| Author | Post |
|---|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 03:21 pm |
|
I thought I'd share with you my analysis and breakdown of the crimes against me during that stop (please forgive the formatting, this site sucks at formatting!)
Crime #1: 18 USC Sec 242
Per the FBI web site (http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights/statutes.htm#section242)
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
During the stop, I was deprived of:
1) 2nd amendment right to be armed
2) 4th amendment right to be secure from search and seizure
a) To be seized (detained) by law enforcement, they must have reasonable and articulable suspicion that the detainee has "committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime" (NRS 171.123). As I was merely walking on a public sidewalk, and police were unable to articulate a reasonable suspicion for detaining me, I was seized in violation of the law:
i) Police can be heard admitting they have no lawful authority for detaining me when they admit at 07:10 in the recording that I do not match the description of any suspect (has committed).
ii) Since walking down the street is not illegal, and carrying a firearm openly is not illegal, there was no crime in progress warranting the stop (is committing).
iii) Again, since I was walking down the street and was not observed acting suspiciously, there was no reason to believe I was preparing to commit a crime (about to commit a crime).
b) Though the stop was not lawful, if it had been, law enforcement must have then formed reasonable and articulable suspicion that the detainee was both armed and dangerous in order to frisk and/or seize any weapons (NRS 171.1232)
i) Law allows an exterior pat-down frisk to determine the presence of weapons if the police have RAS. My shirt was lifted in violation of this provision of law despite my verbal and written refusal to consent to any searches.
ii) Law allows confiscation of a weapon only if police have RAS that a suspect is dangerous. Since the Supreme Court has already ruled that since possession of a firearm is lawful behavior, it is not, by itself, considered dangerous. Police confiscated my weapon without RAS that I was a dangerous person.
c) My wallet was taken from me and searched. Under duress (discussed later as coercion) I allowed police to take my ID only. Instead, they took my entire wallet and removed all the contents from it without permission or authority.
d) At the conclusion of the stop, an officer disassembles my weapon and returns the ammunition to my left pocket. Though he simply could have dropped the bullet in my large pocket, he instead takes approximately 9 seconds to return the bullets, which in actuality was 1 second to drop them and 8 seconds to feel inside my pocket as he touched my keys, voice recorder, phone, cash, etc (since I carry my holster on the right side, everything I carry other than my wallet is in my left pocket).
3) 5th amendment right to remain silent
a) I asserted my right immediately, both verbally and in writing, and yet I was asked directly-incriminatory questions a total of 9 times, each a separate violation of my rights:
i) Recording index 00:49: "Do you have a blue card to carry that weapon?"
(1) A Clark County resident in possession of an unregistered pistol has committed a misdemeanor.
ii) Recording index 01:39: "First of all, are you an ex-felon?"
(1) It is a violation of both federal (felony) and state (felony) law to an ex-felon in possession of a firearm.
iii) Recording index 03:48: "I want to see a blue card."
iv) Recording index 04:12: "Do you have a blue card for this gun?"
v) Recording index 07:43: "...how do we know you're not a felon?"
vi) Recording index 09:15: "...where's the blue card..."
vii) Recording index 10:04: "How do we know you're not lying?"
(1) Making a false statement to a police officer is a crime.
viii) Recording index 14:04: "How do we know you're not giving us your buddy's name?"
ix) Recording index 15:52: "How do I know this is not you?"
4) 6th amendment right to attorney
a) In addition to the 9 questions asked in violation of my 5th amendment right to remain silent and not make potentially self-incriminating statements, I was questioned an additional 39 times without my attorney present, which I demanded both verbally and in writing at the inception of the detainment.
Total count: 48 violations of 18 USC Sec 242
Crime #2: Nevada Law NRS 200.471 (Assault)
"Assault means intentionally placing another person in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm."
I had at least two guns pointed at me, and possibly others I could not see. I didn't know if there were rookies or nervous officers who were potentially drawing their service weapons for the first time. I absolutely felt fearful that my life was on the line and that an accidental discharge wasn't going to end well for me.
Crime #3: Nevada Law NRS 200.481 (Battery)
"Battery means any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another."
Since the stop occurred absent reasonable and articulable suspicion of a crime, it was not lawful, and drawing weapons and placing me in handcuffs were absolute uses of force without lawful authority.
Crime #4: Nevada Law NRS 200.460 (False Imprisonment)
"False imprisonment is an unlawful violation of the personal liberty of another, and consists in confinement or detention without sufficient legal authority."
Again, since the officers did not have sufficient legal authority to detain me, I was confined by handcuffs and detained in the middle of a busy street illegally.
Crime #5: Nevada Law NRS 200.380 (Robbery)
"Robbery is the unlawful taking of personal property from the person of another, or in his presence, against his will, by means of force or violence or fear of injury, immediate or future, to his person or property, or the person or property of a member of his family, or of anyone in his company at the time of the robbery."
I was stopped by armed individuals and robbed of my personal property (firearm & wallet). Though the property was given back to me when they were done, the robbery still occurred and is not undone merely by the giving back of my property.
Crime #6: Nevada Law NRS 207.190 (Coercion)
"It is unlawful for a person, with the intent to compel another to do or abstain from doing an act which the other person has a right to do or abstain from doing, to:
(a) Use violence or inflict injury upon the other person or any of his family, or upon his property, or threaten such violence or injury;
(b) Deprive the person of any tool, implement or clothing, or hinder him in the use thereof; or
(c) Attempt to intimidate the person by threats or force."
There are several counts of criminal coercion engaged in by officers:
1) At recording index 03:43, I repeated that I do not consent to be detained and would like to be released immediately with my property. Police responded by stating "I want to see a blue card" (03:48). This is coercion because their response suggests that I give them my blue card I can be released and sent on my way with my property. I have the right to carry a firearm without also carrying the blue card.
2) At recording index 06:00, I was asked for my date of birth. State law requires I identify myself by name (NRS 171.123) but specifically states "Any person so detained shall identify himself, but may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer." As I am not required by law to give this information, threatening me to do so is coercion. The threat is implied when the officer continues after asking for my date of birth with "Look look look, you're in a lot of @#$%."
3) At 09:15, an officer says "Help me out here, where's the blue card or we're just going to take the gun." Here I was threatened that if I do not give him my blue card or explain where it is, they would confiscate my weapon. I have the right to remain silent and not explain the whereabouts of my blue card, and the officer attempted to compel me to do otherwise under threat of loss of my property.
4) At 11:55, I ask the officer if I'm free to go. He responds "We can't find you in the computer." implying that no, I'm not free to go, and since I'm not in his system and that he will continue to make me stand here in handcuffs. I am tricked by his intimidation and give up the location of my birth, but realize his trick and refuse to give up my social security number. He goes back to the implied threat when he says "I can't run you, I don't know your name" at 14:00.
5) At 15:05, the officer threatens me with hindering his investigation. He says "If you want to keep hindering my investigation, I'm just going to put your gun in evidence, then you're going to have to explain to a judge why you're hindering an investigation, and why you wouldn't give me your information so I could give you your gun back". This is a clear threat that my refusal to give information the law does not require me to give and exercising my constitutional right to remain silent will require me to hire a lawyer and ask a judge for my property back, a very expensive proposition.
6) At 15:30, the officer asks me if I want to go to jail. I obviously respond that I do not. He responds immediately by saying "I need your social security number, I need to see your ID, and I need the blue card". Again, the threat is quite clear. If I don't give him my social security number, show him my ID, and explain the whereabouts of my blue card, I'm going to jail! A minute later, I give in to the threat, because I don't want to go to jail. He takes my wallet and I authorized him only to retrieve my ID. He instead empties all the contents without authority.
7) At 16:40, after illegally searching my wallet, he says "...you have to have that gun concealed." referring to the fact that I have a concealed weapon permit. Again, the threat is that they will continue to harass and detain me each and every time they see me and I am not concealing my weapon. I know the gun laws well and know that this is ludicrous and only once I laugh and call him out does he give up trying to coerce me into complying.
8) At 22:20, the officer rewards me with the return of my property. Except he intends to do it on his terms in a manner which I did not agree with. He separates my gun into three separate pieces. If I do anything other than the way he says to do it, I'll be arrested. He places my magazine out of my control and out of their control, on public property with lots of pedestrians nearby. I easily could have been the victim of theft. Every time I disagreed with his proposed return of my gun he threatened me, and at one point even told me to "Shut up...I'm trying to explain something to you politely." He can talk to me however he likes, but telling me he'll arrest me if I reload the magazine while he's still there is clearly criminal coercion.
|
Vegassteve
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Las Vegas NV |
| Posts: | 388 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 05:54 pm |
|
pedrop357 wrote:
Assuming the OP was truthful, how many good cops came to his encounter? How many were respectful? How many DIDN'T threaten to arrest him for non-crimes? How many didn't take the stance that the law means what they say it means?
The story is entirely believable in that the behavior is consistent with behavior documented hundreds, possibly thousands, of times in video and audio over the last 20+ years.
Tim and his story are 100% true. I have heard the audio of the stop. It is sad that they did step all over his rights.
|
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 07:15 pm |
|
joeschmo wrote: Have a nice hate filled life 
Aw, how cute. He thinks this is my whole life... I don't even have to rebut you anymore, anyone with a room temperature (or above) IQ can smell this rat.
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | Tennessee |
| Posts: | 1066 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 07:41 pm |
|
joeschmo wrote:
They aren't out to get you or to make your life difficult, they are out to do a job. While there are a few corrupt ones, 99% are better people that care more about this country than you ever will.
And you know this how?
my take on this is simple : there are enough corrupt cops to make it impossible to trust any of them. There are just far far too many civil rights violations going on at the hands of law enforcement to justify saying that 99% of them are "better people, or care more". If they violate a SINGLE--a SINGLE Constitutional right then most certainly they are not a "good cop". If they try to intimidate one of us, or buffalo any of us--then they are not "good". If they try to make up things as they go along, then they are not "good" or "better people".
they should repeat 42 USC 1983 and 18 USC 241 and 242 a few times before they try to walk up to us and try to threaten, intimidate, harass or assault any of us.
A single violation of any right guaranteed under the Constitution should be enough to cause them to lose their job at the very least, but what I would really and ideally like to see is federal civil rights prosecutions taking place and the message sent that "You shall not violate the Constitutional rights of any citizen" and think you can hide behind your badge.
|
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 07:47 pm |
|
suntzu wrote: there are enough corrupt cops to make it impossible to trust any of them. There are just far far too many civil rights violations going on at the hands of law enforcement to justify saying that 99% of them are "better people, or care more". If they violate a SINGLE--a SINGLE Constitutional right then most certainly they are not a "good cop". If they try to intimidate one of us, or buffalo any of us--then they are not "good". If they try to make up things as they go along, then they are not "good" or "better people".
they should repeat 42 USC 1983 and 18 USC 241 and 242 a few times before they try to walk up to us and try to threaten, intimidate, harass or assault any of us.
A single violation of any right guaranteed under the Constitution should be enough to cause them to lose their job at the very least, but what I would really and ideally like to see is federal civil rights prosecutions taking place and the message sent that "You shall not violate the Constitutional rights of any citizen" and think you can hide behind your badge.
This.
+ in a locale where the LEOs own and operate the Methamphetamine Business, even the 'good ones' have to play ball, or else.
My ability to defend myself from them is field-proven. Don't question it. It's a @#$%ing war here. Only the oblivious and the collaborative are spared the experience.
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | Tennessee |
| Posts: | 1066 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 07:51 pm |
|
timf343,
have you been back in touch with the FBI about your complaint? What about the local department that you filed with? The local good ol' boy network requires them to sweep it under the rug if they think they can get away with it--at least that is how it works here in the southern part of the country. I would never let it rest until I had pushed it to the point of no return.
Last edited on Tue Oct 27th, 2009 07:53 pm by suntzu
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | Tennessee |
| Posts: | 1066 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 07:55 pm |
|
ixtow wrote: suntzu wrote: there are enough corrupt cops to make it impossible to trust any of them. There are just far far too many civil rights violations going on at the hands of law enforcement to justify saying that 99% of them are "better people, or care more". If they violate a SINGLE--a SINGLE Constitutional right then most certainly they are not a "good cop". If they try to intimidate one of us, or buffalo any of us--then they are not "good". If they try to make up things as they go along, then they are not "good" or "better people".
they should repeat 42 USC 1983 and 18 USC 241 and 242 a few times before they try to walk up to us and try to threaten, intimidate, harass or assault any of us.
A single violation of any right guaranteed under the Constitution should be enough to cause them to lose their job at the very least, but what I would really and ideally like to see is federal civil rights prosecutions taking place and the message sent that "You shall not violate the Constitutional rights of any citizen" and think you can hide behind your badge.
This.
+ in a locale where the LEOs own and operate the Methamphetamine Business, even the 'good ones' have to play ball, or else.
My ability to defend myself from them is field-proven. Don't question it. It's a @#$%ing war here. Only the oblivious and the collaborative are spared the experience.
collaborators can never be trusted either, and the oblivious really are not oblivious--they simply turn a blind eye because they don't want to see.
|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Fri Oct 30th, 2009 05:03 am |
|
I spoke with my attorney and he agreed I could speak with the IA folks.
So I met with them this morning at 7am at their West Charleston office. I entered the office open carrying and when I met with the Detective assigned to my case I saw him notice the weapon.
His Sgt came out and the three of us went into an interview room. They mentioned they were aware I was armed and that they were OK with that. I was mentally prepared for them to tell me I couldn't carry it, but they were cool.
With their permission, I audio recorded the interview. At the conclusion of the investigation, I may release a copy of the tape, or at least portions of it, but agreed to withhold public release while their investigation was ongoing.
It took an hour and a half, but at my attorney's direction, I didn't answer any questions that were not already in my typed complaint. They were professional and when asked whether I wanted criminal charges filed against the officers they were investigating, I hemmed and hawed a bit as I debated it with myself, but ultimately said that yes, I felt criminal charges were appropriate and I gave them a copy of the research I posted a few posts above citing the specific crimes I thought were broken.
|
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 30th, 2009 06:10 am |
|
Vegassteve wrote: pedrop357 wrote: Assuming the OP was truthful, how many good cops came to his encounter? How many were respectful? How many DIDN'T threaten to arrest him for non-crimes? How many didn't take the stance that the law means what they say it means?
The story is entirely believable in that the behavior is consistent with behavior documented hundreds, possibly thousands, of times in video and audio over the last 20+ years.
Tim and his story are 100% true. I have heard the audio of the stop. It is sad that they did step all over his rights.
How many good Officers were there?
OK, lets count. How many Officers recognized and rejected the behavior of the bad ones? How many Officers arrested the Officers who were committing FELONIES against Tim? How many of these Officers were fired, suspended, or even talked mean to by an Officer who recognized and rejected the criminal behavior they wer committing?
Zero.
Zero is how many "good apples" were present.
|
riverrat10k
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Aug 25th, 2008 |
| Location: | Bon Air, Va |
| Posts: | 492 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31st, 2009 01:54 am |
|
I have missed this thread until today. Tim, it looks like you have a helluva case. Best of luck to you and repost any legal funds info if you would.
Sic Semper Tyrannus
Last edited on Sat Oct 31st, 2009 02:00 am by riverrat10k
|
joeschmo
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 28th, 2009 |
| Location: | Nevada USA |
| Posts: | 44 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31st, 2009 02:43 am |
|
ixtow wrote: Vegassteve wrote: pedrop357 wrote: Assuming the OP was truthful, how many good cops came to his encounter? How many were respectful? How many DIDN'T threaten to arrest him for non-crimes? How many didn't take the stance that the law means what they say it means?
The story is entirely believable in that the behavior is consistent with behavior documented hundreds, possibly thousands, of times in video and audio over the last 20+ years.
Tim and his story are 100% true. I have heard the audio of the stop. It is sad that they did step all over his rights.
How many good Officers were there?
OK, lets count. How many Officers recognized and rejected the behavior of the bad ones? How many Officers arrested the Officers who were committing FELONIES against Tim? How many of these Officers were fired, suspended, or even talked mean to by an Officer who recognized and rejected the criminal behavior they wer committing?
Zero.
Zero is how many "good apples" were present.
There is a thing called a chain of command. Tim's stop was initiated by a Sergeant, or a supervisor. All other officers are below a Sergeant in seniority and rank, and just like the military, you don't question your superiors without being in serious trouble for insubordination, especially when it's in public.
|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31st, 2009 05:26 am |
|
At the stop, I was interrogated by 3 officers. The other officers were standing around and said nothing. I imagine their job was just to keep me in line. There was one officer for example who just stood behind me.
As joeschmo said, and I tend to agree, the other officers were subordinate to Sgt Miller who initiated the stop. The Sgt needn't explain his reasons for the stop (to them). It was probably just like any other call in which he needed backup. So I would expect there were at least a few who were ordered to the scene who did not have any background whatsoever, and therefore did not necessarily know the stop was unlawful. My protests probably sounded a lot like any other suspect who didn't want to be in handcuffs.
|
N6ATF
Banned
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31st, 2009 06:50 am |
|
There is a difference between "deferring to those who were there from the beginning" and "just following orders".
I was taught by a retired peace officer that every LEO in CA (except for the reserves and perhaps probationers) has exactly the same POST certification and authority by law. So even if the chief of police/sheriff makes an unlawful "order" (really just a suggestion), the line officers have exactly the same authority and can decline the suggestion.
Internal affairs is not the singular division in every agency that has more authority to actually enforce the law against its fellow officers - they are merely formally organized to deal with bad cops that any officer can and should investigate on his own, if he abides by his oath.
Last edited on Sat Oct 31st, 2009 06:55 am by N6ATF
|
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31st, 2009 09:58 am |
|
joeschmo wrote: ixtow wrote: Vegassteve wrote: pedrop357 wrote: Assuming the OP was truthful, how many good cops came to his encounter? How many were respectful? How many DIDN'T threaten to arrest him for non-crimes? How many didn't take the stance that the law means what they say it means?
The story is entirely believable in that the behavior is consistent with behavior documented hundreds, possibly thousands, of times in video and audio over the last 20+ years.
Tim and his story are 100% true. I have heard the audio of the stop. It is sad that they did step all over his rights.
How many good Officers were there?
OK, lets count. How many Officers recognized and rejected the behavior of the bad ones? How many Officers arrested the Officers who were committing FELONIES against Tim? How many of these Officers were fired, suspended, or even talked mean to by an Officer who recognized and rejected the criminal behavior they wer committing?
Zero.
Zero is how many "good apples" were present.
There is a thing called a chain of command. Tim's stop was initiated by a Sergeant, or a supervisor. All other officers are below a Sergeant in seniority and rank, and just like the military, you don't question your superiors without being in serious trouble for insubordination, especially when it's in public.
And just like in the Military, you don't have to, and have a duty NOT to, follow orders of a criminal nature.
|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Sat Oct 31st, 2009 11:16 am |
|
I understand, my only point was that some of the officers may not have known the stop to be absent RAS if they were called in as backup. Sgt Miller knew he had no RAS. Two plain clothes officers knew they had no RAS. But the others may have had no knowledge that the stop was unlawful.
And for this reason, my allegations are that only three officers were involved in misconduct in this stop.
|
DON`T TREAD ON ME
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 24th, 2009 05:31 pm |
|
I OC'ed the entire strip. However the after party didnt go so well as I was asked to leave the Eagles Clubhouse, overall good day !!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj7-Vm8wZPw
|
vegasche1023
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 29th, 2009 |
| Location: | Las Vegas, NV |
| Posts: | 64 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 24th, 2009 07:55 pm |
|
| I got stopped on Saturday in front of planet hollywood. Cop threatened to arrest me for not having Blue Card. I argued that I wasn't required to(stated on lvmpd website). I pulled out my cellphone and went to their website and showed them. They walked away and spoke amongst themselves for a minute. I looked at a buddy of mine that was standing a few feet away and loudly said, "Call my sister and have her call my lawyer." They immediately walked over to me and told me I was free to go. The sgt said that as far as he knew that blue card were required to be carried(he pulled his out and said that even they are required to carry it). I was so furious that I didn't even write down their names.
|
The Big Guy
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 24th, 2009 08:06 pm |
|
| Don't forget in cases like this to mention that a federal court has ruled that merely carrying a firearm is not reason for a stop. Even if you were required to carry the blue card, they can't stop you to inquire absent RAS that you have, are, or about to commit a crime. You are required to have a license to drive a car but they can't stop you just to check if you have one. Same thing should apply here.
|
Vegassteve
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Las Vegas NV |
| Posts: | 388 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 25th, 2009 01:31 am |
|
| Why on earth do you guys not get names when stopped? The only way to end this is to have names badge numbers and win some cash in court from these abusers. I just dont get it. If it is important enough for you to post it on a internet website then it should be just as important to get names.
|
timf343
Campaign Veteran
|
Posted: Wed Nov 25th, 2009 02:24 am |
|
I'll meet you on the strip this weekend. I go late, like 2-3am Saturday night. Will meet you OC in front of Bally's between the two pedestrian cross walks.
As for any awards in court, according to my lawyer, usually it's only "nominal" charges like $1.00 per incident. Anything else usually requires more egregious violations, like actually being arrested in thrown in jail, or physical injury, etc...
Last edited on Wed Nov 25th, 2009 02:25 am by timf343
|
|
|
|
|
