Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Norfolk illegally arrests VCDL member!
Phil van Cleave - - VCDL email ^ | 07/19/07 | Phil van Cleave

Posted on 07/20/2007 5:11:30 AM PDT by Mad Dawg

And a lawsuit is being prepared.

Norfolk passed an ILLEGAL 'no guns' ordinance a few months ago (no, I am NOT kidding) and ENFORCED that illegal ordinance against a VCDL member!

Bad, bad, bad mistake.

New firearms ordinances, other than those to control discharge or hunting, have been illegal in the Commonwealth since 1987! But Norfolk appears to have been passing a series of gun banning ordinances pertaining to various festivals that the City has put on over the years!

Unbelievable. And Norfolk, of all places, KNOWS better than to do that. (VCDL has had TWO large turnouts at City Council meetings a few years ago to make sure that City Council was aware of Virginia's preemption laws.)

But, Norfolk did it anyway and now it's time to pay the piper.

Worse, within the last month, Norfolk police have also harassed two other gun owners who were lawfully carrying openly, one black and one white - each was accosted on TWO separate occasions! More on those incidents later in the alert.

Here's the story of the false arrest under an illegal ordinance (if you take blood pressure medicine, now is the time to take it for this is going to be very unsettling). Sorry for the length, but it will read quickly:

Chet Szymecki arrived at Sail Virginia 2007, a tall ship festival in Norfolk, with his family (wife, their three children, and two other children from other families [all 13 and under]) around 2:30 PM on Sunday, June 10th, 2007.

As luck would have it, Dennis O'Connor and I were also at that same festival about the same time - but Chet didn't know that we were there and vice versa! Damn, I wish I had known what was about to transpire!

Chet, who was open carrying on that beautiful day, crossed paths with dozens of officers, with many being cognizant of the fact that he was openly carrying.

At 4:30 Chet and family had just ordered some waffle cakes and returned to a music area for an upcoming show. Chet was approached by a black female Norfolk Sheriff's officer and was asked if he was a police officer.

Chet responded, "No."

The officer then stated that Chet must leave the festival area immediately since he was not permitted to carry a firearm there. At the same time another Sheriff's deputy closed in, and one more hung back a few feet. The officer began communicating on her radio and Chet was expecting the situation to totally dissolve within minutes and he could then continue to enjoy the rest of the show with no further interruption.

Within a few seconds two groups of officers from the Norfolk Police Department approached from two different directions.

The primary group had 5-6 officers, and from the look on a Lieutenant's face Chet could tell that things were quickly becoming exponentially worse.

The Lieutenant came within inches of Chet and in a very condescending tone of voice stated that Chet had two choices: leave the park or go to jail.

While appearing to be as non-confrontational as possible (one hand holding his waffle cake and the other feeding his mouth) Chet began to reply that this must be a simple misunderstanding since he is permitted to carry.

Chet was cut off and, as the Lieutenant leaned in to intimidate him, the Lieutenant raised his voice and just about shouted that Chet had only two choices: leave immediately or be arrested.

Chet was still in shock and once again began to speak. Not waiting to hear what Chet had to say, the Lieutenant immediately told the other officers to arrest Chet!

In the following seconds Chet had hands all over him. One officer was tugging at Chet's pistol, having much difficulty removing it. Chet was worried about an accidental discharge with his family being literally feet away.

Other officers were pulling Chet's arms around his back and cuffing him. Chet offered no resistance.

Chet's wife began to speak and she was immediately pushed back by a black female Sheriff's deputy!

Chet's children were just about panicking watching their law-abiding father being stripped of his dignity while their mother was being forced back and being told that she may be arrested if she failed to comply.

Chet's wife attempted to record the scene on her cellular phone and was told she would be arrested if she did not secure her phone immediately!!!

The police then forcibly escorted Ms. Szymecki and her children off the property and left them standing on a street corner in Norfolk, all alone and without car keys (Chet had them and the police would not retrieve them). How very shameful.

A totally unnecessary use of force by the police on someone who was not threatening anyone, leaving a wife and young children on a street corner, totally unprotected.

Congratulations, Norfolk, those police-state tactics would have made Stalin smile warmly at you.

While being whisked away, Chet stated that he was aware that he was being unlawfully disarmed and detained and he demanded to be released immediately.

That didn't draw any response.

After a few minutes when Chet and the police were in a clear area where an Explosive Ordinance Disposal van was parked, along with many other police vehicles, Chet was instructed to face a wall.

Chet informed the officers that the handcuffs were agonizingly tight and repeated that he was not a threat to any of them and asked that the handcuffs be loosened.

Two officers were behind Chet holding him - one officer replied while squeezing the cuffs tighter that "they were not meant to feel comfortable." Nothing like having a sadist on the police payroll. I knew a couple of officers like this who worked the jail in San Antonio.

Chet was just sickened by the lack of professionalism and, as an ex-law enforcement officer and law abiding citizen, SO AM I!

After a half hour or so, and asking a few more times to have his cuffs be loosened, Chet was placed in the rear of a squad car. At that time Chet's left hand was totally numb and his right shoulder was aching.

Chet informed the officer in the police car that Chet was a veteran retired from active service and had sustained injuries in the line of duty - Chet's right arm being one of the injured areas.

Chet informed him that his right Brachial Plexus nerve group was torn from his spine and he had limited use and mobility of his right arm. Chet stated again that he simply wanted the cuffs behind his back to be readjusted.

The most the officer could offer was a suggestion on how to sit back in the squad car in a comfortable way. Needless to say - Chet, who had done nothing wrong, was very uncomfortable.

Several times one officer approached Chet and stated that "in a town of 200,000 or more like ours you cannot carry around a gun like you can in other places."

Chet told the officer that that law did not apply since: (1) the gun Chet was carrying was not classified as a "firearm" in that code section and (2) Chet had a concealed carry permit which rendered the entire section inapplicable to him.

Chet was told he did not know what he was talking about and Chet had no business carrying a gun while in Norfolk.

Speaking of being ignorant of Virginia gun laws, that officer needs remedial training. What a disgrace.

While in the cruiser an officer approached Chet and once again Chet was offered a choice: sign a summons or go visit the magistrate.

Being unfamiliar with the entire process and not understanding the gravity of the decision, Chet asked for additional clarification. The officer was polite and informed Chet that signing a summons was not an admission of guilt and he was simply promising to show up at a future court date. By not signing the summons Chet would go in front of a magistrate and this, along with the associated processing, would take many hours. Signing the summons would only take a few minutes and then Chet could be released.

DOES EVERYONE NOW UNDERSTAND WHY VCDL FOUGHT A BILL EARLIER THIS YEAR THAT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED OFFICERS TO THROW SOMEONE IN JAIL FOR ANY CLASS 1 OR CLASS 2 MISDEAMEANOR AT WILL? Any doubts in your mind that these officers would have done so to further humiliate and intimidate Chet if they were given the option?

Chet asked what would happen if the magistrate realized that this was all a simple mistake. The officer informed Chet that even if the magistrate released him, the police could issue a bench warrant and keep Chet in jail until his court date!!! Any doubt that these officers would have done so?

It seemed that signing the summons was the proper choice and Chet signed it. I agree.

Chet asked for his pistol to be returned and one of the officers stated that it was being held as evidence. Chet asked him for a receipt for his confiscated property. The officer stated that he had a pistol, one magazine, nine rounds of ammunition, and a holster. The officer said his verbal receipt was sufficient!

Like hell!

Chet was also forced to provide his Social Security Number - Chet asked if this were voluntary or mandatory - Chet was told it was mandatory. WRONG again, Norfolk Police! Chet was also forced to fingerprint his summons papers in four areas.

Arriving home almost two hours later, Chet was forced to skip a previously planned dinner engagement with another family and seek treatment at a local medical facility. Chet said he has a high tolerance for pain and discomfort but his right arm/shoulder and the back of his neck was just killing him.

Chet was examined by the doctor and prescribed medications. The doctor stated that since his arm has limited movement and the officers forced it into this unnatural position for over an hour, muscles and ligaments were probably strained.

Chet contacted me that evening and related the above story. The next morning I was on the phone to Norfolk City Attorney, Bernard Pishko.

Mr. Pishko proceeded to tell me that the public streets for the event were considered private property and thus guns could be banned. I told him that the "Festevents" organization that was running the festival was nothing but an arm of the City and could NOT ban guns. I also said that if the private property part were true, why had Chet not been arrested for trespass, but was instead charged under a City ordinance?

Mr. Pishko said I wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what I was talking about. He suggested that he could drop the charges against Chet, but said that perhaps this issue should be settled in court. Mr. Pishko said he was comfortable that the City would win.

Dream on, sir.

However, Mr. Pishko said the charges would be dropped and he kept his word. The charges were "Nollo Prossed" at Chet's court hearing on June 22nd and Chet is now in the process of getting his record expunged.

Chet was charged under City Code 42660 Section 3c (weapon/firearm in festival area).

In order to gather information the City may have on this incident, VCDL has already sent Freedom of Information Act requests to the

* Norfolk Sheriff, to find out which officer started this whole thing, along with any supporting information

* Norfolk Police, to get a copy of ALL radio traffic and other documents relating to Chet's arrest.

* Norfolk City Attorney, on the City's relationship with "Festevents" and to get a copy of the offending ordinance

The dollar amount of the lawsuit has not as yet been set, but I hope it is enough to get the City's attention.

--

Two other law-abiding gun owners, one black and one white, were each harassed TWICE by the Norfolk Police recently. Both were simply open carrying.

The black gun owner, an articulate, polite, 23 year-old who has helped at VCDL tables at various gun shows in the Tidewater area, had guns drawn and pointed at him by the police on the first occasion.

On the second occasion, he was handcuffed, even after complying with police demands to keep both hands on a nearby wall.

Both times the gun owner was released at the scene. But not after being unnecessarily humiliated and manhandled.

On the second occasion, the police officers told him that if they saw him open carrying again, they would handcuff him, run his gun for stolen, and then release him again!!!

Forget looking for real criminals, just harass the good guys, Norfolk. Unbelievable.

The white gun owner (Norfolk seems to be an equal opportunity harasser) was also detained and then released.

--

VCDL has been sitting quietly on this until Chet's charges were dropped. But these events cannot go unchallenged.

In addition to the lawsuit, VCDL will be attending a future Norfolk City Council meeting to denounce the oppressive harassment of Virginia's gun owners and demand an end to it.

The City of Norfolk and their police agents have a pattern of abusing the law and law abiding gun owners. If you or I violate the law, we risk fines and/or jail time. Why should local government officials be immune from punishment for passing and enforcing an ordinance in violation of state law? How long will the General Assembly let these rogue officials get away with this abuse of the law?

WE NEED A **HUGE** TURNOUT TO MAKE SURE CITY COUNCIL GETS THE MESSAGE LOUD AND CLEAR

I will advise when we have picked a date.

Tidewater - time to step up to the plate again.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: banglist; donutwatch; leo; norfolk; rkba; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 321-330 next last
To: Mad Dawg

Sorry to disagree but that is what these thugs are counting on that you’ll cower before them and allow them to make up the rules as they see fit. If he had obeyed and something happened to his family and he’s standing there unarmed what would he have felt like. I believe he did the right thing in forcing them to arrest him illegally so he could later press the issue. According to the article he never resisted arrest but they acted thuggishly anyway. An egregious use of force.


121 posted on 07/20/2007 7:10:17 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Edgerunner

Thanks


122 posted on 07/20/2007 7:10:24 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: nw_arizona_granny

Here is a thread on the VCDL incident


123 posted on 07/20/2007 7:10:44 AM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ontap

As I said, we see differently.


124 posted on 07/20/2007 7:11:45 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie

I have the feeling that he wasn’t really being given the chance to leave. I think they said it just to CYA and then escalated their interaction with him. I have the feeling that they were determined to arrest him from the start and possibly to make an example of him. I could be wrong, but that is the feel I get.


125 posted on 07/20/2007 7:11:58 AM PDT by looscnnn ("Those 1s and 0s you stepped in is a memory dump. Please clean your shoes." PC Confusious)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
“Isn’t the maxim “You fight as you train?” Training includes visualization. I’m going to visualize cops saying,”Would you please leave?” and me saying, “Right away,” and then calling Phil van Cleave.”

It would have been a good idea to leave, call a bunch of friends with video recorders and perhaps a couple of other open carriers, and then return. It is amazing how law abiding officers become when they are being recorded.

That said, hindsight is 100 percent. I have been in situations similar to the one mentioned, in Arizona. Here, when I cited the law to the officer/officers, they always backed down.

But that is something that cannot be counted on.

126 posted on 07/20/2007 7:12:21 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: gracesdad
Oh my.

Let's stipulate for the sake of discussion that what the guy did was stupid. NEVERTHELESS what the Norfolk deputies did was illegal.

That's what chaps my pumpkin. Cops breaking the law. Cops using handcuffs not to secure a baddie but to torment a detainee. Stupid (if indeed it was stupid for the gentleman to be carrying) is one thing. Cops breaking the law is quite another, and a very serious thing.

127 posted on 07/20/2007 7:13:37 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Like I said, if I think I may need it, I will have it. Having been to these events, in my opinion, this guy did not need to open carry. I have known people that like to open-carry, because it makes them feel empowered and they tend to show-off, those are the types that worry me, and in my opinion, give the anti-gun people more voice...I don’t like either of them or what they do, so I comment.

WOW!

Clairvoyant, able to read peoples purpose with out asking, and arrogant.

You really impress me! (not)

128 posted on 07/20/2007 7:14:05 AM PDT by Hazcat (We won an immigration BATTLE, the WAR is not over. Be ever vigilant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Where, in any of my comments, did I defend the police actions, or say anything near what you are talking about?

The tenor of your entire post was that the victim of unwarranted police abuse should have just meekly allowed the cops to deprive him of a right which he clearly has under the laws of the state without questioning their reasons for doing so. Of course he should not have resisted arrest in such a situation, but if the account of the event is accurate he didn't resist he only questioned why he was being arrested when he was not breaking any law. In any case, unless he was physically resisting arrest there was no justification for the brutal treatment he was given while handcuffed and helpless.

My point is that this police action was obviously pre-planned and calculated to intimidate licensed gun carriers into giving up their right to carry where the cops don't want them to, not to enforce a valid law. Any such action by LE is totally unacceptable, they are hired to enforce the law, not to enforce their opinion of what the law should be.

129 posted on 07/20/2007 7:14:44 AM PDT by epow ( "The more guns you take out of society the fewer murders you will have" Rudy--6/20/00)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: looscnnn

I suppose someone could break into my house, and steal things from there when I’m not home, or I could get shot from a distance, and then have someone come take my weapon, or someone could commit a crime with another kind of weapon, etc. As I said, life is full of first events, and we make our calls, as we see fit.


130 posted on 07/20/2007 7:15:01 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

> I was glad to see his expression and attitude change when viewed over the sights of my p239.<

Big grin


131 posted on 07/20/2007 7:15:45 AM PDT by B4Ranch ( "Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

I have no arguement to support, I just stated my opinion. I said I thought it was irresponsible of the guy, and I think there are times and places to carry or not, that’s all there is to it.


132 posted on 07/20/2007 7:17:25 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: brwnsuga
What does this deputy’s race have to do with anything? Did you notice that you wrote that? I get the message of the posting but that line causes me to pause.

I caught that too. Unnecessary.

133 posted on 07/20/2007 7:18:24 AM PDT by Half Vast Conspiracy (Can I cast the second stone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

It’s pretty scary the number of people on this post willing to shift the blame to the innocent victim, He did nothing either stupid or illegal. He was harassed and arrested illegally without cause. You can disagree with the law but it has to be changed, not broken, especially by the police. Sad!!


134 posted on 07/20/2007 7:19:18 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: ontap
I think your point is certainly arguable even if it's not worth posting twice. (How'd that happen anyway?)

I think though that this was a conflict for which he was unprepared. I guess part of my future planning will include making sure the boss-lady has a set of car keys, and (if my kid hadn't grown up and left for western skies) explaining to the kid (or kiddies), "The nice police person may lock Daddy up today but it's all okay and it'll come out just fine; Daddy's just being a citizen in a free country and these misunderstandings happen.

135 posted on 07/20/2007 7:19:22 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Rocky Mountain High
I prefer concealed carry, for OPSEC. You might be able to kick-@ss if you see them coming, but if little Johnnie Gang-banger decideds your Sig might look better in his hooptie, you’re going to take a half-full 40oz bottle of beer to the skull from behind. Self Defense doesn’t start with firearms, it starts with reality.

If little johnny gang banger is going to hit you in the back of the head it's just as likely to be for a whole host of reasons, your money, your weapon, your tennis shoes. I'd wager you are more likely to be targeted with weapon concealed than exposed for all to see. Anyone who has ever approached me while I'm open carry has always shown great respect. I don't frequent little johnnyanbangers turf, so it's a moot point. Our reality's differ. Blackbird.

136 posted on 07/20/2007 7:19:42 AM PDT by BlackbirdSST (I'm dug in, giving no more ground to the rino stampede. BB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Hazcat

My apparent clairvoyance, ability to read peoples purpose with out asking, and arrogance, have served me quite well so far.


137 posted on 07/20/2007 7:19:46 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Jason_b
Could mean if anyone would appreciate the importance of the 2nd Amendment it would be a black, considering the history of gun control laws being used to disarm blacks, thus it is more surprising a black officer would participate in this action.

Gee, I hope you didn't hurt yourself reaching for that one.

138 posted on 07/20/2007 7:20:21 AM PDT by Half Vast Conspiracy (Can I cast the second stone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: epow

While you may have read tenor into my statements, I did not write any, I merely made my opinion known...as we all do here on FR.


139 posted on 07/20/2007 7:21:23 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
The black gun owner, an articulate, polite, 23 year-old who has helped at VCDL tables at various gun shows in the Tidewater area, had guns drawn and pointed at him by the police on the first occasion.

Was he clean, too? </Obama Reference>

140 posted on 07/20/2007 7:22:39 AM PDT by Half Vast Conspiracy (Can I cast the second stone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 321-330 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson