• 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.

Appeals court overturns judge who said cops had no reason to stop a man running away

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
"The Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled today a Boston police officer did nothing wrong in chasing after and arresting a man he suspected was packing a gun late one night on Norfolk Street in Roxbury.

In its ruling, the court overturned an order by Boston Municipal Court Judge Raymond Dougan that prosecutors could not use the gun allegedly found on Olajuwan Jones-Pannell on Aug. 6, 2011.

The appeals court begged to differ with Dougan's assertion that that particular stretch of Norfolk Street was not a high-crime area and that the officer who began chasing Jones-Pannell when he started running away from him had no indications that Jones-Pannell was doing anything wrong at the time. A Supreme Court ruling lets police stop people they suspect of committing or being about to commit a crime if they have reasonable suspicion based on several factors."

http://66.39.52.227/2014/appeals-court-overturns-judge-who-said-cops-had-no

There is a link in the page to the actual ruling.

They found that training and experience, high crime area, at night, defendants actions (swiveling, holding waist band, etc.) were enough for Terry Stop.

For some reason the original Judge who tossed the gun and case said that the fact there was a shooting a week or two prior and that it's heavily infested with gangs is not a "high crime" area. And the original judge said that it being at midnight bears "very little".

I bet that judge wouldn't be caught walking in Roxbury on that block at 12am....
 

Baked on Grease

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
629
Location
Sterling, Va.
These "sudden movements" ideas are bogus reasoning.

Remember that standing still is alao now a 'known precursor' to aggressive action and must be dealt with using deadly force. So run, don't run, submit, don't submit... all can get you killed nowadays.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
These "sudden movements" ideas are bogus reasoning.

The swiveling? Its not just "sudden movement" its an indicator or an illegally armed suspect. And I stress illegally.

When guys in here carry their guns I highly doubt they are swiveling their head around as if they are going to get stopped or jumped.

Well maybe a few, but that's because they think the police are our to get them.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
942
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
The swiveling? Its not just "sudden movement" its an indicator or an illegally armed suspect. And I stress illegally.

When guys in here carry their guns I highly doubt they are swiveling their head around as if they are going to get stopped or jumped.

Well maybe a few, but that's because they think the police are our to get them.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

"Head on a swivel" is standard S.A., I'll bet $100 as an LEO you don't just keep eye balls locked straight forward.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
"Head on a swivel" is standard S.A., I'll bet $100 as an LEO you don't just keep eye balls locked straight forward.

I agree 100%.

Again difference between you keeping your head on a swivel and a bad guy looking over his shoulder for another bad guy or the police.

You can and should check your surroundings and look around, but you don't (and I'm certain you don't personally) have to look like your actively being persued.

For example..... Ever see a small child up to no good? How they look around ALOT for mommy and daddy so they don't get "caught". That's the behavior these idiots mimic. And certainly jot the behavior you or I would do if we were just casually walking down the street with a gun openly/legally on us.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
"Head on a swivel" is standard S.A., I'll bet $100 as an LEO you don't just keep eye balls locked straight forward.

Why so little?:lol:

I agree 100%.

Again difference between you keeping your head on a swivel and a bad guy looking over his shoulder for another bad guy or the police.

You can and should check your surroundings and look around, but you don't (and I'm certain you don't personally) have to look like your actively being persued.

For example..... Ever see a small child up to no good? How they look around ALOT for mommy and daddy so they don't get "caught". That's the behavior these idiots mimic. And certainly jot the behavior you or I would do if we were just casually walking down the street with a gun openly/legally on us.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

If I were to stop looking over my shoulder, I'd be ignoring about 70 degrees of my surroundings, completely leaving me open to someone coming up from behind when I walk along straight paths.
I could, I suppose, do a quick turnaround and walk backwards for a short period to see if anyone was behind me, but wouldn't you agree that may be considered more "suspicious" than looking over the shoulder (as I normally do) to maintain good situational awareness)?

It can be summed up by the words of one girl I was speaking to who accused me of not minding her enough:
Her: "Are you listening? You keep looking around while I'm talking to you."
Me: "Just scanning."
Her: "Well, you act like we're about to be attacked."
Me: "Nope. Just scanning."
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,169
Location
earth's crust
The swiveling? Its not just "sudden movement" its an indicator or an illegally armed suspect. And I stress illegally.

When guys in here carry their guns I highly doubt they are swiveling their head around as if they are going to get stopped or jumped.

Well maybe a few, but that's because they think the police are our to get them.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Someone has watched too many Hollywood movies ....
 

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
942
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
Why so little?:lol:

I'm on drugs and had a moment of compassion for primus (post operative opiates)



If I were to stop looking over my shoulder, I'd be ignoring about 70 degrees of my surroundings, completely leaving me open to someone coming up from behind when I walk along straight paths.
I could, I suppose, do a quick turnaround and walk backwards for a short period to see if anyone was behind me, but wouldn't you agree that may be considered more "suspicious" than looking over the shoulder (as I normally do) to maintain good situational awareness)?

It can be summed up by the words of one girl I was speaking to who accused me of not minding her enough:
Her: "Are you listening? You keep looking around while I'm talking to you."
Me: "Just scanning."
Her: "Well, you act like we're about to be attacked."
Me: "Nope. Just scanning."

Actually, the wife accuses me of looking at pretty women and all my pleadings of innocence fall on deaf (knowing) ears :p
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,453
Location
White Oak Plantation
If a cop wants to Terry stop you he is gunna stop you. Being legit has absolutely no bearing on the matter. Keep a recorder running, clam up, and when "free to go" text/call your lawyer. The courts keep adding stuff to the cops gut feeling list to justify unwarranted stops just top make sure you ain't a felon.

They found that training and experience, high crime area, at night, defendants actions (swiveling, holding waist band, etc.) were enough for Terry Stop.
Avoid those places and avoid those actions and hope that the cop's "training" and "experience" are sufficiently honed to exclude you from his ire.
 

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
942
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
If a cop wants to Terry stop you he is gunna stop you. Being legit has absolutely no bearing on the matter. Keep a recorder running, clam up, and when "free to go" text/call your lawyer. The courts keep adding stuff to the cops gut feeling list to justify unwarranted stops just top make sure you ain't a felon.

hey found that training and experience, high crime area, at night, defendants actions (swiveling, holding waist band, etc.) were enough for Terry Stop.

Avoid those places and avoid those actions and hope that the cop's "training" and "experience" are sufficiently honed to exclude you from his ire.

It can be pretty hard to "avoid those places" since more and more they tend to be the "entertainment districts" in large cities, like LODO (Lower Downtown) in Denver or the Power and Light district in Kansas City. The scumbags know nobody has anything worth stealing in their home area so they go to where the money is, and all the push for public transportation makes it easy for them to get there.
 

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
942
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
LOL Years ago I-526 was built to get service people from NoChuck in to and out of affluent Charleston and Mount Pleasant. After hours it became the B&E Expressway.

When I lived in Missouri St Louis was building the MetroLink out to the suburbs, and quickly became known as the CrimeLink, it went past a nice little mall, in a few years the mall was a ghost town. Pretty heavy 2 way traffic, suburbanites going into the city to work, criminals going to the 'burbs to rob.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
The swiveling? Its not just "sudden movement" its an indicator or an illegally armed suspect. And I stress illegally.

"Head on a swivel" is standard S.A., I'll bet $100 as an LEO you don't just keep eye balls locked straight forward.
Bingo! Anyone NOT keeping their head on a swivel is someone that you really need to worry about. They're the ones that don't need to be afraid when they're in a high crime area because they're the top predator.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,453
Location
White Oak Plantation
The swiveling? Its not just "sudden movement" its an indicator of an illegally armed suspect. And I stress illegally. <snip>
Just to clear things up for anyone who has not picked up on this particular comment. Stressing "illegally" is a worthless qualifier because legality can only be determined after the Terry stop of a LAC based on a gut feeling.

Remember, the premise is that this "indicator," by default, indicates illegality. So, we are again presumed to be thugs based on "experience, training, time of day, location".....all key factors to support nothing but a gut feeling.....bingo.....Terry stop.

This is how MA LE rolls, remember the Constitution Suspension Event and frame that event around any commentary provided by a MA cop.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Just to clear things up for anyone who has not picked up on this particular comment. Stressing "illegally" is a worthless qualifier because legality can only be determined after the Terry stop of a LAC based on a gut feeling.

Remember, the premise is that this "indicator," by default, indicates illegality. So, we are again presumed to be thugs based on "experience, training, time of day, location".....all key factors to support nothing but a gut feeling.....bingo.....Terry stop.

This is how MA LE rolls, remember the Constitution Suspension Event and frame that event around any commentary provided by a MA cop.

This is reason I posted this case. It takes MORE then just "swiveling".

Its a combination of factors that combined equal enough to stop.

2 things guys on here haven't addressed. (To include yourself since you want to throw in)

1) the "swiveling" is NOT just being situationally aware. It DIFFERENT. Again...... Have you ever seen a kid up to no good? A kid who just broke a toy or who touched something he wasn't supposed to and is now looking of to avoid the adult? Or even better.... Have you never seen an adult out and about looking "suspicious"? A guy that you saw looking around a lot in an area and you said "hey thats the guy I want to avoid he's up to no good".

Both the little kid that you know took a cookie and the thug looking for a victim or to get away from a victim they just robbed are NOT being "situationally aware" or "tactical". That is more akin to the type of behavior a person exhibits while doing something illegal. That is because they KNOW its illegal and don't want to get CAUGHT. Different reason for the head swivel different reaction.

You have said presuming a thug until after he stop. Well not just based on that. Read the court case. They broke down each factor and how much is enough to even do a Terry stop. There's a lot.

2) The cop was accurate in his assessment. His training and experience were accurate. The guy really was carrying a gun illegally. The gun really was "swiveling" to avoid cops or other thugs.

Again... Read the court case. It shows the LE aspect and the SJC aspect.

This is way MORE then just "oh he was being situationally aware and got stopped for it".

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,453
Location
White Oak Plantation
Again... Read the court case. <snip>
I read it, please do not presume otherwise. I would like to think that we "know" each other better than to make statements such as this.

I categorically disagree with the findings based only on the fact that the thug should not have been stopped in the first place. None of those "indicators," even witnessed together, is unlawful behavior/acts except in the mind of a/that cop and his courtroom enablers.

The cop was proven right after the fact. The cop got lucky and the thug was proven to be a thug.

Sadly, the courts have deprived us of our right to be left alone, and the cops take advantage of this permission to deprive a citizen of his right to be left alone, as long as the deprivation is only "minimally intrusive"....or "relatively short in duration," which is almost always determined after the citizen has been run through the "justice" system defending his right to be left alone after it has been infringed upon.

The level of infringement is never defined by the citizen. Even "shall not be infringed" is nothing but a minor impediment to cops. A minor "teachable moment" if a cop gets it wrong.

Stringing together "facts" to see if a crime is afoot is a affront to liberty. Read the sig line that I display. Liberty is not pretty but must remain unmolested at every opportunity.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
I read it, please do not presume otherwise. I would like to think that we "know" each other better than to make statements such as this.

I categorically disagree with the findings based only on the fact that the thug should not have been stopped in the first place. None of those "indicators," even witnessed together, is unlawful behavior/acts except in the mind of a/that cop and his courtroom enablers.

The cop was proven right after the fact. The cop got lucky and the thug was proven to be a thug.

Sadly, the courts have deprived us of our right to be left alone, and the cops take advantage of this permission to deprive a citizen of his right to be left alone, as long as the deprivation is only "minimally intrusive"....or "relatively short in duration," which is almost always determined after the citizen has been run through the "justice" system defending his right to be left alone after it has been infringed upon.

The level of infringement is never defined by the citizen. Even "shall not be infringed" is nothing but a minor impediment to cops. A minor "teachable moment" if a cop gets it wrong.

Stringing together "facts" to see if a crime is afoot is a affront to liberty. Read the sig line that I display. Liberty is not pretty but must remain unmolested at every opportunity.

I apologize for assuming you didn't read it. No offense was meant. Just wanted to make sure because I know some guys just skim and see key words.

I respect and can appreciate your opinion about. Not necessarily agree with it, but respect it none the less.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,453
Location
White Oak Plantation
I apologize for assuming you didn't read it. No offense was meant. Just wanted to make sure because I know some guys just skim and see key words.

I respect and can appreciate your opinion about. Not necessarily agree with it, but respect it none the less.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Thanks, no apology is necessary.

Necessarily? Interesting.
 
Top