On a thread from yesterday we had a discussion RE: the guy who was raided by the L.A. County Sheriffs Dept and a small arsenal was discovered in the process of searching for 'stolen school supoplies'.

Having been subjected to a similar experience I had a few revalations dealing with this. While I was in the Army, I took full advantage to -legally- acquire MRE's, feild equipment, and other things I felt that I would find useful for the rollover. Everything was on the level, and there was no issues that I knew of.

Then came the fateful phone call. My roomate called me from his cell phone telling me that he was enroute to the house, with Criminal Investigation Department thugs following him behind. He had used his cell phone to alert me to this. They had been 'tipped off' to my having stored 'explosives' in the house, and they were to search it for the bombs. In the end, CID was rather disapointed to find nothing of the sort, that this rumor/lie had been perpatrated by the supply NCO to find out exactly what I had in my possession to try and cover his supply shortages, (by accusing me of the 'theft' of the items).

This seems to me a similar instance. Construct a 'cover story' of "Hey we hear you might have stolen some items...we are hear to look for them." I haven't heard otherwise, but if the guy was doing illegal things re:weaponry, then why did he agree to the search? And I don't believe that anything found beyond what was listed on the warrant is legal? (All you lawyer-types care to comment?)

The other thing that really pisses me off is the handling of this by the media. Not "...that a homeowner, while attempting to assist law-enforcement officials in a search for missing school property was held for questioning regarding a number of weapons found at his residence..." no no no...no it was more like "...that a janitor from the school, wanted in connection with theft of school property, was arrested. When his residence was searched, Police uncovered a vast arsenal on military weaponry and ammunition."

Now I don't know if this guy is a 'bad guy' or a 'good guy.' My problem lies therein with the use of the loaded words to spark a definate negative reaction from the public at large against gun owners as a whole.

using the words 'janitor', 'theft', 'vast', 'arsenal', 'uncovered'...provoke and elicit a pavlovian response from the listener. The media, in its quest for "HYPE" has lost all journalistic credibilty...I hope that the guy, if innocent, sues the shit outta the media.

final example. I took a course in college on WWII. Among the required reading; Mien Kampf. I also own a military-style M-4 Carbine, and a Mossberg M590 military shotgun. I like to keep ammunition on hand, and I keep my hair EXTREMELY short as I did in the airborne. I can just see how the media would play that headline "WHITE SUPEMACIST SKINHEAD FOUND WITH ASSAULT RIFLES: copies of anti-semetic literature found!!!"

god help us.... (end rant)

-- Billy-Boy (Rakkasn@Yahoo.com), October 01, 1999

Answers

BB,

And I don't believe that anything found beyond what was listed on the warrant is legal? (All you lawyer-types care to comment?)

IANAL (I am not a lawyer) but I do know that if they find something not listed on the warrent, it's still fair game for prosectution *IF* they found it while looking for the items listed on the warrent. For example, if the warrent says "M-60 Machine Gun" and they find heroin stuffed into one of your socks, they CANNOT use it because there is no reasonable way for you to hide a machine gun in your sock (ie. they shouldn't have been searching your socks in the first place). However, if they open a closet door and find pot plants, then they CAN use it against you since they reasonably could have been looking for the machine gun in a closet. It really depends on what they are looking for and what they find.

Regarding your complaint with the media, they go for maximum hype to draw viewers, regardless of the truth....

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), October 01, 1999.

Our constitution is being attacked and dismantled. How many people think of our government as "PROTECTOR" of our individual rights? But that is exactly what our constitution is designed to do. Until we take it upon ourselves to study our constitution and know when and how our rights are being violated and the law is being broken, this kind of incident is just going to get worse. We have an organization here in Md. that teaches constitutional law (for free) . They also sponsor radio stations across the country, and are in the process of buying more stations. You can call them a 1-410-876-6342 to find out where they broadcast in your area. We also have a highly courageous woman who broadcast here on WCBM 680 am Balt. each day at 1-3 pm est. Zoh tells it like it is, and like nobody else. You can visit their website at www.wcbm.com

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), October 01, 1999.

Excuse this cut-n-paste job. As always it appears there is more to this story.

Seized guns may not be prohibited WEAPONS: Groundskeeper's lawyer contends raid was retaliation by school district.

October 1, 1999

By JOHN McDONALD, TONY SAAVEDRA and MICHAEL CORONADO

The Orange County Register

SAN CLEMENTE  Authorities spent Thursday trying to determine whether any of the 80 assault-style rifles seized in one of Orange County's largest weapons busts are actually illegal. Investigators from the Orange County Sheriff's Department and the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms were testing the rifles to determine if they are operational, fully automatic or otherwise prohibited by law. The arsenal was seized from the West Marquita home of school groundskeeper Jerry D. Peacock, 43, the target of a theft investigation. Peacock's attorney in a previous civil suit said the rifles are part of a family collection. "His father started the gun collection a long time ago. I think it was when (Peacock) was a child," said attorney Michelle Reinglass. "He's not a Columbine kind of guy. He's not a guy who is out of control." Reinglass said the police raid smacked of retaliation by the Capistrano Unified School District, which lost a sexual-harassment case brought by Peacock and two other workers. The cost to the district was about $800,000, Reinglass said. "This is the absolute ultimate act of retaliation by an employer. His character has been massively maligned," she said. District officials, however, stressed that they called deputies only after receiving a tip from a neighbor that Peacock had district property. Among the district items found at his home were five pairs of safety boots, two ladders, four trash cans and assorted containers, officials said. Peacock remained in jail Thursday on suspicion of possessing stolen property with bail set at $1 million. "We don't consider the items (as) small-ticket at all," said district Superintendent James A. Fleming. "It's public property. The amount of it is less important than the fact it was there." Deputies found the guns, locked in two safes, while searching the home for district property. Also found were hand grenades, machine guns and at least 50,000 rounds of ammunition held in cookie tins and boxes, sheriff's officials said. "I am horrified we would have someone in the employment of the district, on school grounds, with this kind of firepower in his home," Fleming said. He said the district would move to fire Peacock, who has been on disability leave for several months. In September 1997, Peacock and two co-workers were awarded $215,000 in their harassment suit, which alleged they suffered retaliation after reporting that a supervisor committed a lewd act. A judge later ordered the district to pay more than $560,000 in legal fees for the groundskeepers. Reinglass said that during the trial, the district tried to introduce Peacock's gun collection as evidence. "They were trying to show he was a gun-slinging guy. The judge wouldn't allow it," she said. District officials alerted deputies to Peacock's collection, prompting authorities to arrive with a SWAT team Wednesday, district spokeswoman Julie Jennings said. The district, during settlement negotiations, also tried to coax Peacock to resign. The reason, said Fleming, was that Peacock was routinely out on disability. District officials described him as an "average, satisfactory worker," who was often absent. The landscape gardener worked in teams of four, mowing, trimming and maintaining grounds at the school district's 41 elementary, middle and high schools.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), October 01, 1999.

Looking at this situation objectively, I smell a vendetta on the part of the school district. $1,000,000.00 bail on a chicken shit stolen property beef? My guess is that heads will roll and Mr. Peacock will once again be the recipient of the districts money. More ammo anyone?

-- Truth (at@the.ready), October 01, 1999.