Police Harassment Suit Amended

October 22, 2012

Features, News

The federal civil rights lawsuit brought by the Southern Nevada Confederation of Clubs and numerous individual complainants against various Las Vegas area police departments including the notorious Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and the North Las Vegas Police Department has grown.

The lawsuit now lists 32 separate “claims for relief.” Each claim, by an individual, seeks a “sum in excess of $75,000 for damages” and a similar amount in punitive damages plus a “a reasonable sum as attorneys’ fees, costs of suit and interest.” So it is now a $5 million lawsuit and unless Southern Nevada police stop singling out motorcycle club members for harassment the amount sought will grow.

The complainants are represented by Las Vegas lawyer Stephen P. Stubbs. The suit alleges that “Plaintiffs were willfully, maliciously, and intentionally prevented from associating and/or assembling without justification or compelling state interest as a result of their status as a motorcycle club or motorcycle club member.”

The original suit, brought last June, alleged two serious incidents of harassment against the Mongols Motorcycle Club; an incident involving the Vagos Motorcycle Club; illegal persecution of the Stray Cats Motorcycle Club; and incidents involving members of the Bandidos Motorcycle Club named Joseph Pitka and Stuart Cantara. You can read The Aging Rebel’s original report on the lawsuit here.

The amended complaint cites additional incidents involving members of the Mongols, Bandidos and Down & Dirty Motorcycle Clubs. The suit is reinforced by documents that seem to prove that police and politicians in Boulder City, Nevada intended to deprive visitors during the Mongols National Run last June of their constitutional rights.

Police Make The Law

For example, the suit cites an email written by Boulder City, Nevada “Intel/Gang/Graffiti Crimes Detective Scott Pastore” that closes with the words, “The greatest pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do.”

In that email dated June 27 Pastore writes: “Just wanted to say thank you to all of you for a job well done. Everyone made an impact on keeping our city free of OMG rallies such as these. Will OMG bikers come to BC, yes. But, only as they normally do in packs of three or four. I don’t anticipate another rally based on the results. However if they do then we will welcome them the same way we did this year. In all it was a great learning experience for all of us in dealing with OMG groups.” It is unconstitutional for a policeman to enforce a self-authored decree that his city will be “free” of any lawfully assembling group. It is also rare for a cop to be so feeble-minded as to make such a statement in writing

An email written a few days earlier by Boulder City Police Chief Thomas W. Finn to two other officers of the court clearly illustrates that officials who are supposed to uphold the law conspired to break it in order harass motorcycle club members out of town. Finn writes Municipal Court Judge Victor Miller and City Attorney Dave Olsen: “There will be several dozen law enforcement agencies working in BC this weekend for the Mongols event. We are taking a zero tolerance approach with them and all the agencies will be citing them into our municipal court ofr ordinance violations, traffic violations and other misdemeanors. Is there a specific date you want us to use for a court appearance?

“Also, as part of our zero tolerance approach, all the law enforcement agencies have asked if our court and prosecutor would consider ‘no deals’ when the misdemeanors are adjudicated. Doing so would make it clear to the ‘Mongol Miscreants’ that Boulder City does not tolerate bad behavior.”

Quit Bitching

According to the suit: “During the (national run) event, on three separate occasions, officers of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department entered the Boulder Inn and Suites (the Mongols hotel) without a warrant or probable cause, despite clear notice to law enforcement that the property was closed to the public and requests that they leave the property. Attorney Stephen Stubbs and the owner of the Boulder Inn Suites went to the Boulder City Police Department to register a complaint in connection with these activities but were ignored and ultimately left without filing their complaint. Attorney Stephen Stubbs later reached Chief Finn by telephone to report the trespass and Chief Finn told Attorney Stubbs to ‘quit bitching.’ Chief Finn refused to let Attorney Stubbs document the trespass complaint.

The suit also alleges: “Mongols member, Rafael Garcia Espinoza, and his fiancée, paralegal and law school graduate, Lynn Vilpondo, were also in attendance that weekend. Ms. Vilpondo was stopped by Las Vegas Metro officers while walking down the street for allegedly appearing to look like someone Metro was looking for. Ms. Vilpondo identified herself and was subsequently detained by Las Vegas Metro officers without cause. Mr. Garcia expressed his frustration over Ms. Vilpondo’s detention, and was subsequently cited by Las Vegas Metro for allegedly using profanity while protesting.”

Also that weekend: “While attending the Mongols national gathering in Boulder City, Mongols member, George Olivo, crossed Nevada Way on foot when he was suddenly detained by Las Vegas Metro officers. Nevada Way had just been repaved and did not yet have any lines painted on the roadway. The reason given for the detention was suspicion of jaywalking. Mr. Olivo was asked for his name, which Mr. Olivo provided.

“Shortly thereafter, a second officer, Detective Woosnam, approached Mr. Olivo and likewise asked for his name, to which Mr. Olivo responded that he had already provided this information to the other officer. Detective Woosnam then arrested Mr. Olivo for obstruction of a police officer, violation of NRS 171.123, (failure to identify oneself), and public drunkenness pursuant to a Boulder City ordinance that has been preempted by NRS 458.260, which provides that it not unlawful to be intoxicated in public. Detective Woosman did not conduct a sobriety test or otherwise obtain any evidence whatsoever of Mr. Olivo’s allegedly state of intoxication. Mr. Olivo was released on bail 24-hours after his arrest.

“Shortly after Mr. Olivo was arrested, his wife, Nancy Laura, was traveling to Boulder City for the event in a truck with a non-operational motorcycle in the back. Ms. Laura was pulled over by Detective Woosnam for no apparent reason, without a warrant or probable cause. Detective Woosnam threatened to confiscate a motorcycle in Ms. Laura’s vehicle, but ultimately did not after the owner of the motorcycle returned from California (barely beating the tow truck) and demonstrated necessary documentation for the parts on the motorcycle. Before leaving, Detective Woosnam informed Ms. Laura that Mr. Olivo was too drunk to stand at the time of his arrest, which assertion is contrary to the evidence.”

No Steenking Fifth Amendment

In another example of police contempt for the law the amended suit cites “Mongols member, Charles Christopher Gulas,” who “attended the 2012 Laughlin River Run held April 25 – 29, 2012.

“During the event, Mr. Gulas was detained for openly carrying a buck knife on his person. Following his detention, Mr. Gulas gave the detaining officer a business card identifying Stephen Stubbs, Esq. as his attorney. This business card contains writing asserting Mr. Gulas’s Constitutional rights on the back, including his Constitutional right to remain silent and to his 5th Amendment right to counsel.

“The detaining officer read the back of the card and returned the business card to Mr. Gulas. Mr. Gulas in turn promptly handed the card to the officer once again, which was again refused. The officer then attempted a custodial interrogation of Mr. Gulas, completely ignoring Mr. Gulas’s assertions of his Constitutional rights. The officer threatened Mr. Gulas with arrest if Mr, Gulas did not surrender the Buck knife, even though Mr. Gulas was lawfully open-carrying the knife. The officer confiscated the Buck knife.”

Cops Can Go Anywhere

Earlier that month, “On or about April 14, 2012, the Bandidos Motorcycle Club held an event at the Eagles Lodge in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Eagles Lodge has a private, fenced parking area where the attending members parked their motorcycles while attending the event. There is a second parking area (inside of the first parking area) that is has additional fencing and a clearly posted sign that states ‘Members Only.’ James Gear, Jeff Ohm, and Dan Berstead, stood by the entrance to the second parking area, limiting admission to invitees and assisting with parking.

“Las Vegas Metro Officer Quinteros, badge #P9755, unlawfully entered the private parking area in a grey Honda Accord with California license plate number 3UOG418, breaking through the yellow taped barrier, ignoring the ‘Members Only’ sign, and despite being signaled to stop at the entrance. Officer Quinteros admitted that he entered the area notwithstanding the Club’s refusal to admit him, nearly running down Mr. Gear, Mr. Ohm and Mr. Berstead in the process.

“Officer Quinteros was followed by Officers Yatomi, badge #4602; Fink, badge #8904; Tripp, badge #6731; and Doughly, badge #13358. The officers did not have a warrant or probable cause to enter the private parking area. The officers were asked to leave by Attorney Stephen Stubbs, two Eagles Lodge trustees, and the Eagles Lodge president, James Kimsey. The officers responded that they have a right to go anywhere they want on the property, and only left after taking down the license plate numbers of all the vehicles within the private parking area.”

Jerald Murillo

The suit also tells the tale of Jerald Murillo who, “traveled to Laughlin on or about the weekend of May 1, 2011, to hang around the Mongols Motorcycle Club, to meet with family, and attend the motorcycle run held there that weekend.

“While there, he was detained by an officer of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, and ultimately arrested. Mr. Murillo asked the officer why he was being arrested and what he was being charged with, which resulted in his being told to shut up, then violently slammed against a police car by the arresting officer and handcuffed.

“After some time passed, the officer allowed Mr. Murillo to exit the police car and asked Mr. Murillo to sign a paper before he would be released. Mr. Murillo did not have his reading glasses and refused to sign something he could not read. Mr. Murillo requested that the officer allow him to retrieve his reading glasses. At that point, the officer told Mr. Murillo that he was being arrested and proceeded to put Mr. Murillo back in the police car. In addition to sustaining a cut to his face from earlier entering the police car, the officer pushed Mr. Murillo into the police car the second time and purposefully slammed the door on Mr. Murillo’s foot, resulting in a fracture, bruising and swelling which required treatment.”

Down And Dirty Sexual Assault

Another incident added to the original complaint occurred on or about May 12, 2012 when Down & Dirty Motorcycle Club members Stacey Frongillo and Michael ‘Mike’ Edwards were planning a charity event held by the Club to benefit St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital. When they left the event location, they were followed by Las Vegas Metro officers, among them Officers Fink and T. Pandulo, badge #7884.

“Ms. Frongillo and Mr. Edwards were pulled over by the Las Vegas Metro officers at the intersection of Arville Street and West Russell Road for allegedly failing to signal. Officer Pandulo informed Ms. Frongillo that he intended to pat her down. Ms. Frongillo requested that if a pat-down were necessary, that it be conducted by a female officer. Officer Pandulo denied Ms. Frongillo’s request, and refused to even check to see if a female officer was available. Officer Pandulo insisted on conducting the pat-down himself.

“Ms. Frongillo, who was wearing skin tight pants, could not possibly hide a weapon of any kind on her person. Officer Pandulo proceeded with the pat-down, running the back of his hand across s. Frongillo’s crotch areas and down the front of her thighs. Officer Pandillo then ran the palms of his hands down Ms. Frongillo’s buttocks, slowly and firmly pressing against Ms. Frongillo’s buttocks and thighs (which) Ms. Frongillo found extremely offensive. Officer Pandulo took no interest in the pack of cigarettes and lighter showing through Ms. Frongillo’s front pockets.”

 

 

Share
, , , , , , ,

169 Responses to “Police Harassment Suit Amended”

  1. Grumbler Says:

    @Va.Bob – Abe sure is a polarizing figure. Was actually planning to use a quote from the Boondock Saints …

    @Shyster – Hang in there as your contributions are much appreciated!

  2. Glenn S. Says:

    Shyster, SC laws specifically exempt primitive weapons from their “felon in possession of firearm” laws, as does the federal 1968 gun control act. SC is pretty reasonable regarding guns. Recently, an ex-convict shot an intruder in his home, in Spartanburg, and the state refused to prosecute. Then the feds charged him. I was charged under the state law in 1990, but the guy I shot was the W. Columbia police chief’s nephew and the cops wanted to leverage me to the fullest extent to get a plea on shooting nephew so that nephew would get a check from the state victim/witness fund.

    What I wanted to know is whether or not there have been more recent federal laws passed, new interpretations of existing laws, or newer case law that bars felons from owning and possessing black powder weapons, black powder, lead balls, and/or percussion caps. Knowledgeable friends have offered me conflicting opinions and its getting more and more difficult to research federal law, these days, with all the case law and amendments to unrelated laws, especially post 9-11.

    I hope you continue to contribute here, Shyster. Do what I do here and everywhere: Take what you need and leave the rest.

  3. Va.Bob Says:

    [email protected] the hypocrite and war criminal,Abraham Lincoln.

  4. Bill Says:

    Shyster: I, among most here I suspect, truly appreciate your contributions. You can still “come here daily and leave enriched” from what you have given, whether or not you feel you have received anything. This thread has been illuminating to say the least, mostly because of you. Thanks

  5. Shyster Says:

    Glenn S,

    California Penal Code section 16520(a) As used in this part, “firearm” means any device, designed to be used as a weapon, from which is expelled through a
    barrel, a projectile by the force of any explosion or other form of
    combustion.
    Caveat: Every State has their own definition of a firearm.

    Junior,

    Despite the schoolyard “blowhard” name calling and your giving absolutely flawed advice to the readers here that not only can one kill a cop who is attempting an unlawful arrest, but “and look kids your friends can jump in an kill the cop too” who is attempting an unlawful arrest, I took time out of my day to simply look up the John Bad Elk case cited at 177 US 529. NOT ONLY HAS THE CASE BEEN SUPERSEDED BY STATUTE BUT THE CASE DOES NOT STAND FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT YOU HAVE STATED HERE, I.E. THAT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT HAS GIVEN LEGAL CARTE BLANCHE TO ANYONE WHO KILLS A COP DURING AN UNLAWFUL ARREST!! The case ruled on appeal that the jury was not instructed as to a lesser charge of manslaughter and the USSC sent the case back for a re-trial with the instruction for the Court to advise the jury that they could consider a verdict of manslaughter. And read California Business and Professions Code 1680 again. The language clearly states the the attorneys duty is to his client not the Court!!!!
    Google “Attorney Client Duty” and take a look at the ABA Model Rules regarding who the Attorney has to protect. You have not imparted one correct piece of legal advice on this forum.

    Sled Tramp,

    I’m going your way man. I used to come here daily and leave enriched but now I visit this site less and less. I will still read and CTL though.

    Desert HD,

    Still waiting …

    Shyster

  6. Jim666 Says:

    Well while I agree we do need a amount of law and order for the population, to adhear to rapes, roberys,cold blooded murders,treason,shit like that, ok to that extent we do need policing from someone,
    but all these petty bullshit laws made up every day just to run the govt. rackets is completly out of hand along w/ these so called police bullies that protect and help profit the govt. racket,s that we do not need or want,

    If you notice in movies, news, music, all the peoples outlet,s the police are portrayed as dumb fucks ,idiots, scumbags, bullies, the same as in real life , Who the fuck would want to be apart of the problem, you go to court and there are people from all walks of life in those court rooms,and most are law abiding citizens, but because of the “law racket,s” they are now to some extent a criminal.

    To put it simply the people are being screwed out of hard earned money by a government racket called the law plane and simple.
    Ive spent time in court quite a bit over the years and have seen and talked to all kinds of people in these courts that were there for parking tickets to dui,s to manslaughter, and all have the same openion of these idiot bullys with way too much power extorting them for the govt. racket,s
    very few people like cops anymore, at one time most of the citizens looked up to cops and thought of them as someone they could trust, well those days are long gone.
    It would be safe to say that 70% of every one in every town city county ect. in the U.S. dont like cops at all, dont want anything to do w/ them, all because of abuse of power, we the people gave them the power to serve us, not the power to put us in fear for our lives every time we see a cop car, and sadly thats how it has over the years played out.
    yet they get speacial treatment, you cant hit one, they can beat the living shit outta you and in most cases get away w/ it, but try hitting one of them see what happens even in self defence, much less shooting and or killing one, that would be the end of life the way you know it,
    Another is judges or “court admin,s.” they have too much power too, no one man should have the power to inflict death or a prison sentence on another for any reason,now some will say that a judge doesnt have that power, well yes they do, or at least they think they do. Innosent untill proven guilty in a court of law,

    BULLSHIT

    Ive seen many men and have myself been one that spent time behind bars because of a judge, only to be found not guilty or aquited after spending countless time in jail,did I get that time lost and everything I lost while locked up back ?

    FUCK NO !

    OK Im done w/ my rant, but something really needs to be done.

    Respects Jim666

    F.T.P. F.T.F.

    F.T.G.

  7. Ol'LadyRider Says:

    Dear Tooj,

    AMEN.

  8. Tooj Says:

    Having been a ‘worker’ in the ‘social system’ I have observed and came up with a theory. That theory being that these positions that can award varying degrees of power tend to attract two types of individuals.

    The first individual is the person doing the job because they truly believe in what they are doing and perform their tasks with honor and integrity.

    Can they become jaded? Burned out and testy? Yep. The self-aware person will admit this is happening and that no longer are performing their job optimally. Then make a choice to either get out or find a better way to deal with stuff.

    The second person is that one that is attracted to these sorts of positions BECAUSE of the power awarded by holding them. There is no component of honor or integrity, but rather the scales of ‘caught’ and ‘not caught’. This is your problem child that can impact the former type over a period of years. That impact carries to all levels of the organization.

  9. Grumbler Says:

    No man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent. . . . These United States of America can never be destroyed from forces outside its borders. If America falls, it will fall from within. Brought down by apathy. When good people do nothing, Anarchy reigns. ~ Abraham Lincoln in a 1854 letter to Congress

  10. Guest1 Says:

    And here’s another:

    “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’, because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”

    – Thomas Jefferson

  11. BrianF Says:

    Since we’re throwing out quotes..
    “Remember: Evil exists because good men don’t kill the government officials committing it.”
    -Kurt Hoffman

  12. swampy Says:

    “What killed freedom in this country is that people don’t want responsibility, they want a nanny state to protect them, and hold their hands, and wipe their asses. They believe blindly in cops and authority figures that are given absolute powers and yet the people don’t understand it corrupts absolutely as well. And finally, we moved away from our constitution and we allowed the nanny state to become all powerful.” – BigV, 11/7/2012, 9:22 a.m.

    BigV, that a great assessment and comment. It gave me a “flash back” to a quote that I read some 25 years earlier from the “Diary of Edmund Ruffin” (yes, I read all 4100 pgs. of it – LOL!) With the highest regards and respect, swampy

    “The power that has been conferred on demagogues, by the machinery of conventions, & founded on universal suffrage, will never be recovered by the sound and worthy portion of the people. Our political condition will gradually grow worse – until, to save ourselves from the worst of political evils, the rule of demagogues sustained by the mass of most ignorant and vicious of the people, we will gladly succumb to the usurpation of a wise and patriotic Cromwell, a military Napoleon, or even a Louis Napoleon, able, unprincipled, & infamous….” – Edmund Ruffin, May, 14, 1860

  13. Junior Says:

    Jim666:
    Thanks for the synopsis of Redman, I had never heard of him, will research him now.

    Now, as for all you fukers on this forum tellin me what to do and what not to do: Fuk you. As for all you pigs that commit unlawful arrests and get red in the face because you can’t handle a simple question at a traffic stop: Fuk you too; maybe your fate will equal that of officer Jeff Hart who was “relieved” after commiting a felony against me or perhaps equal the fate of chief shelton in SC; and maybe my fate will equal that of Jason who put shelton out of his misery in ’89 and left me stranded in MB. As for shyster who makes blanket statements and can’t back em up with any case law: keep towing the “company” line shyster, maybe one day you will understand the oath you took, and understand that your paramount allegiance is not to your client but to the court and its judicial officer. Read your oath and Business and Professions Code Section 6068
    Duties of Attorney again. -Junior

  14. Jim666 Says:

    BTW All you that live in colorado and washington states can now be free to smoke and sell weed,,lmao

  15. Jim666 Says:

    This comment section is getting better and better all the time, @ Shyster thank you i,ll read those cases.Maby even w/ all the leagle mumbo jumbo I might still be able to make some since outta them, maby not, but i,ll try, @ Junior, there was a man named Louis Redman , he was a moonshiner in south carolina A Sherrif had a warrent for Redman, however a federal marshal came to arrest Redman w/out the warrant, a gun fight broke out and the marshal got killed, posse,s were organised to capture him and they did twice both times Redman escaped, he even organised raids to get his stolen property back from corrupt officals
    After 5 yrs on the run he was shot 18 times lived thru that spent 2 yrs in prison and was pardoned by pres. Chester A Arthur he came out a free man and a legend in the fight against unjust athority. this is the only man Ive ever heard of that killed a cop and after being shot multable times 2 yrs in prison came out free, and this was because the fed had no warrent
    Id never suggest killing a cop, that is for some reason a capital offence “Eric Clapton”
    anyway look at the shit that would hit you in the face if you did whether he is rite or wrong either way you loose,
    Granted any body cop or not fuck w/ me or mine in a deadly manner he,s a dead mother fucker now the reaction to that is I very well could be a dead mfer too

    fwiw
    Jim666

    F.T.F. F.T.P. F.T.G.

  16. Junior Says:

    Phuquehead:

    Read the BAR/Attorneys oath for your state. An Attorneys paramount allegiance is to the court, not to the person or defendant they represent. Most Attorneys will deny this, which is what I expect shyster to do, but a simple reading of the oath always brings me to this conclusion. A lawyer is somebody who can give legal advice and has been trained in the law (my grandfather-RIP). An attorney is somebody legally empowered to represent another person, or act on their behalf (BAR member). -Junior

  17. Pig Says:

    I agree with 99% of what BigV said. Other than the “LE Plant” comment, the only thing that I disagree with is that this country is dead. The sheeple are not the majority, but they are the squeaky wheel and their constant bleating has started paying off politically.

    If we can’t come together soon, if there isn’t some catalyst that unites us, if we can’t quit fighting amongst ourselves, we will be hunted down in small groups until we are all behind bars or dead. To steal from the Sipsey Street Irregulars site once again:

    “ This is no small thing, to restore a republic after it has fallen into corruption. I have studied history for years and I cannot recall it ever happening. It may be that our task is impossible. Yet, if we do not try then how will we know it can’t be done? And if we do not try, it most certainly won’t be done. The Founders’ Republic, and the larger war for western civilization, will be lost.

    But I tell you this: We will not go gently into that bloody collectivist good night. Indeed, we will make with our defiance such a sound as ALL history from that day forward will be forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.

    And when we are gone, the scattered, free survivors hiding in the ruins of our once-great republic will sing of our deeds in forbidden songs, tending the flickering flame of individual liberty until it bursts forth again, as it must, generations later. We will live forever, like the Spartans at Thermopylae, in sacred memory.”

    — Mike Vanderboegh, The Lessons of Mumbai:Death Cults, the “Socialism of Imbeciles” and Refusing to Submit, 1 December 2008

  18. Glenn S. Says:

    I don’t think LE plants, I think they’re just slumming. I think LE is watching, parsing our every word, and have probably got inside the servers Rebel uses to learn exactly who and where everybody is. But I don’t think LE, as LE (as opposed to the occasional asshole cop or ex-cop that wants to yank everybody’s chain) would announce its presence. I think they would rather lull us into complacency with silence in the hope that we’d slip. Or pretend to be somebody other than a cop, with a respectable history, in the hope that somebody would want to impress them with knowledge of events under investigation. Which is why I believe its best we not speculate on current events not in the public domain, even if we’re just guessing, but especially if we’re not. There are a few stories presently being commented on that we have to KNOW are being examined by LEO. Seemingly innocuous information might provide the necessary link for LEO to bust or frame someone.

    Hell, if I wasn’t 100% legal these days, I don’t think I’d even have an internet presence.

  19. BigV Says:

    And if anyone believes Paladin and Pig are anything more than LE plants, probably feds, you’re fucking crazy.

    Once a cop, always a cop.

    Don’t forget it and watch your ass, watch what you say.

  20. BigV Says:

    Shyster and anyone else familiar with law will tell you that arguing that you aren’t in equity is a frivolous legal argument, that doesn’t mean his loyalty is to the court, it means his loyalty is to seeing that his client gets the least fucked.

    I bite my tongue when I see the Sui Juris and “I wasn’t born in equity and this court has no authority over me and I won’t even plead at all and this will all go away because I’m not subject to the Uniform Commercial Code and this is now all Admirality and Administrative Law and not the Common Law to which I am bound”.

    I grew about an hour away from Nord Davis. Nord screwed over a lot of people spreading that crap. I watched “Freemen” and “Sovereign Citizens” in NC, TN, AL, SC, GA, FL, MT, WY, and IA lose their land, their freedoms, and some nearly their lives over it.

    When they tried that in anything outside a traffic court, they found out most of the time you don’t go before anyone to register your plea- you get a piece of paper and you have to fill it out or go into contempt of court.

    There was no covert change in our legal system in 1938, Eerie Railroad v. Tomkins did not somehow mystically change our legal system.

    The biker world has been touched by Sui Juris as well, poor “Hangmen Barry” Bischof got drug into something his cellmate tried with trying to put liens on the “administrator”- the judge- and ended up very screwed because of that idiot cellmate involving Barry.

    Secret Cabals did not change our Judicial system, and “you weren’t born into equity” doesn’t have a damn thing to do with it either. What killed freedom in this country is that people don’t want responsibility, they want a nanny state to protect them, and hold their hand, and wipe their asses. They believe blindly in cops and authority figures who are given absolute power and yet the people don’t understand it corrupts absolutely as well. And finally, we moved away from our constitution and we allowed the nanny state to become all powerful.

    That killed this country.

    Last night ? The sheeple proved once again, they are the majority and they cannot be trusted.

  21. Glenn S. Says:

    My gut tells me that Shyster is one of the good guys, more concerned with right and wrong than the law. In my part of the world, a righteous lawyer is rare.

    Phuquehed, SC law allows black powder weapons for ex-convicts as well. I am more concerned about the federal laws. They change, interpretations change, case law changes, and US attorneys always look for new ways to interpret existing laws as greater restrictions, especially where the right to bear arms and use them for defense is concerned. I know primitive weapons USED to be legal for ex-convicts, I just don’t know if they still are.

    Bad Magic, I would have loved to have voted for less power for the government. I just couldn’t find a candidate or issue on the ballot, hereabouts,that served that end. I voted for Obama in 2008 because I thought, with his background as a community organizer, his race, and some of the things he said while campaigning, that he might move the country away from the police/incarceration state. Instead, he signed NDAA into law. My guess is that, 10 years from now, people like us will be speaking of NDAA the same way we speak of RICO today: As an end run around the Bill of Rights that results in routine miscarriage of justice, lives ruined, good people thrown away, while polite society yawns. But the objectionable amendment to NDAA was a Republican idea. They dusted off Dick Cheney to promote it. And all those excessive prison sentences, asset forfeiture, etc. from the war on drugs came from Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon. I believe Romney would have taken it further, while shitting on the working class. So I didn’t think I had a dog in that fight. I hope that, next go round, either the Republicans will field a libertarian candidate or the Democrats will re-discover their libertarian roots or a viable freedom-loving third party that respects individual liberties will appear. But for now, voting means about the same to me as offering an opinion as to which asshole cop should be the police chief, the one that plants evidence or the one that shoots the suspect to save the expense of a trial.

    Respect to most here.

  22. DesertH-D Says:

    Shyster – Ok, still looking forward to the info.

  23. Phuquehed Says:

    @Glenn S – Here in TN, a felon CAN own a black powder weapon and keep it loaded…but they can’t vote.

    @Junior – I thought Shyster’s a defense attorney. Aren’t they a business(?) unto themselves and thus not a government lackey of any kind? Either way, not sure what you’re trying to say about him. Good or Bad? Me, I’d want him representing me if I were in trouble. He’s got a good head on his shoulders from all I can tell and is passionate about his want to ‘protect’ those he’s trying to help.

  24. Junior Says:

    All:

    Remember, shyster is an officer of the court. He is not and can not truly represent someone because his true (paramount) allegiance must, by oath, remain with the court. -Junior

  25. Junior Says:

    Shyster said: IMHO your HO will get someone the fucken gas chamber! We DO NOT have the right to kill a cop who is effectuating an unlawful arrest! Period.

    Shyster, your opinion contradicts the Supreme Courts opinion. The Supreme Court and many state courts are clear on the matter. Can you back your opinion up with Supreme Court and other state appelate court case law?

    All you have done here is give your opinion that “we do not have the right to kill a cop who is effectuating an unlawful arrest”…you dont back up your statement with anything. Hot air from a blow hard in my opinion. -Junior

  26. Paladin Says:

    Shyster,

    Because I’m not always in the office, I asked Rebel to pass you my contact information. If I’m not in, leave a message and I’ll get back to you.

    Long May You Ride,

    Paladin

  27. Sieg Says:

    The Constitutoion?

    Oh yeah…it was a beautiful document, but the Mandarins quit using it years ago, it’s nothing but toilet-paper now.

    And hang on to your shorts…didn’t really matter if the Demicans or the Republicrats won, we are going to be getting Socialism and enforced “good-citizenship” pushed down our collective throat, by the barrel of a gun if need be.

    FTF / FTP
    TOSIAR

  28. Shyster Says:

    Paladin,

    I called your office this week and spoke to Rick. You apparently were not available. He wanted me to e-mail him. I won’t do that. What’s the best time to get a hold of you?

    Shyster

  29. Paladin Says:

    Dear KK,

    Since you’ve decided to call me out, here’s your answer.

    I’ve always been “old school”. When I was hired by the Sheriff’s Department, I considered myself a Peace Officer. I was more interested in keeping the peace, than taking folks to jail. I never considered myself a revenue collector for the County or the State. I was always more interested in enforcing the spirit, rather than the letter of the law. I had a reputation of being tough, but fair. Over the years, I’ve found that if you treat people fairly and give them the opportunity to do the right thing, most of the time they will. Have I taken people to jail? Yes I have. There are those occasions where there is no other choice. However, I never took anyone to jail that didn’t deserve to be taken to jail and I’ve never falsified a report, tampered with, or planted evidence.

    Have I written traffic citations? Yes I have. If I saw someone speeding in a school zone, when children were present, they got a ticket. If I saw someone pass a stopped school bus, with its stop sign displayed, they got a ticket. Because I was a biker long before I became a cop, folks that were trying to multi-task by putting on their makeup, while reading the newspaper, and eating breakfast, while operating their motor vehicle, got a ticket. If someone has never before been busted for DUI and I stopped them, because I suspected they’re DUI, they got a (1) one time pass. I’d take their keys, call their significant other and tell that person to bring someone that could drive the car or ride the bike.

    As most folks know who’ve been there, jail and having to defend yourself in court is expensive. I’d rather see that money spent on food, cloths, a child’s education, and a few comforts.

    I’ve gone to what in law enforcement is referred to as the “dark side” because I don’t like the way law enforcement has evolved. Cops that don’t play by the rules are no better than the criminals they chase.

    Long May You Ride,

    Paladin

  30. Shyster Says:

    Glenn S.,

    Great question. I don’t know but I will do the research this week and get back to you.

    Warthog,

    In California, a conviction for a misdemeanor domestic violence or spousal battery results in a 10 year firearm ban.

    Desert HD,

    I’m still waiting on that Nevada answer for you. Damn lawyer making me wait!

    Junior,

    All those cases you cited are very old. Some of them are from the 1800’s. I found the web page where you pasted them from. Any attorney citing authority that a person has the right to kill a cop who is attempting an unlawful arrest will certainly be disciplined or maybe even disbarred for ineffective assistance of counsel. The general rule is that one can use deadly force when confronted with deadly force given the caveat that some states are NOT stand your ground states.

    Hypothetical scenario: Joe citizen is riding his sled down the streets of the Republic. Officer Bacon sees the patch on Joe’s back. Joe commits absolutely no vehicle code violations but Bacon pulls him over anyway. Bacon don’t like scooter trash. He believes anyone who wears a patch is a gang member, domestic street terrorist, baby rapist and is politically involved with the Peace and Freedom party. Joe has the flu so he downed some DayQuil 2 hours before he got on his bike. Officer Bacon approaches Joe with his 17+1 loaded 9mm Glock aimed directly at Joe’s temple. Bacon smells what he subjectively believes is alcohol. Bacon orders Joe off the bike which is Constitutionally legal in all 50 States. Bacon conducts a DUI investigation on Joe who is legally a .00% blood alcohol content. Bacon don’t give a fuck. Bacon thinks this fucken piece of shit MUST be on a controlled substance. Bacon don’t know Joe has 2 purple hearts at home. Bacon wants to gaffle Joe up and take him to the local police station to get either a blood draw or a urine sample to confirm that Joe is DUI drugs. Joe has never ingested an illegal or illicit drug in his life.

    So Junior, according to you, Joe has the right to kill Officer Bacon in this scenario where Bacon is clearly making an unlawful arrest!

    IMHO your HO will get someone the fucken gas chamber! We DO NOT have the right to kill a cop who is effectuating an unlawful arrest! Period.

    Shyster

    Shyster

  31. WARTHOG Says:

    @ jim666,

    I can’t (legally) possess a gun in Illinois and don’t even have a felony. In the only state not allowing concealed carry, if you are convicted of domestic battery, regardless of it being a misdemeanor, you cannot possess a firearm–ever. Talk about some bullshit! My ex-girlfriend had me falsely arrested and her ex husband, a Chicago cop, worked with the States Attorney to come up with a story to have me convicted just to have my guns taken away.

    L&R,

    warthog

    FTF FTP FTW

  32. BadMagic Says:

    “I passed on voting today. Nobody worth voting for.”

    This may be true, however, there are LOTS of issues of the government becoming more powerful and liberties taken away. If nothing else, I STRONGLY suggest everybody go and vote NO on new laws and more government power.

    You don’t have to vote for anyone. Please, please, please, for all that is important, vote NO to more power for the gov.

    B-|

  33. Glenn S. Says:

    In SC a felon can vote, as long as he is not on parole.

    I passed on voting today. Nobody worth voting for.

  34. rollinnorth Says:

    Jim66:
    In many states, your right to vote can be restored after felony conviction. This chart should help.
    http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=286

    Respect.

  35. Glenn S. Says:

    Shyster: Would you weigh in on a topic that some friends and I are in disagreement over? Can a convicted felon legally own a black powder weapon (cap and ball revolver, muzzle loading rifle or shotgun, etc.) Can that weapon be kept loaded in a convicted felon’s home?

    It has been my understanding that a felon can own and use “primitive weapons”. It is my further understanding that felons can own and use loose black powder, percussion caps, and lead balls, but not sabats and other pre-packaged cartridges, or black powder weapons that employ modern technology. A gun dealer friend of mine told me that felons can own and possess any weapon manufactured before 1897, any replica thereof, and can own the ammunition for such guns. He told me that (at my request) he asked his attorney and the attorney verified this, but suggested that cartridged weapons manufactured in the late 19th century might be gray area. Another friend, that I believe knowledgeable, offered the opinion that the government would treat the primitive weapon as an explosive device and would likely prosecute.

    I’m pretty much up on the laws of this state, but the feds change the laws daily, hide new laws as amendments to mundane legislation, and these laws are always more restrictive, not less. So it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that congress, last year, added an amendment to the national boll weevel day resolution specifying a life sentence for any convicted felon that owns a slingshot, or that the courts ruled that the metals found in common household appliances could be modified to produce a working gun and therefore the lamp in my living room constituted constructive possession.

  36. Glenn S. Says:

    The constitution is elegant in its simplicity. The Supreme Court is not, and has often ruled against what seems the common sense interpretation. Ruling that gun ownership is a fundamental right one day and then ruling that the government can totally bar convicted felons from owning guns, forever, is one example.

  37. Shyster Says:

    Jim666,

    The United States Supreme Court is the final interpreter of the United States Constitution. The 2nd Amendment, as you know, allows for us citizens the right to keep and bear arms.

    Within the last 5 years we have had two crucial 2nd Amendment decisions by our Supreme Court. Google “District of Columbia v. Heller” which has in its decision, a lengthy analysis of legally valid Constitutional prohibitions on the right to bear arms. Also McDonald v. Chicago is another case to read. Both cases are a good read, notwithstanding the legal mumble jumble that must necessarily be deciphered for a good grasp of what is actually being decided.

    Shyster

  38. Jim666 Says:

    @ Shyster, Ok but doesnt that still go against our constitutional rite, and the 2nd amendment the rite to keep and bear arms ?
    not sure where the rite to vote is covered but it,s in there somewhere too

  39. Shyster Says:

    Jim666,

    It all started with the Gun Control Act of 1968 and went downhill from there. 18 U.S.C 44. In my State (California), and County (Los Angeles), a never arrested law abiding citizen cannot even obtain a concealed weapon permit ( unless you know the Sheriff and your name is Ben Affleck or you’re a wealthy businessman/politician and you’re a bullshit reserve Deputy Sheriff.

    Shyster

  40. KK Says:

    Jim666: In Pa. Only those felons who are incarcerated are not allowed to vote. Voting rights are automatically restored upon release from prison. I guess it’s different from state to state.

    1. No guns for felons. Most of us are familiar with the rule that a convicted felon cannot possess a gun. The federal rule is found in one of the main firearm statutes, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). It says that anyone “who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” is barred from possessing a gun. The only felonies that are not covered by the federal gun ban are 1) those “pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices,” per 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(A); and 2) felony convictions from foreign countries, per Small v. United States.

    The above info was provided to me by my Pa. attorney while back.

    So I guess you can be a mini Bernie Madoff for a bit, suck the life savings out of people, then be able to carry a firearm when released.

    I was asking my PO some questions last week because I want to relocate to another state, According to my PO, I am in violation of my parole by being on facebook, associating with known felons.

    Hell, JIM666, With that statement, I can’t talk to you either then here.

    I said to her thats absurd & can’t be legal, she said ask your attorney & let him or her define “associating” for you. I am going to soon but if anyone knows let me know.

    Pig: My intent is not to insult you in anyway, your replies are civil and articulate. For me, I just don’t trust cops, I will never call a cop for anything, never. I won’t go out of my way either to be an asshole to cops, I will say hello if acknowledged.

    Paladin:Your replies are basically the same, civil & it appears you mean well, that being said something just doesn’t sit right with me and my beliefs. Here you’re a 20 plus year Deputy Sheriff making I would guess, what, hundreds of arrests during your career as an LEO and now your making a living, testifying, on the same mistakes you & your peers made when you were active in LE?

    KK

  41. Pig Says:

    Hey Junior, I owe you an apology. I just read my last post to you again and I was out of line in that last paragraph. I am not a patch holder and I had no business telling you how to conduct yourself while representing your patch. If you didn’t know how to do that you wouldn’t have earned a patch in the first place. I was in a hurry when I typed it and that filter between what I think and what I say quit on me. I’m sorry. I meant no disrespect.

  42. Va. Bob Says:

    I’m not a legal expert(and I respect the wealth of knowledge and experience on this blog),but I believe the denial of the right to bear arms by felons is relatively recent(1968).Time was ,a man could do his time and ,upon returning to freedom,possess and own firearms.It takes some petitioning,but I know of convicted felons in our Commonwealth who have had voting rights restored ,and certain gun-ownership privileges(shotguns,not handguns)restored.

  43. Jim666 Says:

    About this constution rights stuff, ok, the right to vote and bear arms is a constutional right, rite ? if so and it says no man or law can take thoes rights away, how come if you get a felony conviction you loose those rights ? If no one and or no law can take away those rights how is it taken away, I have 3 felony convictions cant own a fire arm cant vote. any ideas how this bullshit works besides the system being completly corrupt as we all know it is ,,,

    Jim666

    F.T.F. F.T.G. F.T.P.

  44. Shyster Says:

    Junior,

    I will be answering your question as soon as time permits. I’m prepping two trials right now and I’m f’ing tired. Take care.

    Shyster

  45. Paladin Says:

    Dear Junior,

    If the cops are as crooked as many posters on this site believe, and if the judicial system is as corrupt as many here believe, and if the general public is as gullible and uncaring as many here preceive them to be, what do you think your life expectancy would be, on a scale of 1-10, 10 being best, after having killed a cop?

    You post about the protections afforded to this Country’s citizens under this Country’s Constitution. Yet, if the cops are all crooked, as some here say, and the judicial system has been totally corrupted, as some here believe, who’s going to make sure that you’re afforded the protections this Country’s Constitution guarantees? It certainly won’t be the crooked cops, or the members of the corrupt judicial system, and all those gullible, uncaring members of the general public won’t care a wit about what happens to you, or how you’re treated.

    I make my daily bread, by doing my level best, to right the wrongs perpetrated by dishonest and less than truthful cops. The facts are; all cops aren’t crooked and the judicial system hasn’t been corrupted beyond repair. There is a right way and a wrong way to fix the system.

    I can absolutely, unconditionally, guarantee you, that if you ever make the decision to kill a cop, it won’t turn out to be your best day ever.

    Long May You Ride,

    Paladin

  46. Pig Says:

    Junior –

    Remember though that the Constitution was written as a restriction on the Federal Government and wasn’t designed at the time of its writing to affect State laws and statutes. It’s why states like Illinois and California can have such restrictive and unconstitutional gun laws. RICO, FEMA, the IRS, OSHA, Welfare, Social Security, the Patriot Act, most tax laws, and all gun laws are unconstitutional, but start shooting the folks who are enforcing them and see how far it gets you. Your life will be short but exciting.

    What you are talking about has been tried and has been proven ineffective. See “Timothy McVeigh”. McVeigh went WAY further than just shooting a few rouge cops and all he did was manage to be the poster boy for why we need more restrictions and laws to “protect” the citizenry from “domestic terrorists”. Which headline do you think the papers are going to run if you do what you are talking about: “Patriot Liberates Himself from Unlawful Arrest by Tyrannical Cop” or “Motorcycle Gang Member Murders Peace Officer and Loving Father in Cold Blood”? You and I both know that whether you are right or wrong, they are going to run that second one before the barrel of your pistol cools off. Do you think that those actions will help or hurt the OMC point that they aren’t criminal organizations? Hell, that sort of thing could even affect cases like the one Rebel wrote about in this post.

    I’m not saying that you are wrong in your sentiment Junior. I have always stood by the statement that if someone is trying to kill you, you need to stop them by any means necessary. However, when you earn a patch, like it or not, you now represent all Patchholders in the eyes of the public and you need to conduct yourself accordingly. Like has been said many times on this site, citizens don’t necessarily remember who you are or what Club you are part of, only that you were a biker who had a patch on his back. You may even win the case but if you put a stain on the MC community and make it harder on the rest, is it worth it?

  47. BadMagic Says:

    Posted more information on that. It is in moderation.

    B-)

  48. BadMagic Says:

    Posted by

    doubled on April 22 at 2:54 p.m. (http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2011/apr/21/biker-at-bill-signing-may-have-been-involved-in/)

    In the days following Governor Gregoire signing ESB 5242, a bill addressing motorcycle profiling, there has been controversy surrounding the fact that the Governor took a picture of the signing with a ‘cop killer’. The Confederation of Clubs serves as the official voice of motorcycle club members present at the bill signing and would like to address this controversy.

    Describing Robert Christopher as a ‘cop killer’ instead of a victim of the most notorious law enforcement scandal in the history of Portland is biased and unjust. On the night of December 12, 1979, members of the Portland police department and narcotics squad illegally raided the Outsiders Motorcycle Club clubhouse in Portland and officer David Crowther was shot and killed by Robert Christopher. Officers were knowingly attempting to serve an illegal warrant obtained through perjured statements about a nonexistent informant. Narcotics officers Scott Deppe and Neil Gearhart, both present during the raid, corroborated this indisputable fact and furthermore revealed that the narcotics squad officers had come with drugs ready to plant in and around the clubhouse. In fact, it was discovered that police had planted amphetamine tablets during the raid. Narcotics officers also admitted that drugs were removed from David Crowther’s pockets at the hospital after he was shot.

    These are the incontrovertible facts. The entire basis for law enforcement’s presence at the Outsiders clubhouse that night was to serve an illegal warrant and plant drugs. Robert Christopher was released after serving 14 months in prison because the egregious conduct of the narcotics squad was uncovered. Robert Christopher maintains that the police did not announce themselves and that his only choice to avoid being killed was to defend himself. It was later proven that police witnesses had lied at trial when they testified that they had knocked and announced themselves. Although his death was a tragedy, David Crowther and the officers on the narcotics squad were corrupt and 58 tainted convictions were overturned before the scandal was over. Robert Christopher was defending his home and his life against an illegal intrusion and criminal conspiracy perpetrated by Portland narcotics officers.

    Robert Christopher’s presence at the bill signing on April 13th was understandable and appropriate. As a victim of police abuse and discrimination, Robert Christopher has put his energy into fighting for the rights and freedoms of motorcyclists because he understands firsthand the impact of law enforcement discrimination and abuse. Washington’s law condemning motorcycle profiling is the first of its kind in America. Robert Christopher was vindicated and is now a free and voting citizen and had as much business as anybody in the Governor’s office on April 13, 2011.

    (All claims made in this statement are based on publicly available and previously published material readily available. For example, The Oregonian, April 21, 1981, “Retrial of Christopher for killing appears doubtful.” The Times-News, May 29, 1981, p.5, “Narcotics trade triggers police misconduct.”)

  49. BadMagic Says:

    I always thought it was interesting that the day a law was signed to prevent police profiling, the headlines and comments from cops did exactly that!

    http://www.kplu.org/post/new-motorcycle-law-dredges-30-year-old-cop-killing

    And, apparently, even though he was convicted of the killing, he was released because of the unlawfulness of the cops.

    B-|

  50. Junior Says:

    16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:

    The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:

    The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it’s enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

    Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it…..

    A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.

    No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.

    Jon Roland:

    Strictly speaking, an unconstitutional statute is not a “law”, and should not be called a “law”, even if it is sustained by a court, for a finding that a statute or other official act is constitutional does not make it so, or confer any authority to anyone to enforce it.

    All citizens and legal residents of the United States, by their presence on the territory of the United States, are subject to the militia duty, the duty of the social compact that creates the society, which requires that each, alone and in concert with others, not only obey the Constitution and constitutional official acts, but help enforce them, if necessary, at the risk of one’s life.

    Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office. No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts. If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the militia duty obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law. -Junior

Leave a Reply