Arrested by the Philadelphia Police for Open Carry

[t1m0thy]

When police misuse their authority for the purpose of intimidating someone, for example, to drop a lawsuit or take embarrassing audio off the Web, they don't really want to put it into the system. They don't want the usual disinterested cops to locate and arrest the citizen, and get the official hearings and paperwork done quickly and efficiently. No, they want the opportunity to make the arrest and processing as painful, as drawn-out, and as excruciating as possible. They want it to take days, not hours. They have a lot of tools in their Big Bag o' Official Repression, including inexplicable delays, "lost" paperwork, "forgotten" calls, filthy rooms, unpleasant cell mates, missed meals, and a whole lot of officers wandering by to make snide comments, at a time after the strip search and body cavity probing when they know for sure that THIS time there's no digital evidence of their wrongdoing.

It's a nightmare when the officials who have done wrong are allowed to take the accuser and sole witness into their unfettered custody. Like a rapist somehow getting a court order to hold his victim in his basement for the weekend.

Which is why I am glad that they just happened to miss Mark at his workplace and we were able to coordinate getting an attorney and make the necessary arrangements.

This could have been a lot worse for him.

[Pkspawn]

If there's an official legal fund I'll be glad to donate.

For which incident?

http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...sponsible.html

That is the current fund for the prior assault.

[tmountjr]

For which incident?

http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...sponsible.html

That is the current fund for the prior assault.

Gosh, so many funds. There's the bail money for right now and the legal fund for the "sue the crap out of the PPD" case that will undoubtedly arise, right?

[whoshisface]

How do we find out? Who do I pay.. What can I do? There has to be a way to put some pressure on these guys to keep it as legitimate as possible. Do we need to file for an injunction or something like that?

[anonymouse]

As for the case you are thinking of, I imagine I can find it, but I don't think its breadth is as wide as you are hoping for.

Excel, are you thinking of the Pittsburgh case (Matheny v Allegheny County)?

http://forum.pafoa.org/general-2/689...ml#post1484808

The case was settled before the court got to make a decision.

[jhbenson4]

They have finally fully opened Pandora's box, I honestly think they understimate the fight that is before them. It is a shame the taxpayers of PHI get stuck with the bill, however, they are the people that keep voting the liberty hating tyrannical loons into power.

[whoshisface]

This is a problem...

http://forum.pafoa.org/777715-post-218.html

[BenGlock]

Excel, are you thinking of the Pittsburgh case (Matheny v Allegheny County)?

http://forum.pafoa.org/general-2/689...ml#post1484808

The case was settled before the court got to make a decision.

See Kelly v. Carlisle, 622 F.3d 248, 257-59 (3d. Cir. Oct. 4, 2010) and the cases discussed therein. The Third Circuit recognizes that more than 20 years ago, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that "secretly recording a police officer in the performance of his duties did not violate the Wiretp Act."

[MDJschool]

How do we find out? Who do I pay.. What can I do? There has to be a way to put some pressure on these guys to keep it as legitimate as possible. Do we need to file for an injunction or something like that?

If there really was a warrant, it would be nice to find the issuing authority. I have tried to call several MDJs' offices at random and they all seem to be closing at 4:30 to try to test the MDJS case mgmt. system.

It would also help if we knew what police department was holding Viper, although I guess the head of the Philly police can be named in certain actions.

Among the 'crazy ideas' might be a Habeas Corpus action...if you could ever find a judge who would look at an emergency motion for so and order the police to produce the body, ha ha ha.

To get that motion to someone who has power to act, I suspect it either has to be the issuing authority or one of the magistrates on call. I have no idea how laypersons, after normal business hours, would find out how to contact and get a motion to on call or otherwise working philly municipal court magistrates. (And on the other hand I don't know if those judges are fit to see them, as opposed to CCP judges, but maybe it's worth a try.)

42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6503
§ 6503. Right to apply for writ
(a) General rule.--Except as provided in subsection (b), an application for habeas corpus to inquire into the cause of detention may be brought by or on behalf of any person restrained of his liberty within this Commonwealth under any pretense whatsoever.
(b) Exception.--Where a person is restrained by virtue of sentence after conviction for a criminal offense, the writ of habeas corpus shall not be available if a remedy may be had by post-conviction hearing proceedings authorized by law.

Cause for Habeas here:
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/23...r10/s1003.html
Pa.R.Crim.P. 1003(D): (1) When a defendant has been arrested within Philadelphia County in a Municipal Court case, with or without a warrant, the defendant shall be afforded a preliminary arraignment by an issuing authority without unnecessary delay. If the defendant was arrested without a warrant pursuant to paragraph (A)(1)(a) or (b), unless the issuing authority makes a determination of probable cause, the defendant shall not be detained.
(2) In the discretion of the issuing authority, the preliminary arraignment of the defendant may be conducted by using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication. When counsel for the defendant is present, the defendant must be permitted to communicate fully and confidentially with defense counsel immediately prior to and during the preliminary arraignment.

One possibility is that a complaint was filed but a judge never actually issued a warrant, and so we've been asking the wrong question and have been directed to the wrong people (regarding warrants) when we should have asked the DA's office, or the courts, whether a complaint had been filed.

[whoshisface]

See Kelly v. Carlisle, 622 F.3d 248, 257-59 (3d. Cir. Oct. 4, 2010) and the cases discussed therein. The Third Circuit recognizes that more than 20 years ago, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that "secretly recording a police officer in the performance of his duties did not violate the Wiretp Act."

Thank god..