Carry in colleges "not statutorily prohibited"

[dcmdon]

GSG,
Don't forget, thats not case law. It never went to trial, a verdict was never rendered. The cops are free to do exactly the same thing again. And the same outcome will probably occur, charges dropped. After a big hassle .

by the way, goldberg has not yet gotten his gun back.
Prosecutors will be very careful not to make bad case law. They will drop charges if they think they can't win, or they may try to negotiate a deal. Either way, no case law is made.

What will make the cops change how they behave is if Goldberg's civil suit costs the town of Glastonbury seven figures. Then the memo's will fly in all the local PDs.

Don

 

[GSG]

GSG,
Don't forget, thats not case law. It never went to trial, a verdict was never rendered.

In the context of what you're saying you're correct in that it doesn't prevent similar actions by other CT cops. But that is in fact case law, whether or not it's binding in CT.

 

[dcmdon]

Its my understanding that it doesn't carry any weight of law.

In other words, if another person was arrested under exactly the same circumstances (accidental flash, no threatening behavior, pistol permit holder, etc) could a defense attorney point the court to the Goldberg case and reference is in a motion to have the charges dropped? I mean, he certainly could bring it up, but would it have any weight?

I'm not an atty, but my belief was, no.

 

[sbhaven]

There is also another lengthy CT thread over at opencarry.org about a person who open carried, offered to leave when confronted by pool hall owner, did so (waited out side) and the police showed up and arrested him, and later the charges were dismissed.

Arrest and Dismissal of Disorderly Conduct Charges for Open Carry

Some questionable things happened there as well that appear to be leading to a possible lawsuit. Here is some of what the officer initially wrote up apparently.

I then spoke with the owner of Yale Billiards, Robert Hilton (DOB 6/20/68). Hilton stated that Burgess had been in his establishment for approximately one hour when several people began to come up to him and tell him that there was a man with a gun playing pool making them feel uncomfortable. Hilton then asked Burgess to please conceal his weapon while inside his establishment. Burgess then told him that he was trying to make a point and that it is his right to open carry his gun. Burgess then handed him paperwork regarding carrying firearms in Connecticut. Hilton then explained that it would be best if he left the establishment. Burgess agreed and he and Filipkowska went outside and sat on a bench just to the left of the front door.

Hilton then called the Wallingford Police Department to report the incident because he did not believe that it was legal to have the gun exposed. Burgess told me, as well as Hilton that he was trying to make a point. Burgess undoubtedly made a point and caused inconvenience, annoyance, and alarm to patrons inside Yale Billiards. It estimated that there were approximately twenty to twenty-five patrons inside Yale Billiards while Burgess was there. Burgess was transported to Wallingford Police Headquarters by Ofc. Garcia. He was fingerprinted and processed, UAR #2043924. Burgess was charged with Disorderly Conduct in violation of C.G.S. 53a-182. He was released on a Written Promise to Appear and given a court date of 5/25/10 for 0900 hrs at G.A. 7.

The 40 caliber Glock 23 handgun, three Glock brand 13 round capacity magazines, and 40 Winchester brand 40 caliber hollow point rounds were seized. The items were returned to Burgess upon his release from headquarters and he acknowledged receipt by signing the Return of Compliance section of the Inventory of Property Seized Without a Search Warrant Form.

ETA: This is Mr. Burgess (the poster "Rich B" on opencarry.org) account of what happened to him during that encounter.

 

[dcmdon]

The difference between Goldberg and Rich B is that Goldberg was an unwitting victim.

Rich B. is one of the activists on the front lines of the open carry movement in CT. He intentionally waited around after leaving to assert his right to be outside the establishment openly carrying. i.e. he was prepared to be arrested. Also, when asked to remove the gun, he produced documentation that you can print out from opencarry.org, rather than just leaving.

So while Goldberg was caught up in something he didn't intend to participate in, Rich B is out there open carrying every day, essentially daring the powers that be to arrest him.

I believe Rich B is also preparing a civil suit. Although don't hold me to it.

 

[GSG]

Its my understanding that it doesn't carry any weight of law.

I wasn't referring to the "open carry/accidental flashing" aspect of that case. I was referring to the opinions given by the court on carrying in a place where the owner doesn't want guns. I doubt that it would be binding, but in deciding future cases, the courts will look to past cases for guidance on what particular laws mean, and how the courts have viewed them in the past.

In other words, that cases gives us a decent idea of how the courts will respond to a case regarding carrying in a location where guns aren't wanted.

ETA: Upon further consideration, I realize that you are in fact right, that if it's not legally binding then it's not truly caselaw in the truest sense of the word. it may still come into play in the future, however.

 

[dcmdon]

I agree with your revised interpretation.

I think something like this will not only guide courts but police behavior. If a case brought up under certain circumstances is consistently dismissed or the charges are dropped then the police will eventually stop applying the law in those circumstances.

We saw this in the results of a freedom of information act request filed with the CT State Police by Ed Peruta regarding a memo on the "rules of engagement" at a 2nd Amendment rally at the State Capitol last year.

After the fact we found out that the Capitol and State police were given direct orders NOT to arrest anyone openly but peacefully carrying handguns or long guns.
This memo is a direct result of the fallout from the Goldberg case.

I have appended the memo that was sent to the botom of this post. (Emphasis added by me)

Don

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

1l1l Country Club Road

Middletown. CT 06457

2nd Amendment Rally, State Capitol

April 10' 2010


A rally in support of the 2nd Amendment is currently scheduled for April 10, 2010 at 1300 hours on the north lawn of the State capitol. While the capitol building and grounds are

under the jurisdiction of the State Capitol Police, there is the possibility that State Police personnel maybe asked to assist the Capitol Police, or may have occasion to observe and/or come into contact with individuals who are carrying firearms, either openly or concealed. In light of this scheduled event, specific guidance concerning law enforcement matters related to firearms at this event follows:

State Police personnel should not arrest a properly permitted individual merely for publicly carrying a handgun in plain view.

State Police personnel should not arrest individuals merely for publicly carrying a firearm other than a handgun in plain view Exceptions to the general guidance stated above include, but are not limited to:

It is prohibited for private citizens to possess firearms inside the State Capitol or Legislative Office Building (Conn. Gen' Stat. 2-1e).

It is prohibited for private citizens to possess firearms in any Hartford city park (Hartford Municipal Code Article II, Sec. 26-39). Violations should be brought to the attention of Hartford Police for the appropriate enforcement action.

State Police personnel should not request individuals to produce their pistol permits unless such individual has become the subject of a law enforcement investigative inquiry for another reason.

Whether or not probable cause exists to support an arrest depends upon the totality of the circumstances known to the Trooper at the time. Particular attention should be paid to those facts and circumstances which support an inference that an individual to be arrested intended or recklessly created reasonable risk of danger or alarm. Troopers should be careful to document all of the facts and circumstances which justify any arrest which is made. As with all law enforcement action taken by State Police personnel, the safety of both the officer and the general public is of paramount concern.

With those principles in mind, and with specific regard to matters involving firearms, State Police personnel should ensure that they strictly follow State Police policies and procedures.

An Equal Opportunity Employer

 

[mikeflys1]

I may be a test case for this.

Anyone know of any good lawyers in the Waterbury area?

 

[buketduder]

http://www.ralphdsherman.com/ in New Britain....Again though..CT law does not prohibit guns on College Campus..If you were arrested for this I would find an attorney for a Civl Suit as well

Sec. 53a-217b. Possession of a weapon on school grounds: Class D felony. (a) A person is guilty of possession of a weapon on school grounds when, knowing that such person is not licensed or privileged to do so, such person possesses a firearm or deadly weapon, as defined in section 53a-3, (1) in or on the real property comprising a public or private elementary or secondary school, or (2) at a school-sponsored activity as defined in subsection (h) of section 10-233a.

 

[dcmdon]

MIKEFLY

DO NOT DISCUSS ANY OF THIS ON THE INTERNET. DON'T ASK QUESTIONS, DON'T GIVE ANSWERS.

We look forward to hearing how things work out after all is said and done.

Re Lawyers - I believe Ralph mainly focuses on criminal defense. Ask him, he's a great guy. I've met him a couple of times. I was thinking of becoming an attorney a few years ago as a second career and mentioned it to him. He offered to meet me for lunch to talk about it. Nice guy.

One other thought is that woman attorney from torrington who is working with Goldberg. I met her at a CCDL meeting this fall. She seemed very sharp.
Google Goldberg v. Town of Glastonbury and you'll find something with her name on it.

Good luck.

May the Schwartz be with you.

Don

p.s. You may also want to contact the NRA, they may be interested in helping with this. Your actions and intentions would need to be squeaky clean. i.e. just going about your business and accidental print. Or going about your business and threated with lethal physical force, fully justified in presenting weapon. (I'm assuming you didn't shoot or we'd have heard about it). No drugs. No booze involved.

I don't want an answer. DON'T DISCUSS IT.

 

[GSG]

I may be a test case for this.

Anyone know of any good lawyers in the Waterbury area?

At a college or an elementary/high school?

 

[mikeflys1]

College. Don't really want to get into details until it all gets hashed out, though. Speaking to a lawyer on Saturday.

 

[dcmdon]

Don't talk about details at least until it is all over.

If it is settled with a nolle, charges could be brought up to 12 months in the future, so even then keep your mouth shut.

As always, my free internet legal advice is worth every cent you paid me for it.

If you listen to anything anyone says, listen to these two things:

1) keep your mouth shut
2) do what your lawyer tells you. Thats what you are paying him for.

Good luck.

Don