Bill Starks
State Researcher
imported post
Set a date - I'll be there....
Set a date - I'll be there....
-
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.
Unlawful Detention by Mercer Island Police
- Thread starter Washintonian_For_Liberty
- Start date
Lante
Regular Member
imported post
I will come over any Sunday!
I will come over any Sunday!
amlevin
Regular Member
imported post
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
Being calm and logical often gets this type of response. I would, however, make sure that the speedometer in your car is super accurate and you don't speed on the Island. I used to date a girl that lived down in the "rich part" of the Island and had a MI cop chase me all the way across the bridge because he thought I was driving too fast for the "Neighborhood". Hope you don't get any special attention from any of the officers that obviously "lost face" in this incident. Or from any of their friends on the force.
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
Being calm and logical often gets this type of response. I would, however, make sure that the speedometer in your car is super accurate and you don't speed on the Island. I used to date a girl that lived down in the "rich part" of the Island and had a MI cop chase me all the way across the bridge because he thought I was driving too fast for the "Neighborhood". Hope you don't get any special attention from any of the officers that obviously "lost face" in this incident. Or from any of their friends on the force.
imported post
Good God! If they are saying that every time you show up in the park or anywhere in their jurisdiction you will be profiled and harassed, is that not a civil liberties issue.
If a lady with unspeakable looking hairy moles on the face, a black man, an old man wearing a clown costume, or illegal alien was to suffer the same harassment and cuffing every time they were seen, what would that be called?
Is there a new LEO generation dedicated to the oppression of civil liberties.To the hell with your rights, I make the law from here-on-out. I don't give a rats ass with what State Law, State Constitution, or the US Constitution says; I make the Law bubby.
Does that pretty much sum of the Officers in you encounter?, not to mention the current reigning political party.
Good God! If they are saying that every time you show up in the park or anywhere in their jurisdiction you will be profiled and harassed, is that not a civil liberties issue.
If a lady with unspeakable looking hairy moles on the face, a black man, an old man wearing a clown costume, or illegal alien was to suffer the same harassment and cuffing every time they were seen, what would that be called?
Is there a new LEO generation dedicated to the oppression of civil liberties.To the hell with your rights, I make the law from here-on-out. I don't give a rats ass with what State Law, State Constitution, or the US Constitution says; I make the Law bubby.
Does that pretty much sum of the Officers in you encounter?, not to mention the current reigning political party.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
jbone wrote:
Here is a revealing quote from Terry vs Ohio (1968):
...The wholesale harassment by certain elements of the police community, of which minority groups, particularly Negroes, frequently complain, will not be stopped by the exclusion of any evidence from any criminal trial...(emphasis added)
Two points.
First, the court was aware that "certain elements of the police community" were violating the 4A prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures--harassment.
Second, the court knew the complaints were frequent.
Something else just occurred to me.
One of the major sparks for the American Revolution was something called "Writs of Assistance." A writ of assistance was basically a general warrant, something prohibited today by the 4th Amendment.*
Would it not be ironic if the harassmentmentionedin Terry was a major factor behind the civil rights movement? Basically it would mean that once again, violation of the principles embodied in the 4th Amendmentcontributed to a people standing up to government.
*The 4A denies general warrants by setting out the requirements for an acceptable warrant:
...and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause...particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (emphasis added)
jbone wrote:
Maybe, maybe not.
Here is a revealing quote from Terry vs Ohio (1968):
...The wholesale harassment by certain elements of the police community, of which minority groups, particularly Negroes, frequently complain, will not be stopped by the exclusion of any evidence from any criminal trial...(emphasis added)
Two points.
First, the court was aware that "certain elements of the police community" were violating the 4A prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures--harassment.
Second, the court knew the complaints were frequent.
Something else just occurred to me.
One of the major sparks for the American Revolution was something called "Writs of Assistance." A writ of assistance was basically a general warrant, something prohibited today by the 4th Amendment.*
Would it not be ironic if the harassmentmentionedin Terry was a major factor behind the civil rights movement? Basically it would mean that once again, violation of the principles embodied in the 4th Amendmentcontributed to a people standing up to government.
*The 4A denies general warrants by setting out the requirements for an acceptable warrant:
...and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause...particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (emphasis added)
imported post
Citizen wrote:
I ask myself frequently are we spending more time swapping stories and providing sea lawyer advice on internet forums rather than filing complaint after complaint at city hall, demanding the violations of civil liberties under the 2A be heard in court.
I'm a believer that this has progressed into a civil rights issue over the years. Frequency is as clear as the elements of agencies violating the 2A & State Constitutions. It's open season on gun owners, law enforcement agencies have officers legislating from a patrol car, councilmember's and mayors across the country are interrupting under their personal agendas, and none of these officials fear repercussion for their illegal actions.
Citizen wrote:
Does the first & second point exist today? I mean are the courts aware of the frequent violations against lawful firearms owners while conduction lawful activity?
I ask myself frequently are we spending more time swapping stories and providing sea lawyer advice on internet forums rather than filing complaint after complaint at city hall, demanding the violations of civil liberties under the 2A be heard in court.
I'm a believer that this has progressed into a civil rights issue over the years. Frequency is as clear as the elements of agencies violating the 2A & State Constitutions. It's open season on gun owners, law enforcement agencies have officers legislating from a patrol car, councilmember's and mayors across the country are interrupting under their personal agendas, and none of these officials fear repercussion for their illegal actions.
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
jbone wrote:
My main beef has been the 4A violations. My idea has been that if all we formally complain about is 2A violations, we miss the much broader and more common 4A violations.
I believe every formal complaint should howl and hammer on the 4A violations, naming them as 4A violations, not just saying in so many words, "The LEO had no authority to detain me over my gun." I would prefer to read in caps, "THIS IS A VIOLATION OF THE 4TH AMENDMENT."
However, there is no reason both cannot be complained in the same complaint. Nor is there any reason complaints cannot be aimed at City Council/the Legislature.
I wonder if maybe wehave beenoverlooking an avenue here. If you think about it, plenty of states have 2A protections in their state constitutions. And plenty of states have passed "shall issue," meaning legislatures have been friendly to 2A to a certain extent.
jbone wrote:
Hmmmm. You have a point there.
My main beef has been the 4A violations. My idea has been that if all we formally complain about is 2A violations, we miss the much broader and more common 4A violations.
I believe every formal complaint should howl and hammer on the 4A violations, naming them as 4A violations, not just saying in so many words, "The LEO had no authority to detain me over my gun." I would prefer to read in caps, "THIS IS A VIOLATION OF THE 4TH AMENDMENT."
However, there is no reason both cannot be complained in the same complaint. Nor is there any reason complaints cannot be aimed at City Council/the Legislature.
I wonder if maybe wehave beenoverlooking an avenue here. If you think about it, plenty of states have 2A protections in their state constitutions. And plenty of states have passed "shall issue," meaning legislatures have been friendly to 2A to a certain extent.
Gene Beasley
Regular Member
imported post
jbone wrote:
I am in full agreement. The main obstacle is money. I was looking into addressing an event last year and it was $300, if I remember correctly, just to file the case with the court. Legal fees and time would give ample cause to pause and reflect on the strength of your case and the likelihood of prevailing.
But I don't think that what we are doing is without benefit. Look at the number of people of have gone from knowing nothing about OCto being fairly well versed in the statutes and case law. This isn't about me. A number of people have stood up for their rights; both in these contacts and challenging cities/counties/departments on their illegal laws or practices. I'm on a ccw list and more often than not I end up referring back to something that's already been discussed, if not resolved here.
I have been mulling over the idea of talking with WASPC. Sue Rahr is in our corner and she is active. I used to work with the now executive director. There's always the chance that we could open up a can of worms with WASPC approaching the legislature for a bill that would favor the LEO, citing officer safety. My opinion is that in the current climate, every elected official's hold on their seat is so tenuous that they're not going to take on the citizenry. Just thinking out loud.
jbone wrote:
I am in full agreement. The main obstacle is money. I was looking into addressing an event last year and it was $300, if I remember correctly, just to file the case with the court. Legal fees and time would give ample cause to pause and reflect on the strength of your case and the likelihood of prevailing.
But I don't think that what we are doing is without benefit. Look at the number of people of have gone from knowing nothing about OCto being fairly well versed in the statutes and case law. This isn't about me. A number of people have stood up for their rights; both in these contacts and challenging cities/counties/departments on their illegal laws or practices. I'm on a ccw list and more often than not I end up referring back to something that's already been discussed, if not resolved here.
I have been mulling over the idea of talking with WASPC. Sue Rahr is in our corner and she is active. I used to work with the now executive director. There's always the chance that we could open up a can of worms with WASPC approaching the legislature for a bill that would favor the LEO, citing officer safety. My opinion is that in the current climate, every elected official's hold on their seat is so tenuous that they're not going to take on the citizenry. Just thinking out loud.
FunkTrooper
Regular Member
imported post
I just had an Idea, if you get the cops to name themselves and get their confession of not caring what the law says on record then instead of making it a lawsuit take the tape to city hall let the officials hear it for themselves. It would probably get more people to focus on these rogue officers and get people to realize that just because cops bother you that doesn't make you a criminal.
I just had an Idea, if you get the cops to name themselves and get their confession of not caring what the law says on record then instead of making it a lawsuit take the tape to city hall let the officials hear it for themselves. It would probably get more people to focus on these rogue officers and get people to realize that just because cops bother you that doesn't make you a criminal.
antispam540
Regular Member
imported post
If he had the conversation taped, this would be a whole different story, and our elected representatives could hear it on the evening news. I don't carry my recorder as often as I should either, though.
If he had the conversation taped, this would be a whole different story, and our elected representatives could hear it on the evening news. I don't carry my recorder as often as I should either, though.
FunkTrooper
Regular Member
imported post
I use my phone to record voice and am going to setup Ipod touch to record as well until I can get a decent voice recorder, kinda hard since money is tight.
I use my phone to record voice and am going to setup Ipod touch to record as well until I can get a decent voice recorder, kinda hard since money is tight.
Lurkus Maximus
Campaign Veteran
imported post
FunkTrooper wrote:
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/27711.html
but have you seen the services that offer remote (ie inaccessible to delete or confiscate by anyone but you) storage for phone conversations? I'm curious if anyone has used them.
FunkTrooper wrote:
Crossover from this post:
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/27711.html
but have you seen the services that offer remote (ie inaccessible to delete or confiscate by anyone but you) storage for phone conversations? I'm curious if anyone has used them.
swatspyder
Regular Member
imported post
Lurkus Maximus wrote:
Lurkus Maximus wrote:
If the files are deleted, as long as you dont record anything again and you shut it right off, you can recover the files that were deleted on any home computer.
Lurkus Maximus
Campaign Veteran
imported post
swatspyder wrote:
swatspyder wrote:
These services work by recording a phone call to an intermediate server. If your recording device (cell phone) is "lost", the recording is still available to you from the server.
amlevin
Regular Member
imported post
Gene Beasley wrote:
Gene Beasley wrote:
Yes it is. Consider this though, our Founding Fathers put EVERYTHING they had at risk just to declare independence from England. Not just lawyer's fees, court fees, etc, but every bit of wealth they possessed. Everything up to and including their lives were on the line. Something to consider tomorrow between the Monster BBQ Burger, Potato Salad, and the swig of your favorite cold beverage.
imported post
amlevin wrote:
That's about it, the cities and countiessuck up the tax payer dollars fighting us off, while the blue collar worker can barely afford tofile the case from their own wallet.How do we tap into our tax dollars,public defenders?
If you haven't been arrested can you use them for a case where you are the plaintiff?
amlevin wrote:
That's about it, the cities and countiessuck up the tax payer dollars fighting us off, while the blue collar worker can barely afford tofile the case from their own wallet.How do we tap into our tax dollars,public defenders?
If you haven't been arrested can you use them for a case where you are the plaintiff?
j2l3
Regular Member
imported post
jbone wrote:
jbone wrote:
Nope, that's why they are called "Public "Defenders"
amlevin
Regular Member
imported post
jbone wrote:
You really can, up front. That said you CAN tap these dollars by successfully pleading your case and getting a favorable judgement. In most cases the looser pays the attorney fees associated with the case if the Judge is reasonable.
If your case is good there are often lawyers that will handle it on contingency. Make sure you have ALL the facts and "go shopping". Obviously few, if any, lawyers will take a case that is a "looser" at first look.
There are also organizations that will take up the "sword" if there are compelling facts.
It all revolves around FACTS.
jbone wrote:
You really can, up front. That said you CAN tap these dollars by successfully pleading your case and getting a favorable judgement. In most cases the looser pays the attorney fees associated with the case if the Judge is reasonable.
If your case is good there are often lawyers that will handle it on contingency. Make sure you have ALL the facts and "go shopping". Obviously few, if any, lawyers will take a case that is a "looser" at first look.
There are also organizations that will take up the "sword" if there are compelling facts.
It all revolves around FACTS.
imported post
To whom these wordsmay concern,
I would like those members here to know that I have created this account, 'Temporary,' with only the intention to reply to this thread. I do live on Mercer Island, attended Mercer Island High School, and have graduated my boarding school with the class of 2009. I am nineteen years of age, male, and am not affiliated or advocative of any "civil liberty" organizations--that I am currently aware of.
What happened to the O. P., while concern is warranted (because of modern media and communication technologies, public awareness of violent and sexual crime, amongst other, taboo, behaviours, has been increased), I do not believe that the Mercer Island Police Department was at all warranted in their behaviour toward you. Of course, they, for their safety, would not wish to reach down near you and pick up a pamphlet (which could be incorrect or biased); how ever, threats and other judgemental behaviour is that of a biased and, regarding their job, corrupted Police--not one that I would like on Mercer Island.
Realizing that they may have been transfered from other departments, where violent and sexual crime is more rampant, or alive, such aforementioned cautions are those belonging to a well-trained and experienced Police. Other wise, I would be led to believe that, due to the low, percieved, violent and sexual crime, in addition to the recent housing and business influx in the central business district, where Mercerdale Park is located at the edge of, an inexperienced Police might have been merely jumpy and, perhaps, excited at their first gun related "crime," some thing many, I would presume, only view on educational runs and tapes.
In conclusion, and I apoligize if my response has seemed precotious or drawn, I would say, with all of my experience in the law field, to file a complaint with the highest possible authority; with all of my passion and judgement, I would suggest that you file a civil suit with either the City of Mercer Island or the Mercer Island Police Department for your aforementioned grievances. Such suggestions are made assuming that your civil case would be to publicize your grievances, rather than for monetary gain--to which, I would assume, would be none.
Regards,
Devon Kelly Mulhaney
To whom these wordsmay concern,
I would like those members here to know that I have created this account, 'Temporary,' with only the intention to reply to this thread. I do live on Mercer Island, attended Mercer Island High School, and have graduated my boarding school with the class of 2009. I am nineteen years of age, male, and am not affiliated or advocative of any "civil liberty" organizations--that I am currently aware of.
What happened to the O. P., while concern is warranted (because of modern media and communication technologies, public awareness of violent and sexual crime, amongst other, taboo, behaviours, has been increased), I do not believe that the Mercer Island Police Department was at all warranted in their behaviour toward you. Of course, they, for their safety, would not wish to reach down near you and pick up a pamphlet (which could be incorrect or biased); how ever, threats and other judgemental behaviour is that of a biased and, regarding their job, corrupted Police--not one that I would like on Mercer Island.
Realizing that they may have been transfered from other departments, where violent and sexual crime is more rampant, or alive, such aforementioned cautions are those belonging to a well-trained and experienced Police. Other wise, I would be led to believe that, due to the low, percieved, violent and sexual crime, in addition to the recent housing and business influx in the central business district, where Mercerdale Park is located at the edge of, an inexperienced Police might have been merely jumpy and, perhaps, excited at their first gun related "crime," some thing many, I would presume, only view on educational runs and tapes.
In conclusion, and I apoligize if my response has seemed precotious or drawn, I would say, with all of my experience in the law field, to file a complaint with the highest possible authority; with all of my passion and judgement, I would suggest that you file a civil suit with either the City of Mercer Island or the Mercer Island Police Department for your aforementioned grievances. Such suggestions are made assuming that your civil case would be to publicize your grievances, rather than for monetary gain--to which, I would assume, would be none.
Regards,
Devon Kelly Mulhaney