Arrested by the Philadelphia Police for Open Carry

[ViperGTS19801]

THE NEXT 8 POSTS CONTAIN THE IMPORTANT STUFF AS OF NOW.

THE VERDICT ON THE CRIMINAL CHARGES OF
RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT OF ANOTHER PERSON and
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
ARE IN...

NOT GUILTY!!!!

I wanted to think of something witty and humorous to use as a thread title, but I am still absolutely furious and a bit shaken up from what happened, so the straight truth will have to do.

I was visiting my mother today in Philadelphia to help her around the house and spend time with her. While there, I walked over to the local AutoZone to pick up a part for my car. I was OC due to the (finally) gorgeous weather.

I have learned to always keep my recorder on me and recording when I am in public in Philadelphia, due to the over-zealous nature of the police, and today, I am glad I followed that rule.

As I walked down the street towards the store, I caught a glimpse of a Philadelphia Police cruiser out of the corner of my eye, traveling in the same direction I was.

A few moments later, I hear a vehicle's transmission roughly slam into "P" very close by.

"Hey, Junior!" comes a voice from the other side of the squad car.
"Junior?!" I replied, as I turned around. I thought to myself, that's kind of a condescending way to greet someone, isn't it? As I turned, I prepared to ask the police officer what I could help him with.

It was then that I noticed the officer had his gun trained on my chest.

At least seven officers, 5 squad cars, and a threat of a taser later, I found out what it was like to sit in the back of a paddywagon.

I have a legally recorded audio file of the entire interaction, right here.

[ViperGTS19801]

I had a consult with a lawyer this past Saturday. He's not a civil rights attorney, but he says it is pretty clear that my 4th amendment rights have been violated and gave me a referral to one who is. He also told me that he and the recommended lawyer are good friends, and he said I should tell him who referred me.

Also, here is a very small snippet from my audio recording from the incident. Obviously I can only post a very little bit, but this is the kind of attitude I was dealing with.

ETA: On March 3rd, I had a second consult with a new lawyer who listened to the whole audio recording before we spoke. He was very honest with me and he made an excellent impression, and I will recommend him highly moving forward. His name is Josh Prince, and this is his site.

Basically what he explained to me is that, although it is clear and obvious that my rights were violated and that I was arrested illegally, the probability of this case going in front of a jury and ending in any kind of positive settlement would be surprising, considering the attitude of the jury pool from Philadelphia and the way the law is (the exception for Cities of the First Class). Also, considering the fact that I was released on the scene and everything was given back to me, it'd be pretty hard to convince a jury of damages.

However, he did say that, since some progress has already been made by going through internal affairs, and they know who I am, I will probably have good standing to get some things changed from inside by filing complaints. Therefore, that's what I am going to go ahead and do, just as soon as I collect all the proper information.

ETA on March 10: A friend has given me a phone number of a lawyer who specifically goes after badly behaving police. I may still be able to bring this to court yet.

[ViperGTS19801]

Here's the audio from the encounter. I had to shave off the first two and a half minutes of empty space (since that's how long it took from me leaving my mom's house and hitting the record button to the officer drawing down on me), so this starts just a couple seconds before the officer yells out "Hey Junior..." and draws on me.

http://rapidshare.com/files/454161072/ArrestedForOC.mp3

Use the free option to download the file - it'll make you wait thirty seconds or so but the download is pretty quick. The first seven minutes is the important bit, but if you listen all the way through, there's plenty of interesting little tidbits.

Also, I have a series of several complaints I am working on typing up for Internal Affairs.

Another update: One of the media outlets I have contacted has called me back - and they are asking for exclusivity on this story.

Update, March 30th, 2011: Also, another update: I just got off the phone with Harry Harriston from NBC10 News Philadelphia. He wanted to discuss the incident after having listened to the audio, and get an idea for what story I want to tell. We discussed the issue on a number of fronts: previous incidents, both in Philadelphia and in in the suburbs; a few of the ins and outs of the UFA; the attitude that cops in Philadelphia have as a result of all the gun violence and KIA officer shootings. He also asked me the age-old anti-OC question (which he had to do as a reporter, since that's his job) - "If you know the police don't like OC, and you know they are on edge because of them being targets, and you have a permit to carry concealed, why don't you just cover it up when you're in the city?" I explained to him that I find concealed carry uncomfortable, both for ease of access and from a physical standpoint, and that because it is lawful for me to do so, I expect not to be verbally abused, assaulted, arrested, and threatened with being shot simply for exercising my right to defend myself.

Harry said he would take the story idea to his producers, and would let me know if they thought it was a story they would want to run.

[ViperGTS19801]

I filed a Right to Know request on March 25th: these are the results.

Update: So I called the Open Records office in Philadelphia this morning to get an update on the RTK request I filed on the 25th. They already have mailed out their determinations, but I haven't received them yet - that's USPS + Philadelphia for ya.

The officer on the phone explained all three determinations:

1. RE: A copy of the original handwritten report: Denied - long story short, the PPD Office of Records maintains these documents for a period of up to ten years, and they sell copies of them for $25 a pop. According to a section in the RTK Act, if the records are already available through another means, public or not, the act cannot supercede that procedure, meaning I just have to go to City Hall again to file for a copy of it myself. Fair enough, I guess.

2. RE: Follow up reports including 75-48A: Denied - 708(b)(16)(ii) The requested documents are considered "Investigative materials, notes, correspondence, videos [or] reports" and are therefore exempt from the RTK law.

3. RE: Audio or video recordings such as from dashcams: Denied - because the technology "does not exist" (he told me that none of the Philadelphia police cruisers are outfitted with dashcams or microphones), they are forced to deny this portion of the request.

I have a lawyer who needs money for a retainer - if you would like to donate, please follow this link: http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...sponsible.html ([FUNDRAISER] Holding Philadelphia Responsible)

ETA: After the arraignment this morning, zack said it best:

Originally Posted by zackattack784

As of now it looks like there is a trial scheduled for 7/14/2011 at 9am in room 406.

[ViperGTS19801]

The BIG Philadelphia Daily News Article, in it's entirety:

http://articles.philly.com/2011-05-1...ips-gun-rights

And on the front page of the newspaper?

[ViperGTS19801]

Stu Bykofsky, calling me irresponsible:
http://articles.philly.com/2011-05-1...-cops#comments

The first Michael Smerconish show on May 16th, 2011:


pirate4x4? Never heard of this site:
http://pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=980206

An interview on the Lars Larson show on May 17th, 2011:


Jonathan Turley, an attorney, does a writeup:
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/05/17...derly-conduct/

A GREAT blog entry from John Stossel, which brought this issue a LOT more attention:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/st...y-carrying-gun

LOL - corvetteforum.com:
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/poli...rying-gun.html

The HotAir blog:
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives...conduct-audio/

The Michael Smerconish show, May 18th, 2011

Part 1:



Part 2:



Part 3:



Part 4:


PAFOA member "Objective Viewpoint" makes a great contribution to the thread:

Originally Posted by Objective Viewpoint

Now that I read every single post on the 214+ pages of this thread, I feel I am ready to chime in. I will disclaim with stressing a few points. 1. I am not an attorney. 2. I am 100% on Mark's side. 3. I am NOT posting my opinions to offend or stir!!

With that said, it seems at times throughout this tread that people lose sight of what Marks journey really is. This is NOT a "gun" issue, or a right to record the police issue. While these may be minor points in the arguement, this is ALL about being a Civil Rights issue. Mark very well could have been carrying a banana on his side, because that is equally as legal as carrying a gun.

I do urge some of the posters on here to take a step back and try an remove some of the emotion from their view. It bigger problem in all of this is not THAT the police responded, but more HOW they responded. My impression is that Mark knew what he was doing and was at least partially doing it to prove a point. That point being "I am Open Carrying simply because I CAN" beyond that he needs no other reasons.

Most of us are reasonable, and understand that cops are both human and have to deal with an element of society that is bad! As a reasonable citizen, I don't mind, and in some circumstances, expect that a police officer stop and make sure I am a safe and law abbiding citizen. I don't even necessarily mind that he had his gun drawn while he determines that I am no threat.

This is obviously the point it all goes down hill. What I DO expect is that our police officers conduct themselves professionally, and treat ALL of us with respect up until they find out whether an individual is a criminal or not. And even if they have a criminal, I still EXPECT them to show some restraint. Nowhere in any profession in any state of this country is calling someone "A F***ing Piece of S**T" or telling someone to Shut the F up, considered professional. In fact would venture to guess that 99% of us on this thread would lose are jobs if we said anything remotely like that to ANYONE we encounter during our job regardless of what we do to them.

It is my impression, and if I am incorrect, I apologize, that Mark at the very minimum understood what he was subjecting himself to when he OCs. He is obviously prepared with everything possible if and when he is stopped and questioned by the police. Remember people, CIVIL RIGHTS WERE NEVER CHANGED BY PASSIVE PEOPLE. In order to change things you HAVE to get in trouble, you HAVE to challenge the system. So I don't think that Mark minded getting stopped.

Once again, this is where it went down hill. The officer most certainly SHOULD have exercised a ton more patience in handling the situation. THE OFFICER was the one that was not calm, and that was Disorderly. Should Mark have listened and got on the ground...Maybe. But it should have never got that far.

Remember, the officers are human just like the rest of us, so they do make mistakes, just like the rest of us. While I would hope that they would have a better knowledge of the laws they are enforcing, I don't blame them when they don't fully know one. There are a lot of laws to know. What I do blame them for is how they proceeded. This would have been a whole different discussion if the officer would have calmly disarmed Mark, while he checked Mark's License and Verified (Key Point here) what the law actually was. Once again, my impression is that Mark would have shown them everything they needed to see. Once the officers got the facts, they could have given Mark his stuff back and sent him on his way.

I know there are people that are going to say "HOW DARE THEY Disarm" etc. In theory, the cops are there to protect! Remember, while Mark is not a threat, there are just as many others that are. If I am treated with respect, I am not going to mind a minor inconvenience while the Police do their job. When they breach that fine line of Respect, it is no longer about them doing their job, it becomes Harrassment.

It is a shame that anyone would be subject to this for ANY reason. The Bill of Rights gives Benefits and protections for EVERYONE with no exception at ALL TIMES!!!! Not just when it is convenient for certain people.

Thank you Mark for not letting this die.

[ViperGTS19801]

A collection of media links and blogs regarding this incident:

John Lott chimes in:
http://biggovernment.com/jlott/2011/...nd-a-recorder/

Letters to the editor from the Daily News:
http://articles.philly.com/2011-05-1...police-officer

An article written by The Philadelphia Weekly:
http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/ne...121989564.html

It was late last week when gun-rights activist Mark Fiorino joined PW for a stroll around downtown Philly. The Montgomery County man, who was featured on the cover of yesterday’s Daily News for his stance on carrying pistols openly, walks down 15th Street toward Sansom, attracting nary a look.

Eventually, one man offers a double-take. The head turn probably has something to do with the fact that Fiorino’s belt contains an openly holstered firearm alongside his cell phone and keys. After all, Fiorino’s story hadn’t yet appeared in the Daily News, so his face wasn’t yet recognizeable.

Surprisingly, that one brief stare was about the only bit of reaction Fiorino received on that particular day, a few days before the Daily News story broke. But minimal public feedback is often the norm. People typically go about their business unaware that someone like Fiorino has a gun strapped to his hip—even when it’s in full view. “For the most part, it’s either a look or a dismissal or nobody notices,” says Fiorino. And unbeknownst to many Pennsylvanians, “open carry,” or the act of carrying one’s firearm unconcealed by clothing, is actually quite legal. Even in Philadelphia, legal gun owners who have a license can wear their holstered handguns in plain sight. In the rest of the state, open carry requires no license. Still, despite the law being quite clear on the issue, open-carry advocates like Fiorino sometimes find themselves in the crosshairs of an ignorant public.

But what happens when the ignorance comes from the very people who are paid to uphold the law? For open carriers like Fiorino, it’s a problem that can have dire consequences.

Even more letters to the Editor from the Daily News article:

RE CAPT. Joseph DiLacqua's letter on Mark Fiorino openly carrying his gun:

I am and always will be in full support of the police. I'm a retired officer myself. But regardless of Fiorino's intentions that day, the fact remains that he broke no laws, was properly permitted to carry a firearm and was wrongly treated.

That officers stopped him at gunpoint is fine, but what followed after it was known he was properly permitted is the problem. It's a shame Fiorino could quote a police directive and the officers on scene could not! The city will be sued every time someone's constitutional rights are violated, and rightfully so. Maybe it's time for some retraining in the Philadelphia PD.
S. Griffin, North Wales

As a retired police officer with 22 years on the Philadelphia force and 24 years as a school police officer, I don't know of any off-duty officers who'd walk the streets anywhere with their guns in plain view.

Mark Fiorino was, I believe, intentionally walking down Frankford Avenue with a Glock strapped on his side, along with a gun permit and an audio recorder in his shirt pocket - flaunting his knowledge of Police Directive 137 (which most active police are unaware of). This scenario was bound to create problems. It may be legal, but only an idiot looking to cause turmoil and possibly a lawsuit would do something like that.

Charles Veterano, Philadelphia

Your story on this topic is what's irresponsible.

To tell people the victim was irresponsible for exercising his legal rights is absurd. To report your blind accusations that the victim was looking to set up the police is absurd. The victim did nothing wrong, yet his life was threatened by someone supposed to be protecting citizens.

Radley Balko writes about the incident on theagitator:
http://www.theagitator.com/2011/05/1...d-be-arrested/

Even on TechDirt!
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...them.shtml#c57

Forums.officer.com:
http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...=1#post2761374

An EPIC post from PAFOA member son of the revolution

Originally Posted by son of the revolution

I just published this over on my blog

http://www.thateverymanbearmed.com/2...trum-over.html


The letters section of several local papers, the phone lines of local talk radio call in shows and the threads of many internet forums, some of them LEO centric ones all have one thing in common over the last two weeks.

LOTS of active and former cops, from various jurisdictions. many of them from the " City of Brotherly Love" itself all crying foul over the fact that a citizen, Mark Fiorino, caught them red handed on audio tape acting like the very street thugs they're supposed to be policing.

Its an incessant drum beat of whining, inspite of the fact that Mr Fiorino has publicly stated on every single occasion he was categorically NOT, trying to " set up " ANYONE. I'd like to ask all the conspiracy theorists a few questions.

Whats the first thing a suspected criminal says when accused or questioned about a crime ? It was a set up !

Why is it that when Law Enforcement records someone doing something they shouldnt in order to make a case its called evidence and good police work, but when a citizen records the police doing things they shouldnt be doing in order to expose their abuse of power and ignorance of the law its automatically a set up ?

Double standard anyone ????

Even IF Mr Fiorino had set out to indeed "set up " the police, which I have NO reason to believe is in fact the case, but rather a piss poor and transparent attempt to poison any potential jury pool, I'll ask SO WHAT ?!!?!?

Turnabout is certainly fair play, if the cops can legally set up alleged criminals to make an arrest and take away someones freedom, then the citizens who are ultimately the ones in charge in our form of Govt certainly have every right to set up alleged bad cops and catch them .

The only LEO's who have a problem with being recorded or videoed by members of the public and react the way these officers in Philly did when they found out is those officers that know they're doing something wrong and dont want a record of their misdeeds. Remember just a year or two ago when a Narcotics Squad of Philly Officers were caught on tape by the owner of a bodega shaking him down on a regular basis, helping themselves to merchandise and attempting to destroy the evidence ??

How many incidents like Mr Fiorino's, or the shop owners go on every day that we the people never even know about because the victims of the rogue cops either didn't record the event, had the evidence destroyed or confiscated by the cops or were so scared of further retribution that they never came forward ???

Why is it that the standard line to citizens from Cops, Prosecutors and Judges is always, " ignorance of the law is no excuse " but that doesnt apply at all to the very people who have sworn an oath to uphold those same laws ?

Again, double standard anyone ?

Here's the excuse for the abominable behavior of these pathetic excuses for Police Officers from the Official PD Spokesperson

"It was a setup. He's done this kind of thing before," said Evers, the police spokesman, referring to Fiorino's encounters with authorities. "He did it intentionally, and he audiotaped it."

Really ???? Did Mr Fiorino check with the District ahead of time to determine Sgt Dougherty's patrol route ? Cause that would be critical to succesfully setting him up. The odds of walking several blocks in public at any given time of day and even seeing a passing squad car are about the same as Rosie O' Donnel becoming a card carrying member of the NRA.

Spokesman Evers studiously ignores the inconvenient FACT that its documented that Mr Fiorino did indeed have previous run in's on other occasions with other equally ignorant Philly Cops, including the unlawful seizure of his firearm on at least one occasion.

Which leads me to my next question for the " set up " crowd. Exactly how many times should someone have to deal with being harassed for LEGAL behavior before they become proactive in defending themselves by using technology to ensure the inevitable next interaction is documented in full ? Its no big secret that, whether on the street or in a courtroom, when its a citizens word against a cop's, with no other supporting evidence, the cop is going to win every single time.

Frankly, DA Seth Williams should be brought up on charges for Prosecutorial Misconduct for his actions in approving charging Mr Fiorino as he has. Its crystal clear this is strictly retaliatory in nature and has NOTHING to do with "justice" and everything to do with using the awesome power of the Govt to both punish Mr Fiorino for daring to expose the officers involved and as a warning to any other citizens that dare stand up to abuse at the hands of the police that they will be punished as well.

Then Williams and the hierarchy of the PD have the audacity to complain about the street creedo of " snitches get stitches " and complain about the fact that citizens generally refuse to come forward when they witness something. Well no kidding Seth !!! Why should citizens have any respect or desire to help the police when they hear about this kind of behavior ?

Here's a news flash for Commissioner Ramsey and Seth Williams, you want people to respect your Dept ? Then do something to EARN IT ! A great start would be publicly admitting that the officers involved were so far outside any standards of professionalism that they are going to lose their jobs at the least, if not being charged themselves. You could also publicly acknowledge that the Uniform Firearms Act DOES in fact apply to Philadelphia, just like it does the rest of the State, instead of perpetuating even more illegal behavior by agents of the Govt by continuing to enact and attempting to enforce special firearms laws in Philly that are illegal just by their very existence on paper.

During a radio interview a couple days ago , Commissioner Ramsey publicly stated that the policy of stopping Open Carriers and demanding proof of licensure to do so ( required in Philly) would continue without question. His explanation being that officers have no way to know the person in question does in fact have a valid LTCF. But his justification is devoid of any logic. How would an officer know that ANY of the hundreds, if not thousands of people he passes on the street in one day are licensed and carrying concealed ?

If the concern truly is about " officer safety", then following Ramsey's "logic" would mean that EVERY Citizen would need to be stopped, searched and show their papers to ensure they're not carrying a concealed firearm. Clearly that is not only an impossible task to even attempt, it would be a huge violation of the 4th Amendment.

Apparently Commissioner Ramsey and DA Williams, as well as many, many others are completely ignorant of what the PA Supreme Ct had to say about circumstances similar to Mr Fiorino.


What the PA Supreme Ct had to say about a similar case



"The Commonwealth takes the radical position that police have a duty to stop and frisk when they receive information from any source that a suspect has a gun. Since it is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Pennsylvania,[4] it is difficult to see where this shocking idea originates, notwithstanding the Commonwealth's fanciful and histrionic references to maniacs who may spray schoolyards with gunfire and assassins of public figures who may otherwise go undetected. Even if the Constitution of Pennsylvania would permit such invasive police activity as the Commonwealth proposes — which it does not — such activity seems more likely to endanger than to protect the public. Unnecessary police intervention, by definition, produces the possibility of conflict where none need exist."

Then we have this gem, from a Captain on the Philly Police Force no less !

http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion..._vs__cops.html
IT WOULD take someone who's blind in one eye and can't see out the other not to recognize Mark Fiorino's intentions when he sashayed around doing his Wyatt Earp impersonation with his .40-caliber Glock strapped to his hip.
Fiorino accomplished just what he set out to do that day by luring a police sergeant into a heated confrontation while secretly recording his right to bear arms on the open plains. Was the sergeant supposed to just ignore him and head to the nearest Dunkin' Donuts in a city that amasses more than 300 homicides a year? Would the next officer be as accommodating - or shoot first and ask questions later?

It sure didn't take Fiorino long to debut on YouTube and get his face plastered on the front page. He even quoted the police directive when stopped, indicating he knew exactly what he was doing to invite a confrontation. Of course Fiorino will deny all this and sue the city as any other red-blooded opportunist would.
Well, Mr. Fiorino, all I can say is that I hope your 15 minutes of fame does not result in another police officer's death.
Capt. Joseph Di Lacqua

Surely the good Captain is a shining sterling example of a " cops cop", an officer with an unblemished service record right ???

Not so fast. Lets take a look at the Captains jacket shall we ?

DiLacqua's Disciplinary Record

1986: Inaccurate report filed regarding a police raid. Penalty: Three-day suspension.

1992: DiLacqua crashed his unmarked car, but falsely reported that it was struck while parked. Penalty: 15-day suspension.

1993: DiLacqua called Latino officers "conquistadors." Penalty: Reprimand.

1996: At the scene of a fatal accident, DiLacqua ordered that the driver, Christina Kania, be sent home without being tested for intoxication. Penalty: Three-day suspension.

1996: DiLacqua ordered the release of Michael Mullen, a driver suspected of intoxication and cocaine possession. Penalty: One-day suspension.

1996: Two brothers alleged they were harassed by police under DiLacqua's supervision while in custody at a station house. They said a sergeant threatened to beat them with a golf club. Penalty: Reprimand.

1997: DiLacqua failed to correctly manage officer John Leca, whose job performance had deteriorated. Penalty: Three-day suspension.

1998: DiLacqua directed other officers to cover up Homicide Capt. James Brady's car crash, and lied about it. Penalty: 20-day suspension, taken by forfeiting vacation days.

SOURCE: Police Internal Affairs findings; court documents.

When you get " leaders" like Capt DiLacqua, then you get Sgt's like Dougherty and Officers like Rubin.

Its a tragedy of the highest order that in the City that was the birthplace of our Nation, the very spot where the cry for freedom and the indomitable spirit to resist tyranny at every turn first was given a voice in both word and deed has now turned into something more closely resembling the Soviet Union or East Germany then anything approaching the gift that the Founding Fathers left for us.

FoxNews.com, which had several thousand comments before the comment section was closed:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...ry-gun-owners/

With a shocking altercation between Philadelphia police and a 25-year-old IT worker putting the spotlight back on open-carry gun laws, local authorities are warning gun owners that they will be "inconvenienced" if they carry unconcealed handguns in the city.

Lt. Raymond Evers, a spokesman for the city police, told FoxNews.com that gun owners who open carry, which is legal in the city, may be asked to lay on the ground until officers feel safe while they check permits.

PoliceOne
http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issu...on-open-carry/

And Jon Stewart's Daily Show forums.
http://forums.thedailyshow.com/?page...hread_id=41081

And another good article, at firearmprotector.org
http://firearmprotector.com/gun-clea...ke-gun-owners/

I love this one, at Island ADV:
http://island-adv.com/2011/05/crushi...ond-amendment/

A VERY interesting article from PhillyBurbs.com:
http://www.phillyburbs.com/blogs/pol...a4bcf6878.html

Nevertheless, District Attorney R. Seth Williams won't drop the charges, despite the fact that the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office has informed the Philadelphia D.A. that the Commonwealth does not plan to prosecute Fiorino, should he be found guilty and appeal the case. Thus, Fiorino will win anyway, after his resources and ours are wasted on this kangaroo court case.

Please note that the text of the original article was edited here, and this is the original entry. Since, the text stating information about the Commonwealth's decision has been removed, for as-of-yet unknown reasons.

[ViperGTS19801]

And the final details as of right now...

Currently I am charged with Disorderly Conduct and Reckless Endangerment of Another Person.

The DA's argument is that I am intentionally going around, carrying openly and using a voice recorder, trying to bait the cops into engaging with me in an inappropriate manner, manipulating them into drawing their weapons and endangering myself, the officers, and everyone nearby.

They're creative, at least.

Anyway, the lawyers have been paid their retainer fees, and the court date is currently set at

October 27th, at 9:15AM in courtroom 406 at the Criminal Justice Center in Philadelphia <-Edited to reflect new hearing date

Anyone who wants to come along and show support is welcome to, but please, no rioting!!

ETA AS OF July 11th, 2011

THEY HAVE FILED FOR A CONTINUANCE.

If you were planning on attending on Thursday morning you still may, but we do not expect to be in court for any longer than a couple of hours, and we also do not expect any resolutions at this time.

All I can disclose right now is that the prosecution feels they need more time to "investigate" and prepare their case, and have filed for a continuance, which has been granted.

The time elapsed will be counted against them as a time penalty and they have a total of 210 days from the date of my arrest in which to bring this to trial.

ALSO! And this is IMPORTANT: The FUNDRAISER thread is here:
http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...sponsible.html ([FUNDRAISER] Holding Philadelphia Responsible)

While we have the money for the retainers and even a bit extra, all further donations are gratefully accepted - when it comes time to file the civil lawsuit, we may need to pay for expert witnesses, who cost a significant amount of money. Every $5 you contribute to this fund is that much money that goes towards making sure the City of Philadelphia is held responsible for their violations of citizen's civil rights, freedoms, and liberties!!

Thanks for reading, and everyone, STAY SAFE!!

Mark Fiorino

EDIT July 14th, 2011:

Hey everyone,

So the entire court matter today was over in twenty minutes total. The Commonwealth asked for a continuance, it was granted; the next hearing date was set for September 15th, 2011 at 9:15 in room 406 of the same building; the judge denied a request to lift my bail requirement of having to call an automated system twice a week to "check-in," since missing such phone calls could land me in prison; my criminal attorney expressed enthusiasm for the judge who is expected to preside over this particular case as he knows he is fair and has an exceptional understanding of the law.

In addition, my civil attorney has sent mailings to certain firearms-enthusiast and freedom-loving organizations who may be able to assist with the funding of further legal actions, should additional monies be required.

Also, Brian Lentz is no longer on this case. Someone else is prosecuting in his stead, and she usually takes major crimes/drug cases.

Here's the current docket.

See you in September!

Aaaaaaand another continuance. My lawyer was very ill for the September trial date and wound up in the hospital, and therefore we asked for and received a continuance. The next date for trial is October 27th, 9:00am in Courtroom 406.

And the verdicts are in - NOT GUILTY on all charges!! After a two hour or so trial, the judge was unable to find that the DA proved beyond a reasonable doubt that my actions were intentionally designed to attract police attention, which they were not. I'll post a higher detail recap shortly.

Update as of February 14th, 2012: My lawyer and the ACLU have gone ahead and filed a Federal Civil Rights lawsuit against the City of Philadelphia on my behalf in regards to the totality of the incidents I, and a few others, have had with the PPD while open carrying. Below you will find the press release as well as the final complaint. I also have the signed complaint but I figured it would be better to post the searchable PDF.

[camper]

Lawyer, lawyer. Lawyer lawyer lawyer.

Lawyer.

camper

[CenterTree]

HOLY CRAP my friend.

All the best to you. Glad you were prepared with the recorder.

The Philly PoPo really must love you.