| Author | Post |
|---|
doobie
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed May 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 07:04 am |
|
I was detained earlier in the day in Manchester, then went to go to a gun store in Hooksett, NH and was detained again....
I'll let the video speak for itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NUpWWgx5qI
|
Ohio Patriot
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 01:02 pm |
|
Couple things:
1. That officer needs to be reprimanded for his unprofessional behavior.
2. During an encounter such as that, ask if you are free to leave. If you are free to leave, do so. If you are not free to leave, say nothing.
|
doobie
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed May 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 01:15 pm |
|
Ohio Patriot wrote: Couple things:
1. That officer needs to be reprimanded for his unprofessional behavior.
2. During an encounter such as that, ask if you are free to leave. If you are free to leave, do so. If you are not free to leave, say nothing.
As a general rule when I first get detained somewhere I let them 'led' the conversation, and once I saw the cop was going to be belligerent, I decided I wanted to continue and see how it played out. Unfortunately I forgot to get his name/badge. And I don't want to place a complaint because even though it is police policy to accept anonymous complaints they usually ignore them. However I'll be drafting a letter and sending it to the CLEO, AG, and town news paper.
|
Hendu024
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 04:40 pm |
|
Sorry to hear that you are getting harassed in N.H. I will be going back home to Maine this summer to visit, maybe I will stop to see some relatives in N.H. and do a bit of strolling around town... I will also be OC'ing in Maine, I have heard of a few problems up there as well... Keep up the good work!
|
codename_47
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 16th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 330 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 05:51 pm |
|
As a general rule when I first get detained somewhere I let them 'led' the conversation, and once I saw the cop was going to be belligerent, I decided I wanted to continue and see how it played out.
Why bother? You aren't going to do anyting about it. Nothing good on TV?
Unfortunately I forgot to get his name/badge. And I don't want to place a complaint because even though it is police policy to accept anonymous complaints they usually ignore them. However I'll be drafting a letter and sending it to the CLEO, AG, and town news paper.
Once again, draft a letter for what? So people can just say "gee whiz?"
What are you going to DO about it? If you aren't going to do anything, then you shouldn't complain about being taken advantage of.
|
HankT
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 06:19 pm |
|
doobie wrote: I was detained earlier in the day in Manchester, then went to go to a gun store in Hooksett, NH and was detained again....
I'll let the video speak for itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NUpWWgx5qI
Cool video. I think you handled your side of the verbal interaction just fine.
Did you get a ride from someone else? If so, were you stopped in the car you got a ride in?
What kind of video camera are you using? Did the cop ask about or say anything about the video camera rolling?
|
doobie
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed May 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 08:01 pm |
|
HankT wrote: doobie wrote: I was detained earlier in the day in Manchester, then went to go to a gun store in Hooksett, NH and was detained again....
I'll let the video speak for itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NUpWWgx5qI
Cool video. I think you handled your side of the verbal interaction just fine.
Did you get a ride from someone else? If so, were you stopped in the car you got a ride in?
What kind of video camera are you using? Did the cop ask about or say anything about the video camera rolling?
I did get a ride. We weren't stopped. By the time they got there it was an hour and a half later. Either I ended up losing the cop or they stopped watching me. I went back to my car while waiting for my friend and unloaded and stowed my firearms to and waited.
it's a crappy JVC video camera that was swaying in my hand as I held my hands away from my waist. The only comment about it was when hey waved his hand around me when he was saying something about everything all holstered up.
|
Jeremy2141
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 6th, 2009 08:25 pm |
|
| You sure do attract the police!
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 7th, 2009 01:39 am |
|
May I suggest including text in the video to point out legalities and each seeming violation of your rights.
For example, the officer's command in the beginning to keep your hand away from your weapon makes it a Terry Stop, according to US vs Mendenhall,1 even though the next couple pre-profanity questions were put across in a milder tone.
Of course, the profanity and harsh tone indicate a situation where a reasonable person would conclude he is not free to disregard the officer and walk away.1
This sort of information will tend to educate viewers on YouTube.
Also, if possible, you need to get a copy of the 911 call and/or dispatch log to find out what the officer was told. This will help fix whether he had reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) for a Terry Stop.
Your complaint/petition for redress loses some effectiveness if it is discovered someone made a false report about you to 911 that gave the cop RAS. Remember, its not so much what you are actually doing, as what information the cop is given.
1. US vs Mendenhall: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0446_0544_ZO.html
We conclude that a person has been "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. [n6] Examples of circumstances that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, would be the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer's request might be compelled. See Terry v. Ohio, supra at 19, n. 16; Dunaway v. 442 U.S. 200, 207, and n. 6; 3 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure 53-55 (1978). (emphasis added)
|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 7th, 2009 02:41 am |
|
'This is what y'all do in NH? Go trollin' with a camera?
'Left your license in your Kilt?  As in... Kilt?
|
doobie
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed May 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 7th, 2009 03:30 am |
|
Citizen wrote: May I suggest including text in the video to point out legalities and each seeming violation of your rights.
For example, the officer's command in the beginning to keep your hand away from your weapon makes it a Terry Stop, according to US vs Mendenhall,1 even though the next couple pre-profanity questions were put across in a milder tone.
Of course, the profanity and harsh tone indicate a situation where a reasonable person would conclude he is not free to disregard the officer and walk away.1
This sort of information will tend to educate viewers on YouTube.
Also, if possible, you need to get a copy of the 911 call and/or dispatch log to find out what the officer was told. This will help fix whether he had reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) for a Terry Stop.
Your complaint/petition for redress loses some effectiveness if it is discovered someone made a false report about you to 911 that gave the cop RAS. Remember, its not so much what you are actually doing, as what information the cop is given.
1. US vs Mendenhall: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0446_0544_ZO.html
We conclude that a person has been "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. [n6] Examples of circumstances that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, would be the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer's request might be compelled. See Terry v. Ohio, supra at 19, n. 16; Dunaway v. 442 U.S. 200, 207, and n. 6; 3 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure 53-55 (1978). (emphasis added)
The lawyer here told me that the only complaint I really could have successfully is on the officers use of profanity but that the complaint is weakened due to the fact that I didn't video record him doing it.
And that what occurred could not be construed as a real terry stop in courts.
|
doobie
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed May 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 7th, 2009 03:32 am |
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: 'This is what y'all do in NH? Go trollin' with a camera?
'Left your license in your Kilt? As in... Kilt?
I wasn't trolling. I carry a camera with me 90% of the time, even if I'm not carrying a pistol. I walked one way down a road until I decided to turn around and walk back to my car.
Yes, Kilt as in a Scottish Kilt. I wore it the night before and went to a pub.
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 7th, 2009 05:53 am |
|
doobie wrote: Citizen wrote: May I suggest including text in the video to point out legalities and each seeming violation of your rights.
For example, the officer's command in the beginning to keep your hand away from your weapon makes it a Terry Stop, according to US vs Mendenhall,1 even though the next couple pre-profanity questions were put across in a milder tone.
Of course, the profanity and harsh tone indicate a situation where a reasonable person would conclude he is not free to disregard the officer and walk away.1
This sort of information will tend to educate viewers on YouTube.
Also, if possible, you need to get a copy of the 911 call and/or dispatch log to find out what the officer was told. This will help fix whether he had reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) for a Terry Stop.
Your complaint/petition for redress loses some effectiveness if it is discovered someone made a false report about you to 911 that gave the cop RAS. Remember, its not so much what you are actually doing, as what information the cop is given.
1. US vs Mendenhall: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0446_0544_ZO.html
We conclude that a person has been "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. [n6] Examples of circumstances that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, would be the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer's request might be compelled. See Terry v. Ohio, supra at 19, n. 16; Dunaway v. 442 U.S. 200, 207, and n. 6; 3 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure 53-55 (1978). (emphasis added)
The lawyer here told me that the only complaint I really could have successfully is on the officers use of profanity but that the complaint is weakened due to the fact that I didn't video record him doing it.
And that what occurred could not be construed as a real terry stop in courts.
It would seem the US Supreme Court would view it as a Terry Stop.
I would not put a lot of faith in that lawyer's advice. Grain of salt, and all that.
When the cop said "[don't touch the gun]" did you have any doubt from the tone of his voice that if you had touched your gun, compliance would be compelled, perhaps at gun point?
When he was using strong language, loudness, and harsh tone to put across some questions, would a reasonable person conclude he was free to disregard the officer's inquiries and walk away?
If New Hampshire has an open records law/Freedom of Information Act/Sunshine Law, I would first try to obtain a copy of the 911 call and any radio traffic to and from the cop. Might as well go for in-car text messages, too.
Once you know what was reported to the cop, you can judge whether he had RAS for a Terry Stop.
Whether he did or did not, I would make a formal written complaint. To hell with failing to video him. Failure to video does not weaken the complaint. It only fails to strengthen it. Its a nullity. The presence of the audio goes a long ways. Especially when the cops supervisors recognize his voice. Let them try to wriggle out of an audio recording that is clearly one of their cops. Unless they want to try to say that you interviewed the cop previously and had a friend do a very good impression of the cop to fake the audio.
There is another aspect to look at, too.
Clearly, in my mind, you were detained. BUT, he did not seize your gun. Heh, heh, heh. This tells me he probably did not have RAS. I can't imagine that a cop who would be profane would omit to seize a gun during a Terry Stop. Nor pass up the chance to run a serial number. Re-stated, I'm betting he did not have RAS because if he had, he probably would have immediately seized your gun for officer safety.
|
No1
Banned
| Joined: | Wed Jun 25th, 2008 |
| Location: | Zimbabwe |
| Posts: | 114 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 7th, 2009 12:50 pm |
|
doobie wrote: HankT wrote: donot feed the troll henriettaTG is anti-gun possibly cleo's alter ego
free legal advise is worth that much
Last edited on Sun Jun 7th, 2009 12:51 pm by No1
|
doobie
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed May 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 7th, 2009 02:31 pm |
|
Citizen wrote: doobie wrote: Citizen wrote: May I suggest including text in the video to point out legalities and each seeming violation of your rights.
For example, the officer's command in the beginning to keep your hand away from your weapon makes it a Terry Stop, according to US vs Mendenhall,1 even though the next couple pre-profanity questions were put across in a milder tone.
Of course, the profanity and harsh tone indicate a situation where a reasonable person would conclude he is not free to disregard the officer and walk away.1
This sort of information will tend to educate viewers on YouTube.
Also, if possible, you need to get a copy of the 911 call and/or dispatch log to find out what the officer was told. This will help fix whether he had reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) for a Terry Stop.
Your complaint/petition for redress loses some effectiveness if it is discovered someone made a false report about you to 911 that gave the cop RAS. Remember, its not so much what you are actually doing, as what information the cop is given.
1. US vs Mendenhall: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0446_0544_ZO.html
We conclude that a person has been "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave. [n6] Examples of circumstances that might indicate a seizure, even where the person did not attempt to leave, would be the threatening presence of several officers, the display of a weapon by an officer, some physical touching of the person of the citizen, or the use of language or tone of voice indicating that compliance with the officer's request might be compelled. See Terry v. Ohio, supra at 19, n. 16; Dunaway v. 442 U.S. 200, 207, and n. 6; 3 W. LaFave, Search and Seizure 53-55 (1978). (emphasis added)
The lawyer here told me that the only complaint I really could have successfully is on the officers use of profanity but that the complaint is weakened due to the fact that I didn't video record him doing it.
And that what occurred could not be construed as a real terry stop in courts.
It would seem the US Supreme Court would view it as a Terry Stop.
I would not put a lot of faith in that lawyer's advice. Grain of salt, and all that.
When the cop said "[don't touch the gun]" did you have any doubt from the tone of his voice that if you had touched your gun, compliance would be compelled, perhaps at gun point?
When he was using strong language, loudness, and harsh tone to put across some questions, would a reasonable person conclude he was free to disregard the officer's inquiries and walk away?
If New Hampshire has an open records law/Freedom of Information Act/Sunshine Law, I would first try to obtain a copy of the 911 call and any radio traffic to and from the cop. Might as well go for in-car text messages, too.
Once you know what was reported to the cop, you can judge whether he had RAS for a Terry Stop.
Whether he did or did not, I would make a formal written complaint. To hell with failing to video him. Failure to video does not weaken the complaint. It only fails to strengthen it. Its a nullity. The presence of the audio goes a long ways. Especially when the cops supervisors recognize his voice. Let them try to wriggle out of an audio recording that is clearly one of their cops. Unless they want to try to say that you interviewed the cop previously and had a friend do a very good impression of the cop to fake the audio.
There is another aspect to look at, too.
Clearly, in my mind, you were detained. BUT, he did not seize your gun. Heh, heh, heh. This tells me he probably did not have RAS. I can't imagine that a cop who would be profane would omit to seize a gun during a Terry Stop. Nor pass up the chance to run a serial number. Re-stated, I'm betting he did not have RAS because if he had, he probably would have immediately seized your gun for officer safety.
He had nothing on me which is why I did not answer his questions. He did not answer the question with any unlawful activity I did wrong when I asked him. I could have asked him a number of times if I did anything wrong and if he didn't answer I could have just started saying, "Am I free to go?" and if he didn't answer this, "Is this a lawful terry stop, if so what is your cause to detain me or is it an unlawful terry stop?" And at that point I could have probably had something on them.
The attorney's I've talked to here have basically told me, until I have clear reason to believe it's not just a 'chat' it isn't a terry stop. The first time I was detained I could have probably considered it a terry stop because my wallet and shirt I was wearing were seized, without my permission, just taken from me. Wallet after I said, don't take/don't open it; but none of that was on video/audio.
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 8th, 2009 02:35 am |
|
doobie wrote: SNIP The attorney's I've talked to here have basically told me, until I have clear reason to believe it's not just a 'chat' it isn't a terry stop. The first time I was detained I could have probably considered it a terry stop because my wallet and shirt I was wearing were seized, without my permission, just taken from me. Wallet after I said, don't take/don't open it; but none of that was on video/audio.
I don't understand why you bring the attorney into it again. Are you in agreement with him? Not in agreement?
Please, read the law for yourself and compare it to what happened. You even called it a detention in your OP. Read the cases cited within Mendenhall if you need to in order to be certain yourself.
Simply put, you were detained/stopped/Terry Stopped/seized. They all mean the same thing in this context.
In the first instance, personal property was seized. In the second instance you were seized. Just because it didn't involve taking property off your person does not mean it was not a seizure for the purposes of the 4th Amendment. Cites are included above.
Was it as serious as if he had proned you out, cuffed you, and rifled your pockets? No. Was it brief? Yes. But, neither of those are the standards for whether a seizure has occurred.
Does a police officer have authority to command you to keep your hands away from your gun during a consensual encounter? No. Those terms are contradictory. This was not a consensual encounter. The cop established that with the first words out of his mouth.
Would any reasonable person feel free to ignore an angry cop, cursing his questions at him, and walk away? No. Even being well versed in my rights, I would not ignore that and walk away. Legal or illegal detention.
Even if it is an illegal detention, walking away from an angry, cursing cop may well trigger a forceful response from the police officer. In this regard, its not whether you or I think the cop has authority. Its whether he thinks he has authority to use force to compel you to remain. Whether he is right or wrong in his thinking does not enter into the question at this point. If he believes he does, you will get forced. Since you really don't know what he was told via radio, and you really don't know whether he thinks he has authority to use force, it makes no sense, even after reviewing the situation in more depth than is likely during the encounter itself, to ignore a police officer doing that and walk away.
By the way. Did the cop have a hand on his gun?
It looks to me like this officer got bent out of shape because he has a personal disagreement with citizens being able to defend themselves. And overstepped his bounds.
Use your own judgement on what to do about it. I'd hammer it hard in a formal written complaint. After getting my ducks in a row by obtaining the 911 call recording, radio traffic, field interview notes, etc.
|
Phssthpok
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 702 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 8th, 2009 04:11 am |
|
As I posted over in the Michigan section:
Don't ASK if you are free to go.... ESTABLISH that you are:
Am I under arrest? Open the bid with the highest card as they must 'trump' you to retain authority. I dare say 99.9% of the time this will catch them off guard and they will respond in the negative. This does two things:
1: If you ARE under arrest, you now know to STFU to protect yourself.
2: If you are NOT under arrest, you have established such through their own statements, and just trumped any future claims of 'resisting arrest' as you peacefully walk away (after the following).
Am I being detained? Same as above....establish through their own statements that you are NOT being detained. If they indicate that you ARE being detained, DEMAND RAS. Do not relent. It would seem to be genereal consensus that they are not required to articulate their suspicion to YOU, just that they have it for the judge, but I maintain that if they truly do have RAS then it should be no problem to voice to ME it in the instant matter in order for me to know that they are not playing on (my) ignorance and trying to trick (me) into voluntarily surrendering my rights secured by the fourth and fifth.
If they indicate that you are NOT being detained, do not ASK if you are free to leave...make it a statement that you ARE leaving:
"Thank you. Having established through your own statements (Emphasize that line!), that I am NOT under arrest NOR being detained I am terminating this encounter and departing forthwith (or 'leaving immediately' if that's more natural to your speech patterns). I leave you in peace, and bid you good day."
Then turn and WALK. Any action on their part that hinders your free movement from that point on is a direct CRIMINAL violation of 18USC sec 242. Remember....recorders are your friends.
I have had folks say that the whole "departing forthwith" and "I leave you in peace" thing was a little over the top, but I wanted to include a formal statement to establish that I was offering no resistance to any exercise of lawful authority but simply removing myself from their presence and the olde-tyme language pattern seemed to get the point across the best.
(caveat: do the research to determine if your state has a clearly defined 'stop and identify' statute. )
|
SGT Jensen
State Researcher
| Joined: | Sat Feb 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | Santaquin, Utah USA |
| Posts: | 1956 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 8th, 2009 06:21 am |
|
No1 wrote: donot feed the troll henriettaTG is anti-gun possibly cleo's alter ego
Doug, is that you?  Naw... couldn't be. Not with that poorly written sentence.
I wouldn't worry too much about Hank, (s)he is good people! 
ETA: I find it humorous that this thread on OCDO generates a few "good games", but if you find the similar posting over at defensivecarry.com, people are flipping out like the world has come to an end! 
Last edited on Mon Jun 8th, 2009 07:49 am by SGT Jensen
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 8th, 2009 06:48 am |
|
Phssthpok wrote: As I posted over in the Michigan section...
I didn't want to get into tuning up his tactics. But, I agree they could use some strengthening.
Doobie,
I am not a lawyer.
If you live or OC in an area where the police are not used to OCers, I strongly urge you to start invoking your rights immediately during a police encounter. Politely.
A police encounter is a negotiation, with your freedom as the prize. The police are veterans at what they do. They do it every day. You are going up against guys who know all the angles.
You want to negotiate from the strongest position possible. This is obtained by exercising your rights and asking questions. From the outset.
For example,
Cop: "Don't touch that gun."
OCer: "No offense, officer. I know you are just doing your job, but I do not consent to this encounter, am I free to go?" (You have now established that any continuation is non-consensual aka a detention.)
Cop: "If you are not up to something, why do you object?"
OCer: "Officer, lets get the formalities out of the way. I do not consent to any searches or seizures, and I will not answer any questions without an attorney. Why am I being detained?"
Cop: "We did not say you are being detained. We just want to know why you are carrying that gun."
OCer: "I've already invoked my 5A rights. I do not consent to this encounter. Am I free to go?"
You get the idea.
You can play, probe, and fence with the police if you think you are good enough. But do it after you have established the most important legal points--your rights.
Hey, I am all for giving the police rope to discover unprofessionalism. Just make sure you've tied off the other end by covering your bases on your rights.
I notice you have a sort of low post count. I recommend taking some time and really reading through the forum on your rights, court opinions on 4A and 5A, how to deal with police encounters, etc. It will take some digging, but it will be worth it.
You might start with the videos at the link below, then read through the other materials at the link:
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=23936&forum_id=65&highlight=inchoate
|
nakedshoplifter
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 9th, 2009 01:30 pm |
|
Doobie,
I just watched this video, and I for one think you're doing us all a disservice. The folks who normally go out OC and get harassed by cops are not looking for harassment. We don't pace up and down the street in a kilt, wearing a firearm, spare mags, and flashlight while filming ourselves opining "Ridley style" about how nervous we are making nearby citizens while noting the positions of police officers around us. I make special note of this because you don't seem to have a purpose during this walk except to provoke a police response, which... surprise surprise... you received. I've seen this time and time again, where someone on this forum grabs a camera and attempts to provoke a police response so they can post up on the forum how heroic they were. Open Carry should be carried out by citizens who are responsible and mature, the gun is just another tool on their belt. *If* they encounter police in during their daily activities and they record it, well great. But, we as a whole do not go out instigating police contacts. Feel free to continue doing this if you must, but don't expect a lot of sympathy here when you get hooked up by Officer Friendly because you were looking for trouble.
|
Current time is 11:11 am | Page: 1 2 3   |
|
|
|
