If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Cleveland Plain Dealer)   Cleveland police refuse to return gun to man who consented to a legal search. Naturally, the gun owner is suing for the return of his weapon--and tens of thousands of dollars in damages   (cleveland.com) divider line 147
    More: Asinine, Cleveland Police, Photo of the Day, refuses  
•       •       •

10163 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Aug 2013 at 5:02 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



147 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-10 06:03:26 PM
The only difference between cops and criminals is the paperwork.
 
2013-08-10 06:04:50 PM

the_chief: The only difference between cops and criminals is the paperwork.


And a very slight IQ bump on their MMPPI tests.
 
2013-08-10 06:16:47 PM
In other news, Louisiana is on the cutting edge of stopping nefarious money launderers.  You know, people paying in cash.

Louisiana, a recently passed a law outlawing the use of cash in secondhand goods sales.

A secondhand dealer shall not enter into any cash transactions in payment for the purchase of junk or used or secondhand property. Payment shall be made in the form of check, electronic transfers, or money order issued to the seller of the junk or used or secondhand property and made payable to the name and address of the seller. All payments made by check, electronic transfers, or money order shall be reported separately in the daily reports required by R.S. 37:1866
 
2013-08-10 06:17:38 PM
He filed a lawsuit in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court last week seeking to make the city return the gun and pay tens of thousands of dollars in damages.

"Give me my gun or I'll light the river on fire."
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-08-10 06:19:49 PM
ongbok:

But he was never charged, and his attorney, J. Gary Seewald, says Washington does not have a criminal record.

Why isn't this guy suing for false arrest and imprisonment also?


Because maybe that claim isn't quite true?
 
2013-08-10 06:21:28 PM
More and more I am finding that the comment that 95% of the cops give the remaining 5% a very bad name is very valid.  I grew up with the concept that the policeman was your friend and it is hard to accept that that is no longer the case.  I have never had a bad interaction with our local police but I am seeing more and more situations in which the police are acting as thugs and thieves rather than someone I should trust with my life.  I am just afraid that eventually there will be a web site that identifies all these thieves and thugs and puts out a shoot on sight on them and when that happens they will really have a reason for their paranoia as the thugs and thieves start dying.  I do not want that to happen but the upper echelon must begin housecleaning their forces to get the public's trust back.
 
2013-08-10 06:22:13 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


No criminal record = never a felon ==>allowed to own a gun
 
2013-08-10 06:27:08 PM

phojo1946: I do not want that to happen but the upper echelon must begin housecleaning their forces to get the public's trust back.


I can see where this might seem implausible while watching shampoo commercials and woofing down a Big Mac in one's well kept manse, as it were, but they don't really give a polly wolly doo dah f*ck about your trust anymore.  They got the keys to the safe.  They got the government in their pockets, the wealth in their ledgers and all they want is for you to shut the f*ck up, do as your told and keep all those IOUs moving around.  That's it.  If you're not ballin' on a nine digit check statement, that's your job, now.  You don't have to trust a chained up dog.  You simply need a really good chain.
 
2013-08-10 06:27:13 PM
Cops not being held accountable to the law? Must be one of those days whose names end in Y.
 
2013-08-10 06:28:08 PM

Giltric: They assumed he was a felon due to his skin color.


Well, if he's Black, he's probably guilty of something!

/I have relatives who are cops, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies!
 
2013-08-10 06:28:14 PM
CruiserTwelve,

What do you guys do?

Around Chicago (10+ years ago), cops never returned guns. If a cop was called on a domestic disturbance for instance, and a gun was just mentioned (Wife: "He has a gun in the attic and I'm afraid"), the cop would ask to see it and would take it in to "look at" promising to return it if it checked out.

That's the last the owner would see of it.
 
2013-08-10 06:29:34 PM

ltdanman44: "Washington's lawsuit alleges that Washington called police about 2:30 a.m. Feb. 10"

that was his first mistake right there.


This.

The police cannot and will not help you. They don't care about you, and in fact view you as a criminal they haven't caught yet.

Unless you're lying in the gutter bleeding, or someone else is, call someone else.
 
2013-08-10 06:36:58 PM
Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.
 
2013-08-10 06:39:06 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: The lawsuit said police unlawfully searched his car and seized the weapon. He was arrested for possessing a weapon while a  felon. He was held in the city jail for three nights.

Not charged =/= legally allowed to have a gun


Then either charge him with possessing a weapon while a felon, or give him the gun back. This seizure leaves his property rights in limbo - "You didn't commit a crime, nor were you charged with a crime, but we're going to go ahead and punish you all the same for that non-crime."
 
2013-08-10 06:43:32 PM
Tens of thousands?  Considering all the million dollar lawsuits out there for lesser offenses, I'm not sure what has got Subby's panties in a wad on this one.
 
2013-08-10 06:45:35 PM

LavenderWolf: ltdanman44: "Washington's lawsuit alleges that Washington called police about 2:30 a.m. Feb. 10"

that was his first mistake right there.

This.

The police cannot and will not help you. They don't care about you, and in fact view you as a criminal they haven't caught yet.

Unless you're lying in the gutter bleeding, or someone else is, call someone else.



Gun in one hand, phone in the other.  Seems like he already had the right tool for the job instead of ordering delivery.
 
2013-08-10 06:45:58 PM

CruiserTwelve: arcas: Something's missing here.  They held him in jail for three days, presumably because they wrongly believed he was a felon in possession of a firearm, and he's not suing for that also?

That bothers me too. Why isn't the guy complaining about a false arrest? All he wants is his gun back. Something is definitely missing from this story.


I imagine his lawyer thinks the police could justify a claim of probable cause and it would be a waste of time. Maybe false arrest is a high bar to hurdle in that particular jurisdiction.
 
2013-08-10 06:46:28 PM

06Wahoo: Tens of thousands?  Considering all the million dollar lawsuits out there for lesser offenses, I'm not sure what has got Subby's panties in a wad on this one.


:  /

:  \

:  |


Seriously?
 
2013-08-10 06:46:34 PM
violentsalvation:  Well it's one or the other. And if he is a felon he goes into "how about we enforce existing gun laws and charge the motherfarker? FFS" category. And if he's not a felon the cops need to give him his goddamn gun back.

Agreed. But it's hard to determine from the article if the guy is actually a former felon. You'd think that would be easy enough for a journalist to double-check, since there are databases out there for those sorts of things. But apparently they're content just to write quotes and not do any research.

/Checked one such database really quick, but "Derrick Washington" is too generic of a name to be sure.
 
2013-08-10 06:51:20 PM
I hope the city looses big on this, and I hope it becomes a trend of suing the cities for large sums of money because the thieves will never pay otherwise.
 
2013-08-10 06:54:13 PM

panfried: With a name like Washington, the cops reasoning should be quite obvious.


Yeah, never return a gun to a guy who managed to start a war by shooting a French diplomat.
 
2013-08-10 06:56:33 PM

FormlessOne: Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.


Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.
 
2013-08-10 06:56:37 PM
he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it
 
2013-08-10 07:10:26 PM
A lot of cops don't become cops to help people.  They become cops to be the bully who has the teacher conned into thinking they're angels. They become cops because it's a license to do as you f*cking well please.  No catch.  No consequences.  It's a con. It's a pose.  It's a front.  It's a great way to get paid for shaking down people for their lunch money at recess.

It didn't used to be this way.

Believe it or not, money was once looked upon as a tool to effect results and support an economy to serve the people. Not god. Hard to blame them in a society that says it is, indeed, god, though.  Sprinkle in the curse of Atahualpa and some steroids and you got people who will f*ck their own mothers on CNN live to have the most expensive car.  All the sudden, that boring suburb looks a lot more inviting than that video game dystdopia that would be "so rad!"

Your property, oh urban dweller, is just souvenirs.  One gang or another will try and take them and you're not going to get them returned by either.  There's a whole lot of "because f*ck you, that's why" in your future, citizen.  Because there's nothing left to do with the game but hit the reset button.
 
2013-08-10 07:11:26 PM

mrEdude: he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it




You sound like a tough guy.
 
2013-08-10 07:13:30 PM
This is asinine, for the police department. If he's a legal owner and has registration for the gun, they have no right to keep it unless it is evidence for a crime.

Legal searches, how do they work, yo?
 
2013-08-10 07:14:06 PM

bunner: Neighborhood Watch: The police (anywhere) can and will take that away from you and you'll never see it again.

Poor people aren't allowed to have cash.  If they have cash, that means they got it illegally.  All transactions must be recorded, or you're a terrorist.  Sound familiar?  Does anybody still think it's all college football and spiffy cars and lawnmowers on Sat. mornings and rainbow farting unicorns flying us our Burger King order while sprinkling Old Glory and fuzzy kittens o'er the land of the free?  All I can do is sit here and watch the tsunami of history repeat itself in "it can't happen here" land.  But if you get out a roll of tinfoil and tell me it's just a spring shower, you'r the fool.  Not me.


This old man highly approves bunner's message.
 
2013-08-10 07:15:36 PM

HempHead: mrEdude: he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it

You sound like a tough guy.


Tough guys, thieves, hypocrites, witless slags.. what's the difference?  Nobody is tough enough to change the channel.  You sound smirky and 15.  We all have our cross to bear in this dime store cesspit that was once a reasonably free society.
 
2013-08-10 07:17:46 PM

CruiserTwelve: I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.


It's not like the "city" is going to pay for their mistakes.

That comes out of the taxpayers pocket.

There is no incentive to not be dicks.
 
2013-08-10 07:20:04 PM

houstondragon: This is asinine, for the police department. If he's a legal owner and has registration for the gun, they have no right to keep it unless it is evidence for a crime.

Legal searches, how do they work, yo?


There are no registration requirements here.
 
2013-08-10 07:24:14 PM

WTFDYW: Popcorn anyone?


got any white chedder?
 
2013-08-10 07:25:29 PM

CruiserTwelve: FormlessOne: Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.

Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.


So you're basically saying "You don't have anything to worry about if you aren't doing something wrong". That is a comforting thought.
 
2013-08-10 07:34:02 PM

ZzeusS: .38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.


My thoughts exactly, you'd think he'd want to tip them for taking it off his hands.
 
2013-08-10 07:37:19 PM

n0nthing: ZzeusS: .38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.

My thoughts exactly, you'd think he'd want to tip them for taking it off his hands.


In a situation where I need to defend myself against violence, I'd rather have a working, loaded .38 Cal. Taurus than gun snob cred.
 
2013-08-10 07:40:59 PM

bunner: n0nthing: ZzeusS: .38 Taurus?  What, like $60 at a pawn shop?  Police did him a favor.

My thoughts exactly, you'd think he'd want to tip them for taking it off his hands.

In a situation where I need to defend myself against violence, I'd rather have a working, loaded .38 Cal. Taurus than gun snob cred.


"Working" and "Taurus" really don't belong in the same sentence.  Mostly kidding, berating Taurus's whenever the chance arises is ingrained at a biological level.  You can happen across a functional one now and then.
 
2013-08-10 07:44:06 PM

n0nthing: "Working" and "Taurus" really don't belong in the same sentence.


That fully expected response took precisely 2 min longer than I thought.   :  )  Don't really give a sh*t about the whole gun / music / beer / wine / car snob thing, but if that keeps your knickers moist, rock on.
 
2013-08-10 08:00:50 PM
He should be forced to sell it and pay the difference in price to get a new Glock.
 
2013-08-10 08:09:06 PM

OgreMagi: tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.

Why are gun haters so obsessed over penis size?


Because of trolling and/or shiatposting.
 
2013-08-10 08:22:44 PM

violentsalvation: Well it's one or the other. And if he is a felon he goes into "how about we enforce existing gun laws and charge the motherfarker? FFS" category. And if he's not a felon the cops need to give him his goddamn gun back.


My guess is that the cops didn't like the look of the guy and assumed he was a felon. When it turned out that he was not in fact a convicted felon unable to legally possess a firearm, the cops took the attitude "I still say he's a felon, even if he's never been convicted of anything. Who needs judges? I'm a po-lice ossifer and I declare him a felon"

Odds that the gun is now the "property" of a cop and can't be located on any inventory?
 
2013-08-10 08:28:12 PM

AndreMA: Odds that the gun is now the "property" of a cop and can't be located on any inventory?


Don't be silly.  It's next to all of that stolen property that was held until the cases were dispensed in 1997 and that 190 tho... I mean, 279.00 in illegally confiscated cash just waiting for those lazy citizens to fill out the correct forms.
 
2013-08-10 08:32:57 PM

tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.


I recommend that you consult a psychiatrist regarding your evident inability to control your compulsion to inappropriately discuss male genitalia in conversations regarding other subjects.
 
2013-08-10 08:42:52 PM

edmo: Legal is legal, illegal is illegal, private property remains that, and due process is always required.


You aren't familiar with civil asset forfeiture, are you? (No, launching a big-court lawsuit after the fact to try to get your stuff back, with the presumption the police get to keep it, isn't due process.)
 
2013-08-10 08:52:46 PM
CruiserTwelve:
Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.

Cops don't do this where you're from? It's standard behavior in most of the places I've lived. You have to jump through hoops to get anything back if it's "confiscated", if it's a firearm, you can basically forget it.  Especially if it's a nice firearm. Or a ski boat in good shape. Or basically anything someone at the precinct takes a liking to.

That pistol's at some cop's house or they sold it at the next gun show. At least that's what would have happened to it here.
 
2013-08-10 09:05:20 PM

Dimensio: tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.

I recommend that you consult a psychiatrist regarding your evident inability to control your compulsion to inappropriately discuss male genitalia in conversations regarding other subjects.


Dick jokes are always appropriate.
 
2013-08-10 09:24:50 PM
With that kinda scratch. he can buy a S&W, or a gun that doesn't have a big chance of blowing up in your hand...
 
2013-08-10 09:34:35 PM

tetsoushima: I feel bad for the guy, walking around with your backup piece instead of your primary can feel like you're walking around with a slightly smaller penis.  What if he didn't have a available right away when he got home?  What would he have brought to Starbucks yesterday, a loaner?  How mortifying.


So I take it that if the police took one of your possessions that cost you $500.00, for no legal reason and refused to give it back we would all be invited to mock the size of your genitalia if you complained.

Did I get the rules right?
 
2013-08-10 09:46:09 PM

CruiserTwelve: FormlessOne: Maureen Harper, a spokeswoman for the city, said, "While we won't comment on the specifics of this particular case, the city does evaluate the return of property on a case-by-case basis.''

Why? The only evaluation you should be making is "was this property seized legally, and held because it was used in or the result of criminal activity?" If the answer to any of that is "no", you return it - it's not yours, and you've no reason to hold it. Why should there be any other concerns? I can understand keeping property if it's evidence in an alleged crime, or if it's the result of an alleged crime, but there shouldn't be any other reason as to why this guy shouldn't get his gun back.

Maureen Harper seems to be saying "I can't tell you, but there's a good reason we're not returning his gun." I'd like to see the city's response to his lawsuit affidavit. It would seem to me that, in light of the lawsuit and the bad publicity, the city would be glad to return the gun if there wasn't a good reason to keep it. I can't see any reason for the city to keep it without good cause. It's not worth that much.


Ms. Harper doesn't "seem to be saying" anything. The correct word for this is insinuating, which is something rather different. Decent, honest people say things; honorless dogs insinuate. "Spokeswoman" is newspeak for propagandist. As usual, your comment serves only to illuminate your credulity and bias. In light of the lawsuit, I would think that returning the gun now might be tantamount to an admission of error, and keep in mind he isn't just asking for his gun back, he's also suing for thousands of dollars. As to why they may have kept it without good cause, I prefer not to ascribe to malice what can easily be explained by incompetence; perhaps paperwork was botched somewhere along the line, perhaps they don't even know where the gun is any more, and when Mr. Washington complained maybe he talked to people who aren't being paid enough to give a shiat, and if something like this occurred of course they wouldn't publicly admit it.
 
2013-08-10 09:50:08 PM
So report the gun theft to the State Police. Could make for an epic trolling.
 
2013-08-10 10:06:09 PM

bunner: HempHead: mrEdude: he should get it back,
then go shooting cops with it

You sound like a tough guy.

Tough guys, thieves, hypocrites, witless slags.. what's the difference?  Nobody is tough enough to change the channel.  You sound smirky and 15.  We all have our cross to bear in this dime store cesspit that was once a reasonably free society.




You're both farking insane. You wanna know what your problem is? MTV, Playboys, and Madison farking Avenue. Yes. Let me explain something to you okay? Girls with big tits have big asses, girls with little tits have little asses. That's the way it goes. God doesn't fark around, he's a fair guy. He gave the fatties big, beautiful tits, and the skinnies little, tiny niddlers. It's not my rule. If you don't like it, call Him. Hey Mitch. Thank you. Oh guys, look what we have here. Look at this, your favorite. Oh, you like that? Yeah, that's nice, right? Well, it doesn't exist, okay? Look at the hair. The hair is long, it's flowing, it's like a river. Well, it's a farking weave, okay? And the tits. Please, I could hang my overcoat on them. Tits, by design, were intended to be suckled by babies. Yes, they're purely functional. These are silicone city. And look, my favorite, the shaved pubis. Pubic hair being so unruly and all. Very keen. This is a mockery, this is a sham, this is bullshiat. Implants, collagen, plastics, capped teeth, the fat sucked out, the hair extended, the nose fixed, the bush, these are not real women, alright? They're beauty freaks. And they make all us normal women with our wrinkles, our puckered boobs, hi Bob, our cellulite, seem somehow inadequate. Well, I don't buy it, alright? What you farking mooks, you think is that there's a chance in hell that you'll end up with one of these women you don't give us real women anything approaching a commitment. It's pathetic. I don't know what you think you're going to do. You're going to end up 80 years old, drooling in some nursing home, and then you'll decide that it's time to settle down, get married, have kids? What are you going to do find a cheerleader? Charge it, Mitch. Oh, eat me. Look at Paul, with his models on the wall, his dog named Elle Macpherson. He's insane! He's obsessed. You're all obsessed. If you had an ounce of self-esteem, of self-worth, of self-confidence, you would realize that as trite as it may sound: beauty is truly skin deep. And you know what? If you ever did hook one of those girls, I guarantee you'd be sick of her. Get over yourself. ... No matter how perfect the nipple, how supple the thigh, unless there's some other shiat going on in the relationship besides physical, it's gonna get old, okay? And you guys, as a gender, have got to get a grip, otherwise the future of the human race is in jeopardy.
 
2013-08-10 10:10:31 PM
Clearly... They lost it.
 
Displayed 50 of 147 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report