| Author | Post |
|---|
possumboy
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 13th, 2008 05:46 pm |
|
Ohio Patriot wrote: johnnyb wrote: please attempt to get those officers fired.
I would rather see them arrested.
If they are found guilty of a Civil Rights violation, there is a good chance they will spend time in a Federal Institution.
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/civilrights/civilrts.htm
Check out the case and news section. It talks about LEOs serving time in the Federal Prison System for civil rights violations.
|
Statkowski
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 13th, 2008 06:22 pm |
|
Well, wishful thinking for some, but they weren't charged by the FBI for any criminal violations of the Civil Rights Act. A civil action was filed, which may well limit what the judge may do.
Of course, there's always Section 5301 of the Crimes Code, where they could be charged with Official Oppression. It's a Second Degree Misdemeanor.
|
possumboy
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 13th, 2008 07:31 pm |
|
| Do we know if a Civil Rights violation claim was made to the FBI? I believe they can wait to see if they are convicted here before reporting. I have not fully seen the start of the process, I mostly see the end results.
|
Statkowski
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 13th, 2008 09:56 pm |
|
| These things take time. Dickson City has to reply to the accusation, then the Dickson Four have to reply to the reply, etc., etc. It's going to be a long, hot summer. Of course, Dickson City may be sweating more than normal.
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Fri Jun 13th, 2008 10:04 pm |
|
possumboy wrote: Do we know if a Civil Rights violation claim was made to the FBI? I believe they can wait to see if they are convicted here before reporting. I have not fully seen the start of the process, I mostly see the end results.
If the FBI does investigate a violation under 18 USC 242, any false or misleading staement made by the police or police chief to any person whatsoever can be prosecuted by the federal government as obstruction of justice, 18 USC 1512.
|
MustangDave
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | New Castle, DE |
| Posts: | 82 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15th, 2008 11:00 pm |
|
| So will the 911 tapes be released? I'm not sure if they are really important, but I'm curious to read what the caller and operator were saying. Last edited on Sun Jun 15th, 2008 11:05 pm by MustangDave
|
Statkowski
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 15th, 2008 11:13 pm |
|
| Under Pennsylvania's Right to Know Law (RTKL), 911 tapes may be released upon request at the discretion of the 911 agency. To date, as far as we know (the attorneys involved may or may not know otherwise), no such recordings have been forthcoming. The court may or may not order their release.
|
pacrimescode5904
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri May 9th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 12 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 18th, 2008 03:10 pm |
|
PA State Police will investigate any complaints made by a citizen against any police officer from any municipality. I would definitely file complaints with them as well as with the FBI.
I just can't believe the ignorance of these guys up there. I thought my former PD was backward...
|
Steve in PA
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Nov 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | Wilkes-Barre |
| Posts: | 118 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19th, 2008 05:28 am |
|
| I've never heard of the PSP investigating other officers from other depts.
|
Statkowski
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19th, 2008 12:36 pm |
|
| Well, who would investigate a one- or two-person police force then?
|
Steve in PA
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Nov 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | Wilkes-Barre |
| Posts: | 118 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19th, 2008 05:00 pm |
|
| I imagine it would be the DA's Office.
|
Statkowski
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 04:03 am |
|
A second civil rights lawsuit has been filed against Dickson City, this by another victim of the police.
http://paopencarry.org/kraft_complaint.pdf
Dickson City must be loving this. All that's needed now are private criminal complainst against the police officers involved.
|
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 06:13 am |
|
I very much like the part in paragraph 43 about the Borough not giving adequate training to officers to ensure they can identify the specific criminal provision they believe is being violated.
As I've said before, the problem isn't police not knowing the law. The problem is police being willing to initiate a nonconsensual encounter without knowing for a fact there is a law against it.
|
Weak 9mm
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 03:27 am |
|
apjonas wrote: What can be learned from these two letters to the paper?
What a Scam!!
I am sure these gentlemen had this whole plot set up and planned. They knew what the outcome was going to be and then would turn around and sue the city. Why didnt they pick a small restaurant with no one in it along a rural road? Why, because nothing like this would have happened. Nope, they had to go into the busiest, high traffic area where there was children and others and tote their guns out in the open on purpose. I am hoping this goes to trial and they lose. This is the biggest scam I have seen in the longest time
Brian, Scranton, PA
Added: Thursday June 12, 2008 at 02:41 PM EST
I don't know if this is true or not but frankly it doesn't matter. The outcome was dictated by the DCPD. "Testers" are often used to check landlord compliance with civil rights laws, so doing a "carry-in" dinner isn't a scam. Visiting a black landlord in a predominately black area doesn't really serve the purpose of testing. The law is the same in Dickson City as it is any rural area. What is different is the attitude of the police in respecting the rights of citizens.
LEECHES
These open carry people are just foaming at the mouth. The dinner is just a sideline of their true objective and that is confrontation. They got what they wanted, attention and press. They talk about Jack Booted Thugs when referring to police and compare them to Nazis. Go read some of the vile at their website. If they are so high and mighty, they should learn some respect to earn some respect! They are one sided bigots, unwilling to listen to anyone but their own voice and opinion. I hope they lose this case then maybe they will wither and go away. The common citizen does not support this minority!!! They picked the wrong crusade to fight.
Bob, NY
I agree with Bob in part. Some of the OCDO postings are not very genteel. I am not talking necessarily about the people in the DC case. I am trying to demonstrate how perception is sometimes as important as reality. Let us strive for intelligent, rational but polite exchanges. Imagine yourself in front of a judge defending open carry. Do some of the posts reflect less than favorably upon you? This is not the neighborhood sandbox. Namecalling and so's your mother types of retorts have no value and no place in our movement. A cleverly worded jab now and then is one thing. Four-letter words, derogatory comments on physical appearance or questioning someone's legitimacy at birth are out of bounds. You will notice the demeanor of lawyers in court. Are they all well-bred saints? No - they just want to win and refuse to let silly behavior interfere with that goal.
I do agree with your last part as well. All they have to do is find one post where somebody says "jack booted thug" and then they'll spread that around like crazy. Then anybody who hasn't seen the website is going to think "what a bunch of crazies." I agree that we must strive to be intelligent, respectful people on here, because the people who are against us will look for every little thing they can to make us out to be "lawless" citizens.
I am surprised of the attitudes of the residents of that area though. Do they really think that these guys wanted to get illegally detained? If they OC everywhere they go, how is it that this one time was a "scam?" It's a bit ridiculous to claim IMO, but I'm sure that's what these folks think of our "movement" (ie - the simple exercising of rights, not unlike when these people speak). Unfortunately for them, we do have the law (Although maybe not all of the enforcement community) on our side.
I think DeepDiver spoke the truth as well when he stated the following:
deepdiver wrote: The court won't fire either officer or the chief. The court will make their findings and the city council and mayor will make their disciplinary decisions. To discuss it otherwise loses focus on what we really want here.
Generally speaking, we do not want money beyond recouping actual damages and for punitive damages to drive the point home when there are abuses which is the purpose of punitive damages. We do not want people to get fired just for the sake of having some politician or LEO fired. We do not want to freak out the communities, abuse personal property rights or make the community spend lots of money on training seminars for their officers.
We want to be left alone to lawfully exercise our constitutional rights in peace. We are peaceful law abiding citizens choosing to exercise our rights and we want to exercise those rights as peacefully, quietly and uneventfully as everyone else exercises their right to vocalize their opinions or go to the church of their choice. That is what we need the public to understand. Discussing firings of LEOs and $ amount of damages just reinforces the impression of those in the two above posted letters.
What the "Dickson Dozen" wanted that night was not to be activists, but to just have a quiet dinner with their families and friends while they happened to be openly exercising one of their constitutional rights. We just want the same thing for the future and that would be the greatest outcome of the lawsuit.
I agree 100% with this statement too:
Citizen wrote: I very much like the part in paragraph 43 about the Borough not giving adequate training to officers to ensure they can identify the specific criminal provision they believe is being violated.
As I've said before, the problem isn't police not knowing the law. The problem is police being willing to initiate a nonconsensual encounter without knowing for a fact there is a law against it.
Last edited on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 03:38 am by Weak 9mm
|
Statkowski
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 01:20 pm |
|
Dickson City has thirty days in which to respond to the complaint. So, somewhere around the middle of the month we'll be able to see what excuses they come up with. Ought to be interesting reading.
May 2008: Dickson City Incident - good story.
June 2008: Lawsuit filed - interesting reading.
July 2008: Response filed - more interesting reading.
August 2008: Response to the response - still more interesting reading.
September 2008: Court date announced?
|
HyDef
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 22 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 04:40 am |
|
Statkowski wrote: Dickson City has thirty days in which to respond to the complaint. So, somewhere around the middle of the month we'll be able to see what excuses they come up with. Ought to be interesting reading.
May 2008: Dickson City Incident - good story.
June 2008: Lawsuit filed - interesting reading.
July 2008: Response filed - more interesting reading.
August 2008: Response to the response - still more interesting reading.
September 2008: Court date announced?
Sometime early 2009: Appeal filed with the Commonwealth Court by the Dickson Dozen after losing locally. This will more then likely happen since the judges in Lackawanna County are some of the most corrupt anywhere.
There is a local political activist here who is retired carpenter. He has had several decisions by a couple of different Judges from the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas overturned on appeal, and he represented himself in all those matters. He even had a sitting County Commisioner thrown off the ballot after appealing the local court's decision to allow him to remain on the ballot, to the PA Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in his favor.
|
Statkowski
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 04:50 am |
|
| Both lawsuits filed so far have been with the federal court, not Commonwealth court. This is the Major League.
|
HyDef
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 22 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 06:11 am |
|
Ahh yes, I forgot about that.
|
gnbrotz
Activist Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10th, 2008 01:43 am |
|
UPDATE
No surprises here. The defendants have filed for an extension. Standard legal stuff, and it's not being opposed by plaintiff's counsel. Check back after August 4. Defendants are being represented by Louis J. Isaacsohn.
New documents:
Motion to extend
Order for extension
Older documents:
Complaint (4 Plaintiffs)
Complaint (5th Plaintiff - filed seperately)Last edited on Thu Jul 10th, 2008 01:49 am by gnbrotz
|
Pointman
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10th, 2008 03:38 am |
|
| After watching Mr. Gura pull off the narrowest of wins, I'd bet their council also knows what they're doing.
|
Current time is 03:43 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5   |
|
