Posted on 02/16/2009 7:19:15 PM PST by marktwain
Federal courtKrauseberg it is!!!However, a Dec. 4, 2008, declaratory judgment in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia could rattle the law enforcement establishment's legal underpinning.
In a case involving Zachary Nelson Mead, the court adopted a settlement in a case similar to Krause's, declaring that seizing a firearm for no reason except that it was openly carried violated the Fourth Amendment's protection again unreasonable search and seizure.
But they are at least supposed to know what is unlawful. They are also not supposed to make things up. There was clearly no disorderly conduct, and carrying a visible weapon, especially on one's own property, is not illegal, and is in fact a protected right under the WI constitution.
Thus, this is false arrest. It's also deprivation of civil rights under color of law, a federal offense.
bttt
The yard is part of my property, is it not? So the situation would be the same I assume. Of course, you never assume, especially with the clowns we have in Washington running things.
IN HIS OWN YARD!!??
“He continued to testify that by Mr. Krause wearing a gun visible to the public, that created a disturbance, and that was disorderly, so Mr. Krause was therefore arrested for Disorderly Conduct While Armed.”
The first officer was doing the same thing that Brad was doing, why did the second officer NOT arrest the first officer also?
PING!!!!
What is needed is an Americanization program in that state. They have not yet assimilated.
Sometimes you need a fence to keep nosey people out. It's simply not sufficient to post your land in an urban/residential area.
Texicans ~ note, please, this is Wisconsin, not Texas, nor Louisiana. You'd probably get in trouble shooting the neighbor kids through your window for cutting across your lawn.
Being half-Polish, all I can say is that my dad's side of the family did seem to have a deference to law and authority not present among, say, the Scots-Irish. Then again, I thought this was true of all Catholic immigrant groups (the Italians and Mexicans being the notable exceptions, for often legitimate historical reasons).
I'm sure you've noticed!
Red hair liberates!
Now I’m no lawyer, but since he was charged with “Disorderly Conduct While Armed”, I probably would’ve arranged my questions as follows:
Q: So he had a gun?
A: Yes.
Q: What was he doing?
A: Planting a tree.
Q: And what was he charged with again?
A: Disorderly Conduct While Armed.
Q: You encountered him planting a tree while armed, and arrested him for “disorderly conduct while armed”. So planting the tree was the disorderly conduct...
Police are supposed to know the local laws, esp. those pertaining to displayed or concealed weapons. If not, they are supposed to call their legal officer for advise.
I can’t tell you how stupid some cops are about this, having seen this in court with a cop-on-cop case. The judge, a reasonable liberal, almost barfed on the arresting officer for his stupidity, and that of the states involved.
There was no Disorderly Conduct. False arrest lawsuit to follow.
If that's the video I think it is (DSL is a little slow) the cop in part 2 says that he records interviews, transcribes them, and destroys the recordings. I found myself wondering: is there any reason a defense attorney should not be allowed to ask the cop whether the interview was recorded, and if so what happened to the tape? If I were a juror and knew that a cop had deliberately destroyed the recording of what the defendant actually said in an interview, I would be highly skeptical of anything the cop might claim on the subject.
Isn't it funny how some people claim "ignorance of the law is no excuse" in situations where the law is vague and unknowable, and yet refuse to apply anything close to that standard in dealing with cops? Unfortunately, such totalitarian-anarchist views seem to be all too common.
Yes, that’s the one. I know how duplicate posts are hated around here, but it was just so compelling that I decided to risk the wrath of the thread police!
It’s a very disturbing presentation, especially for someone like me who has a son in law enforcement!
It’s a sad state of affairs when we have as much to fear from the police and/or prosecution as we do from the criminals. More and more I’ve come to feel that the average citizen is caught in the middle. Look at that story posted earlier about the guy who was jailed and charged for simply wearing a side arm. The police approached him with weapons drawn. My hat is really off to this guy! He is challenging a law in exactly the correct way. Do something you think is legal, get arrested, take your case to the courts and work your way up the ladder. I applaud him for handling the arrest so well. He has a situation where he is completely right and the police/prosecution is completely wrong. It is so easy in that case to do something that blurs the distinction and all of a sudden you find yourself fighting two wars. Looks to me like so far he has done it just right. I wonder if there’s a way to help him financially? I don’t have much, but I sure would skip a dinner out to send the money to him. I would also like to just send him an ATTABOY. Wonder if Hallmark has anything appropriate!
"Krauseberg, Wisconsin." It sounds so . . . "Rockwell-esque." ;)
Whyinheck didn’t the curious neighbor simply go ask the District Attorney in the county courthouse, instead of making all the trouble so needlessly? I hope someone in West Bend has invited the NRA to intervene.
“Looks to me like so far he has done it just right. I wonder if there’s a way to help him financially? I don’t have much, but I sure would skip a dinner out to send the money to him. I would also like to just send him an ATTABOY.”
—
THAT is an excellent idea. I am in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.