, there's no downside to their actions, which explains why it continues.

 

[codename_47]

imported post

Filing a civil suit is not difficult, particularly a 42 USC 1983. Courts hold such pro se complaints to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by an attorney and liberally construe such complaints when determining whether they state a cause of action. Alternatively, your first move does not have to be a federal suit. You can seek relief in a statecourt and you would probably have better luck finding council.

You can't file in state then file in Federal. You have to pick one and run with it, and Federal is the way to go. I agree otherwise that you can live without them. Just do it yourself. It isn't that difficult.

 

[Slidell Jim]

imported post

pm sent

 

[Seigi]

imported post

A case still end up in federal court even if it is filed in state court. It's called "removal" and it's done at the request of the defendant.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1441.html

 

[mark edward marchiafava]

imported post

Again: one GOOD, gun-friendly attorney could easily handle this.
There's no sense in EVERY damned gun owner in the country having to educate themselves to the point of being able to litigate a civil rights issue. This is an unnecessary duplication of efforts.

There are tons of gripe boards on the internet, what's needed is a site focused on DOING something.

 

[witerango]

imported post

mark edward marchiafava wrote:

There's no sense in EVERY damned gun owner in the country having to educate themselves to the point of being able to litigate a civil rights issue.

i second this

 

[georg jetson]

imported post

mark edward marchiafava wrote:

Again: one GOOD, gun-friendly attorney could easily handle this.
There's no sense in EVERY damned gun owner in the country having to educate themselves to the point of being able to litigate a civil rights issue.

There are tons of gripe boards on the internet, what's needed is a site focused on DOING something.

With all do respect MEM this is the wrong approach... and here's why...

OC’ing is just a small part of the right of self defense and the right of self defense is one of an innumerable amount of inalienable rights that the US Constitution was written to guarantee. Each of should be well versed in many aspects of civil and criminal procedure because it is our responsibility to defend ALL of our rights. The defense of these rightsdoes not differ much from right to right. If YOU know how to defend your right to bear arms, then you are equipped to defend your other rights.

We have become dependant of lawyers. I'll bet that most people participating in this forum consider themselves anti-socialists to some degree or another. Most of us would agree that we should not depend on others to defend ourselves, yet we do that very thing when it comes to legal matters.

Lawyers are important because it is useful to have an "expert" on your side in a specific matter, but we depend on them for the most simplistic things. Even when legal counsel is necessary, it is still our job to make sure the attorney does his job as well as help with any leg work that may be required.

I encourage the poster to learn the law as it relates to his case and further challenge anybody interested in defending their right to bear arms to LEARN the LAW. WE are "SHEEPLE" because we don't know the law!!

 

[mark edward marchiafava]

imported post

What a shame.
Someone comes to this board with real solutions and the rest refuse to learn.

AGAIN: it's an unnecessary duplication of efforts for each and every one of us to become so schooled in the "law" as to be proficient enough to litigate a civil rights issue in either state or federal court.

Not to say we shouldn't learn, but at some point even the least intelligent of us should realize the absurdity of having to take it to this level.