Constitutionalist blames police for fatal shootout (shooting in Massillon, Ohio)

The Canton Repository (Ohio) ^ | August 13, 2002 | ED BALINT

[ResistorSister]

CANTON — Dwight Class said it didn’t have to end this way for Donald Matthews and the Massillon police officer whom he shot and killed.

Class said Patrol Officer Eric Taylor and the other officers and state trooper who were part of a fatal police chase Friday night did not have the authority to pull Matthews over on a traffic stop.

Or to pursue and attempt to arrest him.

Class attends the meetings on constitutionality that Matthews used to lead before he died in the shootout with police that started with a traffic stop on Route 21 in Doylestown and ended at First Street NW and Cherry Road in Massillon.

Matthews was president of the National Constitutionalist Academy and studied the U.S. Constitution. He held weekly meetings at the Denny’s Restaurant on Tuscarawas Street W in Perry Township. About 15 to 22 people usually attend, Class said. He said Matthews also held weekly meetings in Cleveland.

STRONG BELIEFS. Dwight Class and his wife, Sárra,
stand outside Reed Funeral Home after attending
calling hours for Donald Matthews of Jackson
Township on Monday afternoon. Police shot and
killed Matthews after he led police on a chase and shot and
killed Massillon Police Officer Eric Taylor on Friday
night. Class said the shootout wouldn’t have occurred
if the state trooper who pulled Matthews over on a
traffic stop had shown proof that he had an oath of
office and a bond. Repository / Michael S. Balash

Class attended calling hours for Matthews at Reed Funeral Home on Monday. Visitation was held from 3 to 5 and 6 to 9 p.m.

The first session appeared to be sparsely attended. Roughly 12 to 20 vehicles were parked in the funeral home lot. Visitors trickled in during the two hours. Family members and friends occasionally gathered in the parking lot or near the entrance of the funeral home.

Class spoke strongly about the events that unfolded Friday when a state trooper pulled Matthews over for driving 12 mph over the speed limit.

If the trooper could have produced proof that he had taken an oath of office and had a bond, “it would have been a nice, simple conversation (and Matthews would have said,) ‘I recognize you as an officer now.’ ”

That would have prevented the gunshots, Class said.

“I don’t think it had to have happened at all,” the Canton resident said, citing constitutional issues.

However, his wife, Sárra Class, said Taylor “should have been shot.”

Dwight Class disagreed and told his wife to stop making the comment.

“I thought he was a good man,” he said of Matthews. “He tried to get things done; he tried to get them done peacefully. That’s what he taught in class.”

Matthews taught other constitutionalists “to get the ‘paper trail started’ ” by filing cases in court, Class said.

Class said he has filed lawsuits over traffic violations involving himself and Rodney Class. One of the cases involves New Philadelphia police, he said.

Dwight Class also said he’s filed a lawsuit in federal court in Akron over alleged civil rights violations.

He said he’s planning to take legal action this week against Massillon Municipal Judge Edward J. Elum in the Ohio Supreme Court. That complaint involves a warrant issued against Class — he said he doesn’t know what for.

Dwight Class, 51, said he retired after working 30 years at the Timken Co.

He gave a reporter a “notice” of “civil rights violations by Ohio police and (the Ohio Highway Patrol).”

“Ohio is a home-rule state,” it says. “Chances are that if the brothers and sisters are stopped by any local police, they do not have an oath of office or bond to hold a position as a civil servant.”

Without the oath or bond, an officer doesn’t have the power to arrest a citizen, Class says.

Standing outside the funeral home, he said, “We don’t have a police force in the state of Ohio; we have private, at-will employees.”

A bumper sticker on a pickup truck at the calling hours carried the slogan: “I love my country but I fear my elected officials.”

Class said he expects Friday’s incident to boost attendance at the National Constitutionalist Academy meetings.

But not everyone who attended the calling hours shared Class’s point of view.

John Newlund, 49, of East Liverpool, said Matthews was his wife’s brother-in-law.

“He gave me a card one time,” Newlund said of the academy, “and I just blew it off. I believe you should pay your taxes.”

Newlund said he would “absolutely” pull over for a traffic stop.

“He should have stopped,” he said of Matthews. “It was only a speeding ticket — it happens thousands of times a day.

“You go by the law, the law of the land.”

You can reach Repository writer Ed Balint at (330) 580-8315 or e-mail:

ed.balint@cantonrep.com

[wimpycat]

So, a Constitutionalist kills a cop,and you spend your time on this thread accusing pretty much the whole government of acting unconstitutionally, of knowing less about the Constitution than you do.

I don't know what you think you're trying to accomplish by emphasizing your perception of "crimes" on the part of the government, when an anti-government so-called, self-erroneously self-described "Constitutionalist" kills a cop as a result of a routine traffic stop, you are characterizing yourself as sympathetic to Matthews' actions, as if he were justified in his actions.

[drjimmy]

I thought about the "suicide by cop" angle. My guess is that if that was his intent he would have set things up to get a little more bang for his buck, so to speak, for maximum publicity.

[dcwusmc]

It's amazing how some folks point to the 10th amendment when it suits them but completely ignore it when its provisions are inconvenient to their cause. Not to say that this guy was right for killing a cop... but he sounds kinda like Carl Drega in a way...

[Poohbah]

He just kinda lofted that ball right over the sweet spot of the plate, didn't he?

[basil]

Actually. it is difficult to try to asses the "reasoning" of a person who doesn't appear to have a clue--LOL!

[wimpycat]

As for your second question, you show me where in the Constitution it gives these municipal corporate gov'ts. the authority to annex property, require permits, pass codes and regulations, etc.

Nuh-uh, you've got it ass backwards. The burden of proof is on you. Cite which provisions of the U.S. Constitution are violated by these administrative laws. The 10th Amendment gives to states any power that is not prohibited under the Constitution. If it's not prohibited, then it's allowed.

[Catspaw]

Your first question is so stupid it doesn't even deserve a reply. As for your second question, you show me where in the Constitution it gives these municipal corporate gov'ts. the authority to annex property, require permits, pass codes and regulations, etc. The short answer is that there is no authority for these local gov'ts. to have this inordinate amount of control over us. Codes and regulations are created statutorily under administrative law which is NOT constitutional law.

I see--you can't answer the question so you deteriorate into personal attacks. Typical.

[habs4ever]

Ah, well,yeah, very interesting , in another context, but not when discussing one Don Matthews and his perverted view of his "rights", especially when we learn that he was looking to kill a cop for some years.And what did he use to screw up his "courage" to do this? Well, he thought he was a Constitutional Scholar, and he just knew he could kill a cop because it was in the "book".

This guy was scum, who hid it from others, or others demurely looked away while his paranoia and delusions became more extreme, and he followed his bent ideology to a twisted, grotesque but logical conclusion.His is a cautionary tale to those that take their politics far too seriously, or do they take it so seriously because they are nutbars?? What came first??

[amused]

Hey, listen - if the lost 463rd amendment doesn't say shaving cream, then there is no consequent right to groom decently. Lots of arguments on that one.

LOL.

[dcwusmc]

Yeah... but I was equally referring to those who, in a case such as this, use the 10th to point out flaws in an argument yet in another case, say the possibility of Arizona decriminalizing pot, will IGNORE the 10th and hope that FedGov will prevent the will of the people of Arizona from being carried out. That, to me, is hypocracy of the highest order... wouldn't you agree?

[amused]

I thought about the "suicide by cop" angle. My guess is that if that was his intent he would have set things up to get a little more bang for his buck, so to speak, for maximum publicity.

Well he is getting pretty big play here. As the Christine's did. Some off shoot groups know many people visit this site and it is a cheap effective way of getting their message out. They know people here do not take this at face value so debate will ensue. The more the debate, the larger the thread(s), the more publicity is gained. The more this is has discussed, I think Matthews may have been gunning for martyrdom.

[Poohbah]

Absolutely.

"american spirit" seems to think that socialism is good, as long as HE is the Big Kahuna of the people's state.

[carenot]

You don't know exodus very well.

[wimpycat]

You don't know exodus very well.

I, for one, would get to know him better if he would give direct answers to the direct questions I asked him back on #90. They aren't hard or leading questions at all. Just like anybody else here, we can only go by what he writes, as well as what he chooses to ignore.

[Cultural Jihad]

The questions you ask have a moral component to them, and rabid ideologues have no use for such bourgeouis notions.

So true. There is no "Render unto Caesar" in their so-called Christian-based tax-cheating schemes. There is no accepting of personal responsibility for their civil disobedience. There is no Golden Rule in their murderous deeds. In short, they are strict anti-Constitutionalists who choose to wipe the Constitution with their self-centered butts.

[american spirit]

Sorry to hurt your tender feelings. I see you don't have the stones to refute anything I've posted with any facts. My posts have centered on the unconstitutional nature of city gov't. and it's ever expanding control over our lives and if you can't see that I feel sorry for you. It's sickening to see a policeman or private citizen lose their lives over this situation but what we all need to consider is what are we going to do about gov't at all levels encroaching into our private lives and constitutional rights.

[amused]

I considered that possibility, but have figured its better for us to mock, identify, and marginalize his cohorts publicly.

Well I don't think he was thinking of this site in particular(maybe he was) but just the action of being willing to use deadly force over a constitutional argument arising from a simple local traffic violation seems spontaneously premeditated. Now that I am out of 50 cent words, I agree that it is better to debate then to not allow this to come forward.

[Maelstrom]

Well..actually...the leftists aren't coming out and jumping on either of them.

They're dancing on their graves and using it as a springboard to go after people who believe the US was supposed to have been a government of strictly limited and enumerated powers.

Otherwise, we're in perfect agreement.

[wimpycat]

Look at #106 again and cite the provisions of the Constitution that prohibit statutory and administrative law, or else take your puny and pathetic understanding of the Constitution to someone who gives a sh**. In other words, put up or shut up with your rationale.