Disturbing CCW case involving overzealous deputy

[blume357]

lawyers gun. Prove this first.... just to jump a little, assume the deputy knew that the lawyer had a concealed weapons permit and probably was carrying... that is not too hard for a LEO to determine.... then they could always claim they saw the weapon and etc.....

[Dragon55]

Posted by blume357:

".... just to jump a little, assume the deputy knew that the lawyer had a concealed weapons permit and probably was carrying... that is not too hard for a LEO to determine...."

Actually in Springfield, Mass in July 2006 it was not very easy.

This statement from page 13 of the decision:

"As it happens, Massachusetts did not have a simple way for police
officers to conduct such a check, so Stern's effort to do so took
several minutes. "

and.... Officer Stern never successfully verified the permit resulting in confiscation of Mr. Schubert's SD weapon. Then Stern left Schubert in a "high crime area" with no SD weapon.

And... Mr. Schubert was a well known criminal defense attorney of 30 years in Springfield.

[maestro pistolero]

Curiously, Conn. Trooper, Would you have handled the attorney in this manner? Do you think it was reasonable?

[Conn. Trooper]

Probably not, but I wasn't there and this story is one sided from the attorney's point of view. And it was posted in a gun rights newspaper, not exactly unbiased. Would I jump out of my car and point a gun at the head of someone carrying a gun? Probably not, I can think of cases where I would and where I wouldn't, depends on the situation. A well dressed man carrying a briefcase on the steps of the courthouse? Probably not, but I find it hard to buy the lawyer's story at face value when the courts are all upholding the actions of the officer and his department found no wrongdoing in their investigation.

Two sides to every story, this story, IMO, is painted to put the lawyer in the best possible light, published in a gun rights newspaper. Some will say I would back a cop no matter what, and I have given up trying to convince people otherwise, but I don't buy the story as its told.

[Dragon55]

Two sides to every story, this story, IMO, is painted to put the lawyer in the best possible light, published in a gun rights newspaper

Have you read the appeals case?

[Conn. Trooper]

On Schubert's account of the events, once Stern noticed
Schubert's partially concealed weapon, the officer leaped from his
cruiser in a "dynamic and explosive" manner, with his gun unholstered.

In Schubert's version of the facts,
Schubert stayed in front of the cruiser for several minutes, then
moved to ask Stern if he could stand in the shade because it was a
hot day.2 Stern denied the request. Shortly thereafter Stern
escorted Schubert into the back of the cruiser. Inside the
vehicle, Stern partially Mirandized Schubert, see Miranda v.
Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478-79 (1966), mentioned the possibility of
a criminal charge, and told Schubert that he (Stern) was the only
person allowed to carry a weapon on his beat.

Taken from the appeals court decision. The bold portion is the part I find interesting. No mention is made of police reports or officers testimony, just the lawyers side of things. Still don't buy the story, neither did the police department, the state courts and the federal appeals court.

[Dragon55]

I absolutely respect and appreciate most police officers because they do what is in many cases a thankless job.

I do not have the same respect for the justice system. This case is a good example of why I feel this way.

I have known of cases where you guys went way beyond what was required to try and put a really bad person in the pokey only to be frustrated by the court.

This case happens to be one of those where a good guy was wronged because the system could not execute it's own rules.

The following from the case which was stipulated by the court on page 13. NOT just contended by Schubert.

" But the entire stop took only ten minutes and
when Stern realized that he would not be able to confirm the gun
license within a reasonable time, he sensibly opted to terminate
the stop and release Schubert, but retain the weapon."

The officer gave up after 10 minutes?????? Schubert was innocent of the charge of carrying without a permit because he had one and presented it to the officer.
However, he was found guilty in 10 minutes and lost the right of SD because it was a sensible option. !?

No, the officer was wrong to illegally confiscate Mr. Schubert's weapon.

It's just sad the court found otherwise.

[Conn. Trooper]

" But the entire stop took only ten minutes and
when Stern realized that he would not be able to confirm the gun
license within a reasonable time, he sensibly opted to terminate
the stop and release Schubert, but retain the weapon."

The officer gave up after 10 minutes?????? Schubert was innocent of the charge of carrying without a permit because he had one and presented it to the officer.
However, he was found guilty in 10 minutes and lost the right of SD because it was a sensible option. !?

No, the officer was wrong to illegally confiscate Mr. Schubert's weapon.

It's just sad the court found otherwise.

And if he had carried the weapon concealed, he would not have had any issue. And the courts ( plural, more than one court and the police department) disagree with you. Mass. is not a state that embraces open carry.

On the other side of the story if the officer let him keep the gun and he was in fact carrying it illegally, and used it to kill someone, there would be enormous outcry of why didn't officer do something. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Dragon55]

And if he had carried the weapon concealed, he would not have had any issue.

For lack of a buttoned jacket Mr. Schubert lost his weapon. ... temporarily ....in a high crime area..... near the courthouse steps... left to fend as best he could for his own safety by an officer of the law. I guess this is a lesson for us all in regards to concealed carry. MAKE SURE it is concealed!

I wonder what the penalty in Mass. is for someone that has a concealed carry permit if they inadvertantly expose the weapon?

[Glenn Dee]

I have to say again that on face value I must disagree with the handling, and susquent rulings. Something about this post has been nagging me. I now remember an incident when I was on patrol... Very similar... but different.

I was on routine patrol, and noticed a lone car parked in an out of place location. It was a couple making out. The car had Georgia Plates on it.( we were in the Bronx NY) I as usual asked for the drivers licence, registration, and proof of insurance. I also asked if the driver, or passenger had any drugs, weapons, or anything else they shouldnt have. The driver stated that he had a gun. Then directed me to a small auto in the glove compartment. My partner and I removed the gun and the driver, and proceded to place him under arrest. He further stated that he had a carry permit from Georgia. With that he pulled out a piece paper torn from a llegal pad with his name and "OK to carry a gun" signed Sherrif XXXXXXX. We had a good laugh over that. Until we sent a message to that sherrif Dept and recieved a telex confirming the validity of the permit. The driver was let go, and we held his handgun until he left the state. Go figure...


I have to add that this was way back when we did police work... not law enforecement. We were allowed to use common sense.


Glenn Dee.

[arcticap]

The lawyer escaped prosecution for exposed carry, so that would apparently give the police officer justifcation for the harrassment.

It's just like in football when there's 2 flags thrown but the penalties off-set.

[Conn. Trooper]

Got me, wonder why he was taking it to court, didn't think you could carry a gun in court, maybe Mass allows it.

[Conn. Trooper]

Funny Glenn, because I am from the Bronx, and my Dad was a on the NYPD for 31 years and retired as a SGT. NYC never recognized out of state permits and to the best of my knowledge they still don't. Not even NYS permits are valid in NYC, only those issued by NYC.

I used to work in NY, many years ago.

Been at the cop game a long time now, in two states. Didn't say that I would have handled it this way, just that the courts upheld the actions of the officer.

[Wagonman]

And if he couldn't determine that his driver's license was facially valid would he have impounded his car? If he had no receipt for his pants would the officer have driven off with those, as well

Yes we can impound cars of people without DLs.

How did the LEO determine the subject was in possession of a weapon?

In Schubert's version of the facts,
Schubert stayed in front of the cruiser for several minutes, then
moved to ask Stern if he could stand in the shade because it was a
hot day.2 Stern denied the request. Shortly thereafter Stern
escorted Schubert into the back of the

The asking to stand in the shade would be a "tell" for me. You don't get to change the circumstances of my investigation. If I am ok in the climate then you should be also. Are you asking to move for a tactical reason or just to be a PITA eitherway I am predisposed to deny your request.

Like I said before concealed means concealed

[Uncle Billy]

Did I read somewhere here that the attorney was a "prominent defense attorney"? Maybe the cop had a grudge against this lawyer- it's not uncommon for cops to have issues with those who defend criminals and sometimes get them off. So maybe it's not about gun rights as much as it's about successful criminal defenders. Or maybe not.

[Conn. Trooper]

And maybe a criminal lawyer should know the rules in the state he lives and practices law in, suprised that he doesn't.

Maybe this thread should go away before it becomes another cop bashing, cop supporting thread, we are heading that way already.

[Glenn Dee]

Conn.Troop

Yep the city of NY wont recognize any pistol carry permit but their own. Not even permits issued by the higher authority... The State of New York. They dont even want to recognize HR218. But there have been more than a few law-suits forcing the NYPD to return property (the handgun) to it's rightful owner.

Having said that... Could I have arrested the guy with the little gun?.. Yes I could have. But to serve what purpose? Another number?. Releasing him required something called a 343. (Declination to prosicute) It required that I confer with the riding D/A, the Pct desk officer, and my own opinion. He wasnt a bad guy.. In sum and substance he made a mistake.. He should have known better.. but it was just a mistake.


In my opinion... and this is just my personal opinion... The City Of New York believes itself to be the center of the universe, and answerable to no one but itself. Least of all to the constitution. And thats from a native New Yorker.

Getting back on subject. Police work requires maturity, education, experience, training, and compassion... The police work for all the people. Not for the government.

END OF RANT!!!

I apologize for taking the conversation off topic.


Glenn D.

[Conn. Trooper]

I agree, never understood how a NYS permit was never good enough for NYC, makes no sense. But back when I was a cop in NY we couldn't bring guns into New Jersey, even on duty.

If you felt it was OK to let the guy go, have at it, I don't know the whole story. Was the guy up here to get into something? Why the Georgia plates? Etc. If it was a legit mistake, fine send him packing and make sure he's aware of the law for next time. No sweat. Again, I never said that I would have handled it the same way as the cop in Mass, just that the PD and the courts backed him.

Some people are just not aware of the rules and a little education goes a lot further than an arrest.

[Dragon55]

And maybe a state (Mass. in this case) should have the systems in place to make it a

routine procedure for officers to check the validity of a carry permit BEFORE they

start issuing them.

And maybe this thread should not go away simply because it makes some folks

uncomfortable.

I for one have stated I have the greatest respect for most police officers and certainly

in no way intended to bash the officer. I have a problem with the system Mass. had

in place at the time of the incident and the minimum amount of effort officer Stern

exerted to verify Mr. Schubert's permit before confiscating his weapon. 10 minutes

was not enough of an effort unless there were more pressing concerns ..... which

were never mentioned. If my opinion that 10 minutes is not enough effort is to be

construed as bashing then I guess I was bashing.


I bet this couldn't happen now because I bet the state of Mass. has corrected this flaw.

BUT.... if they haven't someone who IS carrying concealed and is subjected to a

Terry can still be relinquished of their weapon in spite of the fact they have on their

person a state issued carry permit IF the officer does not want to invest more than

10 minutes in trying to verify the permit.

[Glenn Dee]

Hey Conn. Troop

Yep I checked him out pretty good.He was legitimately visiting relatives in NY. He drove up from Georgia for a holiday. Just a regular guy who did a bone head move. No reason to ruin his life over it.

[old bear]

“unless the officer has probable cause to believe that you are doing so illegally, intend to or have committed a crime, my instinct is to believe that he has no right to request anything more than identification and CCW.”
From a quick reading of the article it appears as if the officer did have P.C. to believe that the party in question was breaking the law, (officer observed a concealed weapon) so the officer had the right to determine if the suspect had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. An officer has the right and duty to perform a pat down search of suspect’s outer garments to determine if the suspect is armed and may present a danger to the officer or the public at large. If the officer was unable to determine that the suspect’s CCW permit was valid the officer had the right to confiscate the weapon and any documents he believed to be fake. It appears to me that the officer acted within the scope of the law and his authority. Did the officer use what I believe was good sense, no! I believe that the officer could have handled this in a less conferential way.

Years ago when CCW permits were few and far between I had a similar situation happen. It was daylight, in a low crime area; the person I observed was professionally attired, so my threat alarm was at medium. I advised dispatch of my location and observations and requested one back up unit I approached the suspect from a right angle, with my pistol held behind my back, advised him why I stopped him and requested his CCW permit, he quickly provided his U.S. Army CID credentials I made point of re holstering my pistol. We had a short but pleasant conversation and went about our business.

The final aside to this story; the man I stopped was hired as chief of police almost 5 years later and the two of us always had a good laugh over that incident.

[Wagonman]

[QUOTE]In my opinion... and this is just my personal opinion... The City Of New York believes itself to be the center of the universe, and answerable to no one but itself. Least of all to the constitution. And thats from a native New Yorker.

[QUOTE]

Sounds like Chicago also

[Dragon55]

posted by old bear

Did the officer use what I believe was good sense, no!

[ZeSpectre]

I'm always puzzled when law enforcement goes that extra mile to MAKE a criminal out of someone. Sure makes life miserable for those officers who try to "conserve the peace".

[Glenn Dee]

ZeSpectre

I often wonder the same thing. It seems to be a growing trend though. I guess that's what comes of hiring a boy to do a man's work.

Think that was too strong?

Glenn