Ohio: Charged with CCW violation and resulting jury trial

[clarence222]

t165, Zoogster

This was not simply a mistake by just one officer but several mistakes by several officers as well as the prosecuting attorney. this should not be tolerated.

If my doctor makes a mistake that I recover from then at the least I will quit seeing him in a sense firing him. These officers acted in what I would consider a malicious manner and should not be allowed to carry badges or guns. If I see my attorney about a legal matter and he doesn't have the expertise, or for that matter my doctor. Then they will refer me to someone that does. These officers did none of these. That is why this isnt simply a mistake. Also why it should not be tolerated. I am not perfect nor did I ever claim to be. I do try to own up to my mistakes, something these people never did. I would expect that law officers should know whats legal in such hot button issues as drugs and firearms.

 

[HexHead]

I'm not a cop, but if I were, that's exactly how I would see it. "Sir, where are you going?", "Oh, uhm, to the restaurant down the road.", "With TWO handguns, an extra mag, and 2 knives?! What are you planning to do?"

None of those questions are deserving of an answer. None of those questions are any of the officer's business. The only answer should be "why am I being stopped?" or "why am I being detained?"

 

[mdugan]

Holy Smoke, I'm glad my wife doesn't have any friends. Seriously Bryan, I'm happy for you.

 

[t165]

clarence222...you are tying me into a conversation I did not participate in. I am refering to the Willowick Ohio incident which rDigital was involved in. Not the incident which resulted in his arrest in the other Ohio town (Beachwood?). Both sides of the conversation was recorded in the Willowick incident and I sided with rDigital that absent any additional observation of suspicious activity or witness report of wrongdoing he should not have been stopped for simply OC. Deanimator will jump me for not saying articulated reasons.

And lets step into reality here. Police officers only arrest people. Prosecutors, after reviewing the case, decides whether or not to bring formal charges and prosecute the case. Then a judge or a jury of the suspects peers decide guilt or innocence. The judicial system is not always fair nor right. That little old lady and other "stupid people" of the jury could very well have returned a guilty verdict for reasons other than law. It isn't right but I have personally had a juror tell me she convicted a man of aggravated battery because he had facial tattoos more than anything else. The tatoos indicated to her the man was simply mean by nature. Absolutley nothing in this world is perfect and that includes the judicial system. And I absolutely agree it should be. It may be my butt someday in the defendants chair.

I missed what Zoogster said. It must have been pretty good to get removed that quickly!

Okay Deanimator. I was PM'd and cautioned by a moderator to not get you riled up. I should have listened. I am curious though. What did you get arrested for that has jaded you so much? Was it an incident in Chicago? You have made comments in the past like "scorched earth" "annihilation" when commenting about law enforcement. I'm just trying to understand what has made you so angry. It sounds like you are getting ready for a jihad.

And I'm not being disingenuous Deanimator. If a police officer acts like a criminal and knowing breaks the law then I'll not defend him/her. If someone acts like a criminal then they should be treated like a criminal. LEO's included. And I agree with you that police officers should not purposely misuse the law as a bully tool. But expecting LEO's to make perfect decisions all the time is way out there. Thats why LEO's and Federal Agents have professional liability insurance...just like every other profession.

If a LEO commits a crime, and yes, even a crime against you Deanimator, then that officer should be arrested and prosecuted. If a LEO uses his authority to mistreat you then use whatever legal remedy at your disposal to correct the abuse. I would do the exact same thing. If a LEO makes a mistake in judgement during the performance of his duties then you also have the right to seek a civil remedy through the court system. I agree with you on all of this. Where we differ is you seem to be hateful toward all LEOs. You have stated you wish to take all material possessions away from them. Is this what happened to you? I'm just trying to be friendly and understand what has made you so prejudicial towards all law enforcement.

 

[JCisHe]

Clarence,

I hope you never try to defend yourself in court.

"I have not spent time researching the 1st event. I'm only commenting on this event. What I don know about the first event is that he was stopped for simply OCing which is perfectly legal in his jurisdiction. So why was he stopped. Because the cops didn't know the law, had they there wouldn't have been a first event."

You say you have no knowledge of it and then give a false determination here about that first stop. The first stop wasn't solely because he was OC'ing nor were the officers mistaken about the law.

In the 1st few seconds a cop says, "this isn't illegal and you're not going to jail" and they also explain that they got a lot of complaints. You should try and be more factual.

Regards...

 

[JCisHe]

Hex,

There were calls against Bryan and the officers were responding to them. They had every right to ask questions as they were responding to calls and didn't know what was going on. Obviously, someone said something serious about Bryan otherwise the officer wouldn't have been able to say that he was going to charge him with creating a panic or whatever...

See, there is more there than just a random stop. That's not a good argument.

 

[Zoogster]

missed what Zoogster said. It must have been pretty good to get removed that quickly!

No I just felt it took away from the topic at hand. Rather than a back and forth on a devil's advocate position I did not even wish to take, it was easier to let the conversation continue the way it is.

 

[JCisHe]

Zoog, you should have weighed in. It would have been interesting.

My position is that while Bryan wasn't doing anything illegal he was doing something stupid each time. The 1st was having that extra weapon and the second was similar only he had with him stuff for the range on top of an extra weapon just driving around.

Those are the things that got him into trouble and I think the first officer pretty clearly pointed that out while giving him a break because of a friend while the second set of officers were on high alert and figured this guy to be dangerous because of all the extra stuff. I mean honestly, having all that stuff looks more like Klebold and Harris then it does an honest law abiding citizen.

I don't think this guy a good spokesman for 2a rights. What a person who wants to speak out for 2a should do, in my opinion, is print off some pamphlets, stop ant the police station, explain to them he is going to be OC'ing, talk with the dispatcher, drop some literature, explain his intentions, let them know where he is going and for how long, then head out and talk with folks with pamphlets. Then, if that person wants to OC in other areas fine but that's representing 2a rights not walking down the road armed to the teeth with and attitude of "I'm a citizen not a serf and you cops...". I think Bryan went looking for trouble and kept looking for trouble until he found it.

Regards...

 

[t165]

Okay Zoogster. I seemed to have broken a rule or two on this forum lately and the thread police had to correct me. I thought it might have happened to you. Oh well...live and learn.

 

[harrygunner]

Someone, become rich producing decision support software for field officers.

The officer enters the particulars into the computer in his unit and within minutes, recommendations or options based on state law are presented.

 

[Deanimator]

What did you get arrested for that has jaded you so much?

I've never been arrested.

That's because I'm scrupulous about knowing and obeying the law.

If somebody wants to falsely arrest me or otherwise violate my rights because I LAWFULLY have a gun or for any other reason, I have no more reason to view that act in a kindly way than a cop should view an armed robbery. My rights mean more to me than any mere physical possession.

Again, these are no more "mistakes of judgement" than a physical attack on a cop.

 

[Deanimator]

I agree with you on all of this. Where we differ is you seem to be hateful toward all LEOs. You have stated you wish to take all material possessions away from them

I don't think you'll be able to find a quote of me wanting to take all material possessions from all LEOs.

I'd cheerfully take money and possessions from a cop who commits a serious crime against me in the course of their "duties" or who intentionally violates my rights. Why would anyone do anything different? I'd go after the assets of a citizen who intentionally caused me harm contrary to the law. The alternative is to let them get away with it. That would seem like a bad thing.

 

[t165]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the perfection issue Deanimator. Glad to hear you have never been arrested...not sure why I thought that!

Between my time as a LEO and my wife's job with the IRS we have grown to learn there is always a story behind the blanket contempt that has been directed toward us in the past for the positions we held/hold. And, sometimes, we can understand the anger. Maybe someday you will meet a LEO which can show you the good side of the occupation.

 

[rDigital]

I don't think this guy a good spokesman for 2a rights. What a person who wants to speak out for 2a should do, in my opinion, is print off some pamphlets, stop ant the police station, explain to them he is going to be OC'ing, talk with the dispatcher, drop some literature, explain his intentions, let them know where he is going and for how long, then head out and talk with folks with pamphlets. Then, if that person wants to OC in other areas fine but that's representing 2a rights not walking down the road armed to the teeth with and attitude of "I'm a citizen not a serf and you cops...". I think Bryan went looking for trouble and kept looking for trouble until he found it.

Please read all articles before commenting. If only you read just a little further you'd see the fallacies in your statements. Your logic is frightening. Please take the time to do your research before you go off throwing rocks at glass houses. You have misquoted facts and taken things out of context to fit "your" views. You make arguments and then try to make the facts fit your prejudice. You're being pretty judgmental... especially so without knowing all facts. Please, go back and read what you missed.

Your argument is the same as blaming a woman who got raped for dressing too provocatively. "She was asking for it dressed like that....." Was I asking for it? Dressed like that?

No, I was scared to death and did everything I could to stay calm with a LEO pointing a Glock at my head. I didn't deserve that. I wasn't "asking for it"

The only person who called the police on me in Willowick was another cop. I walked everywhere around town that summer open carrying. To my knowledge no one has EVER had a problem with it, not ever to this very day. Most people were friendly and talked shop with me about guns and our rights. Every business I frequented greeted me with a smile and appreciated my business (especially the spaghetti place I was headed to ).

We, OFCC, did the FOIA request and got all of the FACTS straight. I received an apology from the Chief of Police, the sergeant who stopped me, the law director and a city councilman. They were out of line so they fessed up and made nice with myself and OFCC. With the audio we had a "color of law" federal lawsuit that was airtight.

However, I didn't sue anyone. I was unhappy and disgusted by how I was treated, but I didn't want the attention, nor did I want to raid the piggy banks of Willowick's Finest. With a "color of law" case the individual officers are personally liable as well as the city.

I never open carried to draw attention. It's what I did before I had my CCW and when I am comfortable doing so, I still do it to this day.

I always wanted everyone to be OK with open carry and one of the by-products of my police stop in Willowick is that nearly every LEO in Lake County KNOWS with absolute certainty that open carry is legal.

In fact, I just got home from a 6 mile walk open carrying through Eastlake, Willowick and Willoughby. Nobody gives a damn! Oh my! and I was carrying an SAK and a maglite too! I had extra magazines in my back pocket and a Sig P229 on my right hip. I would have brought my 20mm with me, but I didn't have a wheelbarrow on hand.

I don't care if I have 7 pistols in my left shoe, it's still legal and that part is beyond debate. RKBA is not granted by the authorities or even the 2nd Amendment. RKBA is inalienable and should be embraced by CITIZENS everywhere.

Open carry is a RIGHT, CC requires a license which involves jumping through many hoops. It's kind of like a poll tax or Jim Crow laws.

The police are there to enforce the laws and not someone's opinion. This is a republic, not a democracy. We live under rule of law, not mob rule.

 

[Deanimator]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the perfection issue Deanimator. Glad to hear you have never been arrested...not sure why I thought that!

I've never fled from the police, much less taken a swing or a gunshot at them. Does that make me "perfect"? No, it makes me a relatively law abiding person. I'm puzzled as to why it should require "perfection" for a cop to similarly not commit serious crimes. I know it's unlawful to commit the previously noted acts, not to mention carrying a firearm in my pocket in a vehicle without a holster, or entering a "Class D" establishment while in possession of a firearm. Why were those Beachwood cops unable to know that intentional false arrest is a crime and a civil tort? Does it REALLY take "perfection" not to commit a serious infraction of that sort? Should they be allowed to do such things without serious punishment in the criminal and civil courts? Is it an unreasonable expectation of "perfection" to demand that I not flee from or fight with the police... or to have a loaded magazine and a firearm in my vehicle without a CHL?

Between my time as a LEO and my wife's job with the IRS we have grown to learn there is always a story behind the blanket contempt that has been directed toward us in the past for the positions we held/hold. And, sometimes, we can understand the anger. Maybe someday you will meet a LEO which can show you the good side of the occupation.

I've met good cops. For what reason would I seek their administrative punishment, prosecution or a civil judgement? You need a cause of action to sue somebody. Courts don't generally treat "I hate cops" as a claim for which one can seek relief. Intentional false arrest, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter.

I have a very FOCUSED contempt for cops who misuse their positions to commit serious crimes and civil torts against innocent people. Why SHOULDN'T I? To be sure there are people who think you should always let such things go. I'm not one of them.

 

[t165]

Okay Deanimator, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse but I do not understand where the fleeing police and swinging and/or taking shots at them came from? I don't remember reading that anywhere on this thread. If you are referring to the incident in Beachwood, Ohio experienced by rDigital then my comments should not be applied to that situation.

I am commenting on the Willowick, Ohio incident rDigital was involved in. He wasn't arrested that time. I think the only questions I ever asked about the Beachwood incident is if rDigital had, through discovery, obtained a transcript of the original phone call which led the authorites to the Beachwood incident and how much time has to elapse before an individual can be arrested in Ohio for not notifying the police you possess a handgun. Perhaps this is the misunderstanding between us. While I haven't read the reports of the police officers I do have a problem with the prompt notification requirement in Ohio's criminal code. Far too much room for abuse on that one. I believe rDigital was arrested for a violation of the prompt notification statute in the Beachwood incident. I would have been angry to be arrested for something as chickens*** as that also. And I'm glad he was aquitted for that. It's a bad and unnecessary law. I wonder if a individual who possessed a handgun illegally in Ohio who was stopped by the police could be charged with this "failure to disclose" handgun violation? Wouldn't that be the imposition of "self incrimination" by the state of Ohio? Perhaps I'm reaching now? If a police officer in Ohio has adequate reason to believe his safety is in jeopardy then he can perform a "Terry Stop and Frisk". I do not understand the requirement for disclosure for a legal act which comes attatched with a vague time limit or it becomes illegal. I don't get it. Heck, Terry V Ohio originated in Ohio.

And you will never find anywhere me saying LEOs should go unpunished for crimes. Again, perhaps we are confusing incidents. In the Willowick incident rDigital was not arrested and certainly not assaulted. I seriously doubt grounds for a successful civil suit could ever be achieved from it. Additional training for at least one of the responding officers seems to be in order regarding Ohio firearm laws, but that is as far as I'm going to go. Although some departments do restrict their officers from using profanity.

When I speak of perfection I referring to harmless mistakes. Wrong date on a traffic ticket. The spelling of a name or transposed numbers on a police report. Nothing which would purposely inflict injury on an individual. One of the officers in the Willowick incident made mention that rDigital's OC triggered a disorderly conduct charge. He was wrong of course but it was a harmless error. Now, if rDigital had been arrested for disorderly conduct then harmless error goes right out the window.

I know of several LEOs who have been sued over the years. I do not know of any who have ever had to pay out of their pocket. I have heard of LEOs who have but I never met them.

Two thugs got into a shoving match one night and a big thug backed a little thug down. Made him take water in front of a crowd of people. The little thug drove to his grandparents house and stole a shotgun out of their closet. A little later I pulled the little thug over because his license plate was obstructed. The truck he was driving had a temporary paper plate taped in the back window but I could not see it. He was 2 blocks away from where the big thug lived when I stopped him. The police department received no reports about the shoving incident. The little thug never mentioned the shoving incident to me during the traffic stop. Neither the VPD or I knew anything about the theft of the shotgun. I did not see the shotgun in the truck at the time of the traffic stop. The little thug moved the obstruction and I cut him loose. Two hours later he shot the big thug in the stomach with the stolen shotgun outside the big thug's house. The big thug lived. The little thug went to prison. The little thug's grandparents and I, along with the city of Vincennes, were sued by the big thug. I had to give 3 different depositions over several months. I had no reason to believe whatsoever the little thug was hunting the big thug at the time of the traffic stop. I'm not a mind reader. I did nothing wrong. Neither did the grandparents but we were still sued. The grandparents were sued because the shotgun was their responsibility and it was not secured from theft properly. The city's liability insurance carrier's attorney offered the big thug $25,000.00 because he said it would be cheaper than defending the case in court. IIRC the big thug countered back with a $300,000.00 request. Last I heard the big thug accepted the $25,000.00 even though he didn't deserve it. The point I'm trying to make is you don't have to do anything wrong to be sued either. Even a Police Officer!

 

[Deanimator]

Okay Deanimator, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse but I do not understand where the fleeing police and swinging and/or taking shots at them came from? I don't remember reading that anywhere on this thread. If you are referring to the incident in Beachwood, Ohio experienced by rDigital then my comments should not be applied to that situation.

I gave examples of things which the police should (and do) know to be serious crimes or civil torts. I gave examples of things which citizens should (and do) know to be serious crimes. My point is not doing those things isn't an example of "perfection", but instead of the very minimum acceptable standard of common sense.

Throughout I have referred SPECIFICALLY to the incident about which this thread pertains.

There is a world of difference between transposed numbers on a traffic ticket and INTENTIONAL false arrest, or threats to KNOWINGLY violate the law because a cop doesn't like open carry, or concealed carry, or the color of your t-shirt.

I recently had a problem with a local cop who stepped beyond a reasonable investigation of whether I had a CHL to blatant ignorance of state law, reinforced by a pathetic self-appeal to authority. When you don't know the law, blurting out "I'm a cop!" doesn't make you more right than the Attorney General of the State of Ohio. It just makes you look like a five year old. I suspect that somebody on the radio told him he was being a child and to just shut up and give me back my gun and CHL. Too bad he chose to make himself look like a petulant child beforehand. I didn't sue him. I didn't even file a formal complaint. I did write the chief of police a letter giving his name and badge number and suggesting that he PROPERLY train his people before something really bad happened. Either he will or he won't. If he doesn't, I've got a voice recorder and a good lawyer.

 

[t165]

Okay Deanimator! So you admit you have mistakenly applied my comments about the Willowick incident toward the Beachwood incident. Takes a big man to admit when he is wrong. Thanks! And everyone says you can be unreasonable...this should prove them wrong!

 

[clarence222]

I

hope you never try to defend yourself in court

JCisHE,

I will never try to defend myself in a court of law, there is no need to. I have several lawyers in the family plus a personal lawyer who is not related.

I guess I should have clarified my statement, I hae seen what I thought at the time to be the video of the first event. I did pay alot of attention to it nor have I done any further research on it.

That being said he was initially questioned by the police because he was OCing, which is perfectly legal. Maybe the office did just say he was being stupid for doing it or not very smart. However that is as far as the incident should have got. There should have been no further officers involved. I also remember a female officer telling him he couldn't open carry.

The fact remains he was stopped for doing absolutely nothing wrong.

 

[Moon Doggie]

JCisHE
I am so glad you are not a Cop because if you were with your attitude towards LEGAL things, well, I think you would be broke from being sued.
I have had 1 Pistol in my Holster and 1 in a zippered case and one in my console, all loaded and all having extra magazines, which is lawful and you say I would be suspicious in your eyes and that then, you would find something wrong with me?
If you asked me WHY I had so many Guns and Mags, I would tell you because I am allowed.
Then what would you say and do to that JCisHE ?

 

[rDigital]

I guess I should have clarified my statement, I hae seen what I thought at the time to be the video of the first event. I did pay alot of attention to it nor have I done any further research on it.

That being said he was initially questioned by the police because he was OCing, which is perfectly legal. Maybe the office did just say he was being stupid for doing it or not very smart. However that is as far as the incident should have got. There should have been no further officers involved. I also remember a female officer telling him he couldn't open carry.

That is Joseph Ponikvar. My situation was quite different.

I was forced by by the LEOs to "cover up" my P229, which is deprivation of rights. There was no usable video from the dash cams in Willowick and I didn't make any video myself.

In fact, I lucked out in even being able to record the whole thing. I didn't have a dedicated voice recorder. I really wasn't worried about it. I was about to listen to music on my iPhone as I was approached from behind by the Willowick PD. I opened up the "voice notes" app hit record and hoped for the best.

 

[JCisHe]

Bryan, the added information does shed more light on the situation but I think your comments, "I'm not a serf but a citizen" and the range gear, etc... are more your problem than the cops. They are just being careful and applying their own personalities just like you. That comment is mildly offensive and like it or not, law contains the opinions of people too. That's reality. This is far from the case of a rape victim. The cops aren't rapists who do it for their own pleasure, that which is wrong, and know it; they are people who train to uphold the law and took an oath to uphold the law and do their best to do what is right. You are no rape victim who was victimized against your will by a hateful and evil person either. You know that there is some issue with OC for some people and you took that chance. Taking that chance and having a CCW is what opened you up to these encounters (both your choices). So yeah, it is your fault. The problem though is that it appeared to those officers that you had unreasonable amounts of hardware. You might just consider what I'm saying and ask Matthew, the old lady, and the first officer that spoke with you if that's what they saw. Perhaps, my assumption is right? Until you can see something like that being a possibility I hold my original position that you're not a very good 2a spokesman. I hope you don't make that comparison of you as a rape victim and the police as the rapist, in any capacity, again. That was pretty terrible. And just for the record, the police were wrong, but you sort of set yourself up.

Clarence, I agree that the police were wrong but there was only audio of Bryan's incident.

Moon Doggie, if you get a call on you in the middle of the night for domestic abuse I suspect you're going to catch some flack.

Regards...

 

[LaVere]

Just Shut up

In the Opencerry.org/Michigan We are generally encouraged to If you are stopped for anything record it. Get out of your car and lock it ( if they let you get out ). Say your name, Ask if you are under arrest, ask if you are free to go and I want a lawyer. Repeat ad nausium. Your mouth will get you into more trouble. Shut up


I do have to say you did extremely well. According to the recording they sure were trying to jam you up for any reason. I would take a copy of the tape to police of chief and the State police. Just to see what shakes from the tree.
Maybe they have other cases where they have done that. But the person didn't record it. Who knows who you might be helping from the past and in the future. Just don't let it lay there.

 

[Deanimator]

I would take a copy of the tape to police of chief and the State police.

For as long as this went on, and considering the quixotic farce that the prosecutor put on, if the Chief of the Beachwood PD were going to do anything meaningful to rectify this situation, he'd have done it by now. rDigital can correct me if I'm wrong, but other than to falsely arrest him and testify against him, Beachwood PD has done nothing else. I don't expect they will. The Ohio Highway Patrol is a stretch, but not LITERALLY impossible, I guess. You're probably unaware that the OHP was MILITANTLY against concealed carry and managed to get it killed off several times until former Governor Taft's veto was overridden (the first override in over 100 years).

I suspect that the only way this situation will ever be PROPERLY addressed is through civil litigation against the officers and the city. They played an obviously losing hand and bet the house on it. Payment may now be coming due...

 

[t165]

Justice fell on the side of rDigital. A jury of his peers aquitted him. I do believe Deanimator is correct stating the Beachwood officers will not be disciplined by their department or criminally charged by the prosecutors office since the PO found merit to prosecute the case.

The state police are powerless to do anything to the Beachwood police officers as far as discipline. They lack jurisdiction. If new evidence were to emerge which showed criminal conduct by the Beachwood police officers then the Beachwood PD, Sheriff's Department of the county which Beachwood resides in, or Ohio State Police could arrest the participating officers for a crime(s) but the odds are about as good as winning the lottery at this point. And even then the PO's office could refuse to prosecute regardless of what the local (state, county, city) police thought. If rDigital believes his "constitutional rights" have been violated then he could contact the federal authorities but I doubt they would touch something as minor as this. This is not a Rodney King case and even then it took an enourmous amout of political pressure for them to weigh in.

And it doesn't seem right that after winning a case the defendant still has to pay his attorney fees. I know, the state will provide a pauper attorney but you cannot pick the attorney you wish and some court appointed attorneys are simply not that competent or motivated. Heck, you could be appointed one who is a gun grabbing liberal. Yikes!

Being found "not guilty" certainly helps in a civil case but that is far from a guarantee of victory. Not to mention a judge could simply dismiss the case if he thinks it lacks merit regardless of the arrest and subsequent acquital. And I do not know of any attorney who will tell a client they are "guaranteed" to win or have an "airtight case". If you ever run across an attorney who guarantees you the outcome of a case before adjudication, or while being ajudicated, then it is time to check and make sure the attorney is a "real" attorney, or, get a new attorney because the one you are talking is violating his own code of ethics. Attorneys can be disciplined/disbarred for conducting themselves in such a manner. A client could sue an attorney for this behavior...and most attorneys like their money too much to give it away so easily.

Having said all this I do believe rDigitals best course of action for relief is through the civil courts...its just not a guarantee. The ACLU and state chapters very seldom take gun rights cases...if ever. I don't remember reading one. I'm not saying some do not exist. rDigitals best bet is to petition a gun rights organization to see if this particular case has enough merit, in their opinion, to initiate litigation. Just my 2 cents again.