New York Firearms Forum banner
1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,238 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This can happen to anyone...Officers Violate 4th Amendment, Make Up Lie : Dispatches from the Creation Wars

The Equal Justice Foundation believes:
• Citizens should not be torn from their homes and children in the middle of the night based on nothing more than hearsay.
• Men and women should not be presumed guilty until they can prove their innocence.
• A secret tribunal should not have the power to force a man from his home without notice or hearing.
• Police should not have the right to enter and search a citizen's home without a warrant.
• Citizens should not be imprisoned based only on hearsay.
• Citizens should not be more afraid of the police than they are of criminals.
• A legal system that tolerates perjury and the subornation of perjury can not produce justice.
• Men should not be censured by public officials for crimes they have not committed.
• Men and women should not be made to work as indentured servants or held in thrall to others for acts they have not committed.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
240 Posts
I disagree with the article on one point, those deputies should not be fired, they should be charged. Then fired. I think that anyone who is charged with enforcing the law should be held accountable when they attempt to apply justice as they see fit. I come from a long line of police and I know the realities of the job from them, but the laws that were put there to protect civilians are there specifically to protect us from them. If they break that they should be charged. Are they above the law they enforce? I think not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,857 Posts
I tried following the case for a while but updates stopped happening. Last I heard was no officer was even investigated, and one of the mans guns was still being kept from him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
753 Posts
Well, they responded to "shots fired' call. Without knowing who was shooting, everyone was considered a suspect. They had to investigate, and make sure the area was secure. I think it gave them enough probable cause to enter his property. I know it's a very grey area, and if it happened to me, I would be mad as hell. I'm just trying to see it from their perspective.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,339 Posts
Well, they responded to "shots fired' call. Without knowing who was shooting, everyone was considered a suspect. They had to investigate, and make sure the area was secure. I think it gave them enough probable cause to enter his property. I know it's a very grey area, and if it happened to me, I would be mad as hell. I'm just trying to see it from their perspective.
What was the reason for taking his keys and opening the safe? What about the felony charges?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,238 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I think LEOs have to put up with a lot of schit these days and in the process mistakes can be made but once a mistake is made then the best thing is to be honest and not to try to hide it or frame anyone. So assuming this all played like it has been broadcaster any public servants should be the first to be constantly reminded of the rights granted to everyone by the constitution and the oath they took to protect them.

I agree with you guys. the Firing comes first. the charging will come later I am pretty sure.
 

·
I wish I were an Oscar Meyer Weiner
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
If I didn't hear the officers plotting the whole thing I would say the initial search of his home for other people is ok. Again anything in plain view while looking for others in the home would be fair game. Going into the safe using his keys is unacceptable period without a warrant. If I was the guy I would of called the FBI and had the officers investigated for deprivation of rights under the color of law. Which if you read the law can also be applied to judges and others in a just world. 18 USC § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law | LII / Legal Information Institute

On the flip side just to argue one could also say that the call was for shots fired. A simple interview with the person after he was arrested and in the car would of shown that he was target shooting and they could of verified it by seeing his target. Then there would of been no need to search the home, or arrest the man since he was within his rights.

This article shows the law in action. One of the things the officers did wrong was conducting warrantless searches. http://www.fbi.gov/philadelphia/press-releases/2010/ph101410b.htm
 

·
Occupy NYF JBT Tank Operator
Joined
·
2,322 Posts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,225 Posts
Ha, here's a bit of an update (this past November):

Former deputy's ironic new career

"Hart was charged with a variety of felonies and misdemeanors, all eventually dismissed except for "disturbing the peace." Facing prosecutors' threats of additional felony charges, Hart agreed not to sue the county, and his confiscated guns were eventually returned with one gun missing its receiver."

And just a final sprinkling of irony:

"The central figure (deputy Darren Christopher Murphy) in an illegal raid by San Luis Obispo County sheriff's deputies that violated the rights of a county resident is now a local defense attorney, handling cases for indigents and getting paid by the county public defender's office."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,402 Posts
Far too many cops have no problem circumventing your rights, and rarely are held to account for their criminal acts.

Once again, NOBODY in a position of authority is charged, and the abuse of power is just brushed off as an isolated incident.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,857 Posts
Ha, here's a bit of an update (this past November):

Former deputy's ironic new career

And just a final sprinkling of irony:

"The central figure (deputy Darren Christopher Murphy) in an illegal raid by San Luis Obispo County sheriff's deputies that violated the rights of a county resident is now a local defense attorney, handling cases for indigents and getting paid by the county public defender's office."
I can just imagine how much effort he puts into defending peoples rights. He opens his eyes from a nap, glances around, and goes back to his nap. Such a total scumbag and a disgrace to the Murphy name.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,238 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty of something in a court of law and, in this case, includes both the subject of that search and seizure and the cops themselves if in fact they violated any laws.

So nobody think even by a second that the law applies to a citizen 'more' than another, whether you have a badge or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
Willie Wonka nailed it!


"So nobody think even by a second that the law applies to a citizen 'more' than another, whether you have a badge or not."


So let me ask this; If a state like New York imposes gun restrictions on its legal citizens akin to the AWB with all its regulations should LE (other than at the federal level) also have to follow it? LE at the state and local level are considered a civilian entity are they not?
 

·
I wish I were an Oscar Meyer Weiner
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
I will admit that my next comment is only based on what we hear about so we don't really know for sure but based on the media (FWIW) the law does apply differently to different "classes of citizens". Public officials (Judges, police, and politicians) typically aren't charged with crimes that the average citizen would be. Sometimes its covered up, sometimes they are asked to resign instead of being charged and other times just given a slap on the wrist. Yes other times public officials have integrity and the right thing is done but that happens far less.

Look at this case above. The normal citizen was threatened with felonies if he didnt plead no contest to the one charge. But the Officer wasn't and was probably told to resign instead.

My best example of how the law doesn't apply equally is something I ranted on a little bit before lol.

We can't have a "loaded" (rifle or shotgun with rounds in magazine even if magazine is separate from rifle) firearm in our vehicles if we want to go to the range. So you can't legally load up your AR mags before you go to range to shoot. This violates Environmental conservation law which does not exempt anyone including law enforcement. There is case law saying it is actually a penal law and that it applies to everyone regardless or whether or not they are hunting. But yet police are allowed too without fear of being charged because DA's choose not to apply this law equally? If we were truly a fair and just and by the law society then for example SWAT teams in NYS would have to show up at a disturbance, get out of vehicle, load up magazines then the rifle or shotgun to be in compliance. I dont think that it makes sense to make them do that but I also don't think it makes sense to have a law that applies to everyone and only enforce it against the "regular" people.

So to me the law unfortunately does apply to some citizens more then others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,486 Posts
The problem is the lack of accountability. The police can do whatever they want, and when they get caught behaving badly, who pays for it? Taxpayers, that's who! The officer in question gets to keep his job and will probably get promoted in the near future.
 

·
I wish I were an Oscar Meyer Weiner
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
To prevent the need for admins in this thread lol I think its important to say that atleast it seems like police get away with everything from what we see in the Media. The Video though makes a great point though. If the top brass of the police did their job then this stuff wouldn't be tolerated and we wouldn't see it as much. I think unltimately as well the top brass should be held accountable because they are responsible for their officers actions under their charge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,238 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 · (Edited)
Willie Wonka nailed it!


"So nobody think even by a second that the law applies to a citizen 'more' than another, whether you have a badge or not."


So let me ask this; If a state like New York imposes gun restrictions on its legal citizens akin to the AWB with all its regulations should LE (other than at the federal level) also have to follow it? LE at the state and local level are considered a civilian entity are they not?
When it comes to the most fundamental rights granted by the constitution the same applies to everyone. Because if not there are so many layers of nonsense laws and everything is so confusing these days that the law might be subject to the arbitrary interpretation in specific state, city or group of people.
The right to bear arms is not taken away but all the BS is still there and that is why everyone is so confused about everything regarding bans and yes they should apply to LE equally. Still the ban is not so severe but if it goes further that could be the basis for a case to be brought the supreme court too.

Regarding the cops that did the seizure...

A LEO that is given an order that might be consider by the individual (look as it as any civilian) violating any constitutional right or consider unlawful has the right to say no because his oath to obey by the constitution automatically overwrites any chain of command. Military have that right too if I am not mistaken?

But unfortunately some LEOs or Military, etc.., sometimes get confused by the circumstances and only takes a veteran and some 'department or unit' peer pressure to go and play along when in fact they might be committing a crime themselves w/o being maybe too obvious in the heat of the moment.
I also think the big issue is not the fact that someone makes a mistake, but what we do after the mistake is recognized and we are in a position of power. Do we use that power to cover up the situation or should we be honest and recognize it?

I do not take sides in these cases. I am trying to be pragmatic and stick to the facts laid out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,238 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
I will admit that my next comment is only based on what we hear about so we don't really know for sure but based on the media (FWIW) the law does apply differently to different "classes of citizens". Public officials (Judges, police, and politicians) typically aren't charged with crimes that the average citizen would be. Sometimes its covered up, sometimes they are asked to resign instead of being charged and other times just given a slap on the wrist. Yes other times public officials have integrity and the right thing is done but that happens far less.

Look at this case above. The normal citizen was threatened with felonies if he didnt plead no contest to the one charge. But the Officer wasn't and was probably told to resign instead.

My best example of how the law doesn't apply equally is something I ranted on a little bit before lol.

We can't have a "loaded" (rifle or shotgun with rounds in magazine even if magazine is separate from rifle) firearm in our vehicles if we want to go to the range. So you can't legally load up your AR mags before you go to range to shoot. This violates Environmental conservation law which does not exempt anyone including law enforcement. There is case law saying it is actually a penal law and that it applies to everyone regardless or whether or not they are hunting. But yet police are allowed too without fear of being charged because DA's choose not to apply this law equally? If we were truly a fair and just and by the law society then for example SWAT teams in NYS would have to show up at a disturbance, get out of vehicle, load up magazines then the rifle or shotgun to be in compliance. I dont think that it makes sense to make them do that but I also don't think it makes sense to have a law that applies to everyone and only enforce it against the "regular" people.

So to me the law unfortunately does apply to some citizens more then others.
I think you got a very valid point there. if the law applies to all in paper should apply to all in reality right?
So I think you are right and many patrol cars with loaded AR magazines might be committing a felony according to Environmental Conservation law. That's my point above and why the laws are so frikin confusing leaving all doors open to arbitrary interpretation by anyone anytime.
But I am with you there.
hummm. interesting...
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top