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 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 321-330 next last
To: Rocky Mountain High
When people ask me about carrying, I urge them to imagine pieces of somebody's skull and brains hitting the wall behind him. Then I say, "If you can get to the point where you're okay (not comfortable, just okay) with that, where you can decide safe, at home, alone that that is something you're prepared to see and be responsible for, then you should think about carrying. If you have a gun, a situation in which you might need it is NOT The time to ponder that question.

Similarly, while I wargame and visualize de-escalating or avoiding confrontations so that I don't have to break leather, I guess we all should also visualize what to do when an LEO breaks bad on us and all we're doing is breaking our diet.

81 posted on 07/20/2007 6:42:55 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

I was replying to the person that stated there was no need to exercise 2nd amendment rights at the festival because of all the official government representatives that were armed.

Mine was a 1st amendment parallel - perhaps an obscure one.


82 posted on 07/20/2007 6:43:57 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama
Judging from some comments of various Freepers! (FGS), it's easy to see why we are losing our Constitutional rights in this once great country.

The Second Amendment says what it says, period! Anything that prevents one from exercising that right is called an INFRINGEMENT.

It's time for us to step up to the plate and make sure that are rights are not infringed. I applaud this brave man and I personally hope that he soon owns the city of Norfolk.


83 posted on 07/20/2007 6:44:00 AM PDT by basil (Support the Second Amendment--buy another gun today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Rocky Mountain High

He was illegally arrested and detained for exercising his constitutional rights. You are attempting to shift the blame for the officers lack of professionalism onto their innocent victim. His family was left unprotected because these thugs illegally harassed him.


84 posted on 07/20/2007 6:44:06 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

Not ‘zackly, as I said, I go there regularly. Yes, there are parts of Norfolk, that are unsavory to say the least, but this festival, and the surrounding parking areas, are not in that area.


85 posted on 07/20/2007 6:44:51 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

That isn’t even near what we are talking about here.


86 posted on 07/20/2007 6:45:26 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Rocky Mountain High
I prefer concealed carry, for OPSEC.

Me too, but unfortunately our bass ackwards laws in VA require open carry in some situations (re: my first post to this thread). If it were a legal option, I'm sure that Mr. Szymecki would've exercised it.

87 posted on 07/20/2007 6:46:09 AM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

I understand,see my post #52 for my rationale in even mentioning it. I still agree with the premise of the article, law-abiding, gun-toting citizens being harassed and arrested by overreaching LE goons.

Cheers,
SZ


88 posted on 07/20/2007 6:47:22 AM PDT by SZonian (Fighting Caliphobia one detractor at a time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie
Why did he not say “Yes Sir” and left when given that option?

Spoken like a true little comrade! VA law states that open carry is legal.

89 posted on 07/20/2007 6:47:31 AM PDT by 2nd amendment mama ( www.2asisters.org • Self defense is a basic human right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Agreed...he should have been a good little serf. I guess he got what he deserved eh?


90 posted on 07/20/2007 6:48:09 AM PDT by hiredhand (My kitty disappeared. NOT the rifle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
That isn’t even near what we are talking about here.

It is an essential element of the discussion. Your premise that you can just shed your protection at will based on a preconceived notion that nothing will happen is falacious. It is the same mindset that was in plave at VT.

91 posted on 07/20/2007 6:48:59 AM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

You lost me on your first point (I wasn’t asking about carrying, I do it all the time), but this case is much different than SWAT coming in the wrong house in the middle of the night. He was dealing with bad LEO’s BUT he had the chance to disengage and he chose not to.
As for his kids, they had to see their dad roughed up and arrested when they could have all gone home planned a legal retaliation.


92 posted on 07/20/2007 6:49:20 AM PDT by Rocky Mountain High
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Your opinion will change the day you need your weapon and it is at home or in the trunk of your car. I hope nothing ghastly happens on this occasion. See post #32


93 posted on 07/20/2007 6:49:35 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Rocky Mountain High

Without the confrontation, I doubt there would be any “legal retaliation” possible.

If you think so, please describe the legal scenario, had the man left immediately.


94 posted on 07/20/2007 6:51:10 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Well, yeah.

On the flip side, once I was directing traffic around a disabled vehicle and was NOT in uniform. This is something a non-LEO might do. A guy came at me with a club. I'd never seen him before. He has issues (and as it turned out, the proverbial arm-length rap sheet).

Since I am older even than you (hard as that may be to believe) and there was no place to run, I was glad to see his expression and attitude change when viewed over the sights of my p239.

And while open carry is allowed in VA, it is required (if one is to be armed) in situations where alcohol is around. Funny law, but there it is.

In any event, you aren't dead yet, and you only need one lunatic coming at you with a baseball bat to persuade you that a handgun is useful now and then.

I don't think what we're saying is intrinsically contradictory. I'd like visible handguns to be unnecessary while also not striking fear in the hearts of average citizens.

95 posted on 07/20/2007 6:51:20 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Yeah, cause the gun jump out of the holster and easily shoot so many people. Like shooting fish in a barrel.


96 posted on 07/20/2007 6:52:30 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 2 | View Replies]

To: ontap

That is why I have the permit. If I go somewhere that I think I may need it, I have it...so far, I haven’t needed it. Sometimes you have to play the odds...do I think I may need it at this daytime, family festival - no...do I think I may need it at 0200, in a crummy part of town - yes.


97 posted on 07/20/2007 6:53:02 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

“Chet was expecting the situation to totally dissolve within minutes”

Which it did, into chaos thanks to the ignorant officers.


98 posted on 07/20/2007 6:53:58 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 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Wrong again he’s pointing out where ones sense of safety has been shattered when the unexpected happens for the first time.There is always a first time.


99 posted on 07/20/2007 6:54:40 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

excellent observation.


100 posted on 07/20/2007 6:55:51 AM PDT by patton (19yrs ... only 4,981yrs to go ;))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 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