TexasCHLforum.com

Best outcome, the crazy LEO fired, the second one disciplined retrained. The LEO would refereed to Feds Prosecutor if they are interested in filing charges.
City would:
1) Apologizes
2) Drop all charges
3) instate re-retraining dealing with CHLers
4) settle with victim for undisclosed sum (~ $200K).

...the lawyer'll prolly get that much...sad that it happened like it did...gonna cost everyone but the ones at fault a lotta money...

speedsix wrote:...his lawyer said he tried three times...and the audio's not clear enough for us to be sure what was said...I believe him...we may never know 'cause the case'll be thrown out...unless the city attorney refuses to do so because it would be seen as an admission that the cops were all wrong...that won't help 'em in the suit...but if the charge is left in place...it'll give him a bigger hammer to hit them with...we're gonna have to salt our popcorn and wait on this one...the chances of it being settled by the year's end are kinda slim...

And he may have, but I couldn't tell that from the video until several minutes in. When he was allowed to speak the first few sentences were about how he hadn't done this before instead of "I have a conceal carry permit."

This is still no excuse for what the future former LEO did.

...my old ears again...I coulda sworn he was sayin' "I nebber been done like this before!!!"

gregthehand wrote:Finding good cops is really hard. If you've applied for a job in law enforcement you know how far they check into the background of potential hires but sometimes stuff just slips through.

Part of the problem is the legal atmosphere regarding employment discrimination law that prevents people from telling the truth regarding a firing. You can get sued for telling the truth about a former employee if it makes it difficult for them to find another job. I always asked references, "Would you ever hire him again?" They could answer that honestly without saying negative things about the person that could later be held against them in a lawsuit.

Does notification in Ohio have to be verbal?

Shove the CHL in his face while he's spewin chunks in your direction.

speedsix wrote:...his lawyer said he tried three times...and the audio's not clear enough for us to be sure what was said...I believe him.....

It's hard to hear over the thug screaming at him to shut up but I believe him too.

PappaGun wrote:Does notification in Ohio have to be verbal?

Shove the CHL in his face while he's spewin chunks in your direction.

I thought he had the license in his hand but maybe the thug can't read.

C-dub wrote:And I agree with you. I also think the guy had opportunity to notify long before the jerk went off on him. No, that doesn't justify what the jerk did.

I just rewatched a portion of the video. When the second officer enters the rear of the car, you cannot hear anything that he or the driver might have said. So all we have is the visual cues. You can view these by pausing the video and advancing it through the frames. When the officer first enters the car, the driver turns his head to the right, in the direction of the officer. The officer reacts by turning his head toward the driver. The driver immediately turns his head straight forward. The driver then turns his head a second time. This time the officer shines his flashlight in the driver's face. After that the driver remains motionless and facing forward as the officer searches the back seat. Up to this point the interaction between the officers and the three actors is routine and ordinary. I think it's reasonable to assume that when the driver turns his head he is trying to inform the officer and is rebuffed. That's what he says happened, and his actions subsequent to that indicate compliance and a desire to cooperate. I see nothing in the video to indicate his desire to hide something or to not reveal the fact that he holds a CHL.

Tactically, the officers handled the situation extremely poorly. As the first officer began questioning the passenger, he asked him to put his hands on the roof. As I observed the second officer enter the back seat, the passenger's hands were still on the roof. He actually had to move to his left to allow the officer enough room to enter the back seat. So this officer placed himself in close proximity to the passenger, bent over to enter the car, and exposed his service weapon to the passenger in a position where he would have been unable to defend himself or prevent the removal of his weapon. He wouldn't even have been able to see the passenger reach for his weapon and would only have known about it when he felt its removal. Both he and his partner should be thanking the stars in heaven that they encountered three citizens bent on nothing more than doing normal stuff. Had they been bad guys, officer 2 would almost certainly be dead, and the abusive officer would likely be as well.

When the driver exits the vehicle, hands in the air and following the commands of the officer, he has handed his DL to the officer and has his CHL in his hand. The officer asks him, "Why do you keep having that? What is this?" The driver responds, "Because I have a concealed carry...", The officer interrupts him and asks, "Do you have a weapon on you?" The driver responds, "Yes sir. That's why..." and the officer begins his unprofessional behavior.

I don't think the driver did anything wrong. It's reasonable to believe that he tried twice to inform the first officer that he was armed. When the second officer asks, "Why do you keep having that?" it is clear that he is referring to the DL and CHL which are in the driver's hand. Before the driver exits the vehicle, the officer has already begun questioning him and doesn't give him a chance to speak other than to directly answer his questions. He calls the driver a liar repeatedly, compelling the driver to defend himself rather than notify of his CHL.

There are good LEO's out there team.

Oceanside Open Carry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFzH5Oe- ... r_embedded" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

sjfcontrol wrote:What amazes me is that the dashboard cam video not only got made, but it didn't get "lost" somewhere along the way.

Yep. The dvr might be in a lock box and inaccesible except to one person.

speedsix wrote:...that kind of behavior makes the news, like the fat pig punching a handcuffed suspect, and a lot of harm is done to the image of our law enforcement officers...it's hard to wear the badge and know that people like this are part of what society thinks we are...the greater majority of law enforcement pukes to see this kind of "representation"...hug a cop today, please...

Give us a little credit. I don't think all men are rapist, all CHL are gun nuts, all blonds are stupid, etc. Neither do I think all LEOs are abusers of authority. Painting all members of a group with one brush without evidence is called "prejudice".

Poldark wrote:There are good LEO's out there team.



Oceanside Open Carry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFzH5Oe- ... r_embedded" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...we know it, and we love 'em...and some of us would die to help them if they were in trouble...but the two in this video aren't fit to lick the door handles of the good one's squad cars!!! I make no apology for anything I've said about them...they are NOT typical of American Law Enforcement...

ccpacker wrote:

speedsix wrote:...that kind of behavior makes the news, like the fat pig punching a handcuffed suspect, and a lot of harm is done to the image of our law enforcement officers...it's hard to wear the badge and know that people like this are part of what society thinks we are...the greater majority of law enforcement pukes to see this kind of "representation"...hug a cop today, please...

Give us a little credit. I don't think all men are rapist, all CHL are gun nuts, all blonds are stupid, etc. Neither do I think all LEOs are abusers of authority. Painting all members of a group with one brush without evidence is called "prejudice".

...thank you for that...a lot of folks do it, though...I love our cops ALMOST as much as I do our firemen!!!

speedsix wrote:

Poldark wrote:There are good LEO's out there team.



Oceanside Open Carry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFzH5Oe- ... r_embedded" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...we know it, and we love 'em...and some of us would die to help them if they were in trouble...but the two in this video aren't fit to lick the door handles of the good one's squad cars!!! I make no apology for anything I've said about them...they are NOT typical of American Law Enforcement...

ccpacker wrote:Painting all members of a group with one brush without evidence is called "prejudice".

True no matter whether that brush is bad or good, so let's not whitewash the bad seeds.