Posted on 07/11/2008 3:00:00 PM PDT by marktwain
Five open carry activists in Pennsylvania have filed two separate federal civil rights lawsuits against Dickson City police Officers Anthony Mariano and Karen Gallagher, and Chief William Stadnitski in the aftermath of a May 9 incident in which the plaintiffs were confronted and detained even though they had broken no laws.
Gun Week first reported the incident in the June 15 edition.
The first complaint, filed in US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, alleges that Gallagher and Mariano "illegally threatened, harassed, detained and/or accosted" plaintiffs Richard and Judy Banks, Roger McCarren and Larry Meyer while they were dining at a restaurant Banks, McCarren and Meyer were all visibly armed, and were essentially minding their own business. The lawsuit asserts that the plaintiffs' rights were violated under the First, Fourth, Fifth and 14th Amendments.
The other lawsuit, filed individually by Edward J. Kraft Jr. names Gallagher, Mariano and the Dickson City Borough, but not Chief Stadnitski.
All four plaintiffs in the Banks lawsuit were with several other people, and according to filing papers, Banks, McCarren and Meyer "were ordered (by Mariano and Gallagher) to report to a different section of the restaurant for `investigation'." However, the lawsuit contends, there was no explanation of what was being investigated.
Banks refused to provide identification, believing that the officers had no justification to ask for it, so he was then, according to the lawsuit, "illegally and unjustifiably handcuffed, frisked, and arrested, his personal property illegally confiscated and he was thereafter placed in the back seat of the Dickson City marked police car."
Kraft's lawsuit details his encounter with Gallagher and supports the account of the incident contained in the Banks documents. In all, according to the two lawsuits, the officers had nine or 10 men in the group standing outside in the rain, coercing them to produce identification and concealed carry permits, the latter of which is not required in Pennsylvania if someone is carrying openly.
Gun Week earlier spoke to Stadnitski, who said this was the first incident in his 37 years in law enforcement that involved private citizens openly carrying a firearm, other than while hunting. He also maintained that his officers erred on the side of caution when responding to a 911 call from a restaurant patron that complained about people "brandishing guns."
"There was no ill will on our part," Stadnitski stated. That is not how the incident is portrayed in the lawsuit filed by attorney Robert J. McGee, who is representing the Banks plaintiffs. He believes the incident began because another patron in the restaurant was "unhappy and uncomfortable that someone had a firearm in a holster on their hip" and called the police. He does not know who placed the initial 911 call. Magee told Gun Week that the process could take some time, because the defendants have 30 days in which to respond, and then there will be motions, discovery, depositions and a conference, and all of that takes time. Likewise, the confrontation between Kraft and Gallagher, as portrayed in the lawsuit filed by attorney Johanna L. Gelb of Scranton, suggests that both Gallagher and Mariano acted "without cause or justification." In the Kraft lawsuit, it is alleged that "Mariano falsely informed the group...that they did, in fact, need a concealed weapons permit to openly carry a firearm in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania."
The Banks lawsuit also complains that Gallagher and Mariano "refused to return...a handgun which Banks had in his possession at the time..." They also seized a handgun from McCarren and "refused to return it to him, on the basis that, according to some type of illegal registry maintained or available to the Dickson City Police Department, the handgun was not 'registered' to...McCarren."
Banks was ultimately released after, according to the filing document, "Gallagher and Mariano realized they had no basis for placing (him) under arrest...but it was only after an extended period of time."
Banks' lawsuit also describes a confrontation between the officers and Judy Banks, who tried to videotape and audiotape the encounter between the officers and the three other plaintiffs. The officers ordered Judy Banks to stop recording "under threat of being arrested for violation of the federal wiretap law," the document states. Meanwhile, Kraft alleges that "Gallagher and Mariano acted with a conscious and/or reckless disregard of the constitutional rights of Kraft to be free from unreasonable detentions, searches and seizures, and to be deprived of his property without due process of law."
Kraft's lawsuit says both officers "illegally threatened, detained, searched and seized him, and otherwise interfered with his rights under the Second, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments..." The incident has infuriated open carry activists across the country, who have been following developments on OpenCarry.org, an Internet forum set up for the growing open carry community. This is not the first time an open carry confrontation between citizens and the police has resulted in a federal civil rights lawsuit. A few years ago, another such lawsuit was filed, according to Magee, who also represented the earlier client. That lawsuit was settled but the terms of that settlement were confidential, the attorney said.
Richard Banks is the founder of Pennsylvania Open Carry, an offshoot of OpenCarry.org
“It was a criminal investigation”
” Survival of the fittest.”
“failure to produce identification is cause for detention until identification is established.”
You have been watching way to many westerns. There were a lot less actual face to face shoot outs then the movies would have you belive. Most felons did not last long when they did.
So your wife/husband just says you are a abuser you lose your rights there are many classifications of people who are not felons who can’t not carry.
You can tell the bad guys form the good guys the bad guys shoot at you the good guys don’t.
Once a felon, most all the time a felon so do you relly think the law stops them from carring now. Way to many felons are arrested each year to know that isn’t true.
Crimnals break the law that is why they are crimnals.
Sounds like, "Show us your papers" kind of thing. I believe Germany back in the late 30's and early 40's had such a policy.
I wonder if the police at the scene made any attempt to establish who made the actual complaint? After all, you need a witness, right? A voice on the phone to a 911 operator that somebody “brandished” a weapon would not seem to be sufficient evidence if when I walk in the door I observe everybody peacefully eating.
Given the training-level of some 911 operators, I’d take any report passed thru them with a huge grain of salt.
That said, I’d have produced the ID if the officer had asked for it — just out of courtesy. But it all depends on how the officer behaved. I mean I might not have if I was abruptly being ordered around.
Sorry, you are wrong. They can --always-- tell who is calling, or can find out.
“I wonder if the police at the scene made any attempt to establish who made the actual complaint? After all, you need a witness, right? A voice on the phone to a 911 operator that somebody “brandished” a weapon would not seem to be sufficient evidence if when I walk in the door I observe everybody peacefully eating.”
“All 911 lines have caller ID but if the caller blocks it they can not tell who is calling”
ikka replied:
“Sorry, you are wrong. They can —always— tell who is calling, or can find out.”
These officers were way out of bounds. Without any probable cause of a crime being committed there was NO justification for any investigation and no basis for demanding ID. These guys obviously slept though their last Act 120 (PA State
Municipal Police Certification) updates during the section about needing probable cause to detain someone, and the citizen was entirely within their rights to tell you to piss off and not ID themselves if you didn’t have PC to suspect a crime was being committed.
There is NO APPLICABLE SECTION in PA Title 18 (PA Crimes Code) to charge for open carry. Here’s a tip to the Chief ..............IF IT AIN’T IN THE CRIMES CODE IT AIN”T A FRIGGIN CRIME YOU MORON
I remember reading the initial report in the local paper about this. The man that got cuffed & searched also had a conceal handgun. I believe that it was this handgun that was confiscated when it didn’t show up in the “police registry” — whatever that was.
I’m not excusing what the police did, necessarily. Just trying to provide some information so that others can make a little more sense of the situation.
For cell phones, they can block the phone from receiving other calls and you have to enter a code to unlock it.
My 911 call went to the duty station where I got the number {but not the phone} (long way away), I requested my local 911 exchange by proper name, got the operator, and explained the problem.
And they have the number, plus the blocked phone if they decide to check phones.
Fortunately, it was just a property crime. No criminals, children, animals or liberals were harmed.
/johnny
If you are locally in the area, your reports are all the more valuable!
That's like saying" "I believe a person has a right to free speech, but before exercising it, they should have government permission and approval by means of a government issued permit that they must show to any police officer or the owner of an establishment if applicable."
This person has a long running beef with the local LEO’s in this town and the restaurant was picked to force a confrontation.
This person stated on a PA firearms web site that he removed his I.D prior to going to diner.
This person is a FFL in PA and knows the laws.
This person runs an Open Carry web site.
This person's Wife just happen to have a camcorder to record the whole event.
My opinion;
Tactics like this will not further our cause. A better method would have been to sit down with the local LEO’s and bring them up to speed on the OC laws in PA.
This will not end well. A retention holster was not used. Meaning a felon could snatch said firearm and use it in a family restaurant.
This was a setup from the word go.
This is not responsible firearm.
Me;
I've had first hand knowledge and dealings with the person in question.
I resent the fact that I now have to pay for a suit that could have been avoided in the first place.
I am an 16 year NRA member.
I am a GOA member.
I am a pain in the in the rear for any anti-firearm cause.
Concealed Carry permit holder in PA for over 15 years.
I now await the feed back and personal attacks.
Bookmark this to hopefully see reports on how the lawsuits turn out.
Story is in PA.
You should study the racial civil rights movement. You will see that much unjustified police action was recorded and broadcast as a result of purposefully seeking confrontations.
Do you think Rosa Parks didn't further the cause of equal treatment on public transportation?
If you are in the right, the public will tire very quickly of seeing the police ignoring your rights.
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.