I don't undertsand. A few people have hinted that was a liar,a few just came out and said it outright. Yet when I try to make a point,the thread needs to be closed with me maybe being banned? I would not do to anybody that was done to me. By the volume of people reading this post,I think a lot of us are curious as to how it turns out. The T & G is doing a second story soon to show the Shrewsbury police to be the liars they are. If the mods want to close the thread,so be it.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Please,every gun owner read this post!!
- Thread starter darkstorm
- Start date
I don't undertsand. A few people have hinted that was a liar,a few just came out and said it outright. Yet when I try to make a point,the thread needs to be closed with me maybe being banned? I would not do to anybody that was done to me. By the volume of people reading this post,I think a lot of us are curious as to how it turns out. The T & G is doing a second story soon to show the Shrewsbury police to be the liars they are. If the mods want to close the thread,so be it.
I don't like to see this amount of bashing in here. We have a rare opportunity to get the story straight from the person it happened to and not through the filter of the media. Does that mean it is necessarily 100% true, no. But consider this, if he was a member here long before this as many of us are and it happened and then he posted about it there would be a lot more people on his side. We need to give him the benefit of the doubt here. It would appear that the police acted inappropriately on many levels here. Some of you are just way too high strung and/or like being "that guy" who just has to oppose/critique/nitpick everything on the net. What we need to remember here is this: it could happen to YOU! ![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
And at least a few or more of us would have met him/her in person and would have a much better of idea of the kind of person he/she was.
I have no opinion on this case because, quite frankly, it's about the messiest I've seen here at NES. However, coming onto the boards and immediately attacking Half Cocked, who, although we don't always agree with him, is a great source of information from a LE perspective, is something that really rubbed me the wrong way.
I wish the OP the best of luck in the looming legal struggle.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 3,435
- Likes
- 401
I have read it. You continue to state that she has "taken back" her story. This does not mean that she fabricated the story and/or that what she stated was not in fact true.
It simply means that she wishes to not pursue it any further.
Which means that no further action can be taken based upon her statement but it does not invalidate the police actions based upon her initial statement.
Personally...if I were you I would let this thread die!
dwarven1
Lonely Mountain Arms
True... that was my point to the LEO in the other thread.
I'd let this die, too. It could come back to haunt you.
Unfortunately, as others have said, I think a huge part of the problem here is in the way you are communicating your anger and the facts about the situation. Using too much emotion when doing either clouds everything else.
Lets say you get in a car accident caused by someone else. You can take two paths from there. One is chewing the other driver out, chewing the ear off the cop who responds, swearing up and down to the insurance agent and publicly attacking all of them on an internet forum when you don't get what you want. The other path is to be upright and intelligent about the situation, and to not let your reaction to a situation determine your response. Collect your facts, take pictures, and present it in a clam and level-headed way. Which path do you think will lead you through the least troubles and lend the most credibility to your claims?
I think you need to stop talking about this situation, contact a lawyer, and let him do the work for you before you do something that can't be un-done. I think you're going to have a lot of damage control to do before this is over and the only way to avoid it is to stop, lawyer up, and let someone who knows how to play out the situation drive the ship. Loose lips sink ships.
Unfortunately, as others have said, I think a huge part of the problem here is in the way you are communicating your anger and the facts about the situation. Using too much emotion when doing either clouds everything else.
Lets say you get in a car accident caused by someone else. You can take two paths from there. One is chewing the other driver out, chewing the ear off the cop who responds, swearing up and down to the insurance agent and publicly attacking all of them on an internet forum when you don't get what you want. The other path is to be upright and intelligent about the situation, and to not let your reaction to a situation determine your response. Collect your facts, take pictures, and present it in a clam and level-headed way. Which path do you think will lead you through the least troubles and lend the most credibility to your claims?
I think you need to stop talking about this situation, contact a lawyer, and let him do the work for you before you do something that can't be un-done. I think you're going to have a lot of damage control to do before this is over and the only way to avoid it is to stop, lawyer up, and let someone who knows how to play out the situation drive the ship. Loose lips sink ships.
![[horse]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/026.gif "Beat a dead horse [horse]")
I am going repeat something an LEO friend of mine said to me one night while I was venting about someone who had really gotten me angry.
"Don't say anything I might have to testify against you about."
This is a public forum. Announcing that you are going to "make up a story" and send the police into action based on it falls into that category. Not being a lawyer or an LEO, I am not really qualified to tell you if the above statement is capable of damaging your credibility if/when your suit gets to court (or worse). I am guessing that it can.
Like you, I'm not hiding. My screen name is my ham call. Anyone who cares to look in the FCC database can readily find my real name and a valid mailing address. Any LEO (especially the feds) should also be able to dig up just about anything else based on the private stuff I had to cough up in order to renew my ticket.
Yeah I hope for your sake no one from Shrewsbury Police gets wind of this thread ![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
. This would be quite easy to subpoena and put into evidence. Funny how HalfCocked and I share the same profession and we both seem to have the same funny feeling about this gentleman's story. When your job involves seeing through BS it becomes like a sixth sense... and mines been tingling since the get-go.
. This would be quite easy to subpoena and put into evidence. Funny how HalfCocked and I share the same profession and we both seem to have the same funny feeling about this gentleman's story. When your job involves seeing through BS it becomes like a sixth sense... and mines been tingling since the get-go.Yeah I hope for your sake no one from Shrewsbury Police gets wind of this thread
I am far from stupid. I'm sure Shrewsbury PD. has already seen this. I can at least back up what I'm saying.
It took months for that story to come to light as the T & G triple checked every fact,met and called the Chief of police as well.
Do I come across as angry? Damm right I do,and am. Would you not be?
Just because a person wears a badge does that mean they are the almighty?
You call it bs? Why? Because you can't believe a police dept. should or could act like this! Well I'm here to tell you I have not changed one fact of this story!!If someone did not video tape the Rodney King beating and he tried to tell his story I have no doubt he also would be called a liar as well. It's to bad,I guess for me, that some of you just to refuse to belive that this sort of thing can,and does happen.
I have been looking at this in the wrong light. To the few LEO'S out here I wish to thank-you. You are making my case even stronger. I'll let you sit back and give it some thought. With all your training,I'm sure in time the answer will come to you.
Please,as you pointed out,this is a public forum I look forward to more of your comments. Again,thank-you...![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
Please,as you pointed out,this is a public forum I look forward to more of your comments. Again,thank-you...
I can't speak for the others, but I can let you know why I am so willing to contribute to a legal defense fund while knowing little about the facts.
If the OP is 100% in the right and his constitutional rights were trampled on by the system, yet he cannot have his day in court because he can't afford it it would be a damn shame.
If the OP is twisting the facts and is just plain wrong, the legal defense fund will not harm any of us beyond the money we put in. I find it hard to see where this could lead to an erosion of others' rights in this case if it becomes a precedent, but IANAL. And if I'm somehow completely off on my judgement and he's totally off his rocker the case won't go far anyhow.
I think the OP falls somewhere in this range, and most likely is far closer to the right side than the wrong side. But this is not my judgement to make. No matter what I think, nothing changes. But by kicking in to a legal defense fund I might be helping someone who's constitutional rights have been violated, and by helping people in that situation I selfishly help myself. If I'm wrong, I've wasted a little money. I've done that before.
I'm a big girl, and I can live with myself either way.
If the OP is 100% in the right and his constitutional rights were trampled on by the system, yet he cannot have his day in court because he can't afford it it would be a damn shame.
If the OP is twisting the facts and is just plain wrong, the legal defense fund will not harm any of us beyond the money we put in. I find it hard to see where this could lead to an erosion of others' rights in this case if it becomes a precedent, but IANAL. And if I'm somehow completely off on my judgement and he's totally off his rocker the case won't go far anyhow.
I think the OP falls somewhere in this range, and most likely is far closer to the right side than the wrong side. But this is not my judgement to make. No matter what I think, nothing changes. But by kicking in to a legal defense fund I might be helping someone who's constitutional rights have been violated, and by helping people in that situation I selfishly help myself. If I'm wrong, I've wasted a little money. I've done that before.
I'm a big girl, and I can live with myself either way.
In responce to Vellnueve's post regarding another post on this matter where he states there are always two sides to every story. My responce was this.
You are right to some degree. Here is my offer to the cops on this board and the 1% of people who have called me a liar.
As cops,I'm sure they could set up a polygraph test for me to take. I would be MORE than happy to do so! You would never see the 5 officers involved take a polygraph but in order to clear my name, I will! Any time anywhere! I guess it's now there turn to put up or shut up isn't it?
You are right to some degree. Here is my offer to the cops on this board and the 1% of people who have called me a liar.
As cops,I'm sure they could set up a polygraph test for me to take. I would be MORE than happy to do so! You would never see the 5 officers involved take a polygraph but in order to clear my name, I will! Any time anywhere! I guess it's now there turn to put up or shut up isn't it?
Polygraphs, whether taken by you or the police, prove nothing, as I noted in the other thread.
Again, I am not taking sides, but I really don't see what purpose continually calling out the LEOs on this board serves.
Again, I am not taking sides, but I really don't see what purpose continually calling out the LEOs on this board serves.
I'm not "calling out" the leos as you say but rather trying to prove the event's I stated did in fact happen.
As I understand a polygrapg test is anywhere from 88 to 95% correct. I'll take those odds any day of the week.
Why can't certain members refuse belive that what I'm saying is true? I'm willing to do what ever it takes to prove I have not made up any aspect of this story. I thought the poly offer would prove that. I guess I was wrong yet again.
I think it's naive to believe that you're going to convince everyone you tell your story to that it's true. A lot of people are skeptical by nature, or have become as such via their occupations or life experience.
Either way, it's not the members of this forum that you need to convince, rather you need to convince your town officials and the judicial system. You should be focusing on that rather than posting here, as continual posting about any facts that may be used in a legal case here could really come back to haunt you later. Posting here may be an outlet for your frustration with this case, but it really doesn't do anything to further your cause, and could conceivably hinder it.
Either way, it's not the members of this forum that you need to convince, rather you need to convince your town officials and the judicial system. You should be focusing on that rather than posting here, as continual posting about any facts that may be used in a legal case here could really come back to haunt you later. Posting here may be an outlet for your frustration with this case, but it really doesn't do anything to further your cause, and could conceivably hinder it.
Kicker96FS
NES Member
I need another bag...![[popcorn]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/043.gif "Popcorn [popcorn]")
Not bashing but this is going round and round, same things getting said over and over, kinda like a movie if you catch my drift., A "B" movie at that.
This is not the place to "fix" a problem like this. IMHO.
Not bashing but this is going round and round, same things getting said over and over, kinda like a movie if you catch my drift., A "B" movie at that.
This is not the place to "fix" a problem like this. IMHO.
Your prints should be on file with the State Identification Section in Sudbury and there should be no need to take a new set of prints every time you renew your license.
Mark056
Bill Nance
Banned
Darkstorm:
1. You waited 4-5 years to pursue this. It's a basic civil rights case, not a gun case in particular. ACLU and other organizations, not to mention simple private attorneys take such cases on contingency all the time. What you allege is something that promises very significant damage awards. I'm flat calling BS on the "I can't afford a lawyer thing."
2. Because you waited so long, I'd be willing to bet $10 given to the charity of your choice that you have no case because the statute of limitations has run out.
3. The histrionics you've demonstrated on this board, combined with the fact that you're posting what you've posted makes me highly skeptical of your version of the events.
There are several attorneys on this board, any one of who will probably be happy to give you a consult for $100-$200 to determine if you have any case at all. Invest the couple hundred bucks and do the legwork. Then you can come tell us that a suit has been filed, you need help with attorney fees, etc. Until then frankly I'm going to ignore you as a crank.
1. You waited 4-5 years to pursue this. It's a basic civil rights case, not a gun case in particular. ACLU and other organizations, not to mention simple private attorneys take such cases on contingency all the time. What you allege is something that promises very significant damage awards. I'm flat calling BS on the "I can't afford a lawyer thing."
2. Because you waited so long, I'd be willing to bet $10 given to the charity of your choice that you have no case because the statute of limitations has run out.
3. The histrionics you've demonstrated on this board, combined with the fact that you're posting what you've posted makes me highly skeptical of your version of the events.
There are several attorneys on this board, any one of who will probably be happy to give you a consult for $100-$200 to determine if you have any case at all. Invest the couple hundred bucks and do the legwork. Then you can come tell us that a suit has been filed, you need help with attorney fees, etc. Until then frankly I'm going to ignore you as a crank.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
There is a statute of limitations on your 2nd Amendment rights? I don't think he is interested in MONEY. He wants his rights back. Whether he was denied them yesterday or 50 years ago he should be able to get them back. That said, other basic rights were denied such as the right to an attorney. I could be wrong but is there a statute of limitations on rights such as this too?
Bill Nance
Banned
If you read both threads, the claims being made by the OP are that he was essentially dragged out of his home under a false well-being call, agreed to go because he was unlawfully threatened with detention (because again, according to his version he gave the cops no reason to believe he was a danger to himself or others) that a doctor falsely diagnosed him of being possibly suicidal, guns confiscated, etc.
Those are extremely serious charges, and if true, would be the basis for a major civil rights lawsuit on several fronts against the cops and the doctor.
The suitability thing is a separate issue really, and should be fairly easily appealable with a clean bill of mental health unless he's stuck in a "black" town with a prick for a CLEO, in which case moving would probably be the best thing to do, or alternatively moving his business to a green town nearby and re-applying there.
The whole "suitability" issue in Mass is BS. It's unconstitutional. But that's not really the substance of the OP's claim.
The substance of his current gripe is that his so-called unsuitability rests on all the other stuff, which he's waited 4 or five years depending on how you figure it, to take any action at all.
There is, in fact, a statute of limitations on the claims of misconduct he's making, at least in terms of a civil case, which he would need to bring to get his gun rights restored. his guns replaced, and recompense for all the grief, which, I fail to see how anyone who gave a shit about civil liberties wouldn't think is important.
You can't just wait for years and years, suddenly allege serious misconduct of police and a doctor and expect redress by the courts. A 3 minute conversation with any lawyer in the world would have told him that he needed to file an official claim asap, then follow it up with a lawsuit if needed to make sure he kept his options open, something any lawyer would be happy to do for chump change if there was any merit whatever to the claims.
gws1063
NES Member
Robert, I sincerely wish you much better luck in the future than you have experienced in the past!
Several people in this thread have suggested that the right thing to do was to keep quiet and definitely NOT authorize any actions the police proposed. Also, a lawyer advised you that stepping outside your house was the wrong thing to do.
I have a serious question for the LEOs here. Suppose you (or the hypothetical LEO the next town over if you want to keep it impersonal) are out on a well-being call (danger to self and has firearms). Someone comes to the door and identifies themselves as the individual you are looking for, but stays inside and refuses to respond to further questions. What do you do?
-Gary
Several people in this thread have suggested that the right thing to do was to keep quiet and definitely NOT authorize any actions the police proposed. Also, a lawyer advised you that stepping outside your house was the wrong thing to do.
I have a serious question for the LEOs here. Suppose you (or the hypothetical LEO the next town over if you want to keep it impersonal) are out on a well-being call (danger to self and has firearms). Someone comes to the door and identifies themselves as the individual you are looking for, but stays inside and refuses to respond to further questions. What do you do?
-Gary
How can they do anything without a warrant? This is still America, right? I'm also curious how stepping outside your house invites any invasion of your rights. You are still on your property, minding your own business. They still have no warrant, and you have the right to say nothing. Shouldn't be able to cuff and detain you with no charges. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some way around it with "its for their own good" type of laws to "protect someone from themselves". I'll let you know from personal experience, if someone is going to kill themselves they WILL do it and you can't stop them. Believing otherwise is simply naive.
