How should I go about this...?

[PTK]

This incident, this quote:

If you were handcuffed, you were effectively detained for suspicion of lawful activity. The police acknowledge that you didn't break any laws. You were standing in a checkout line when they walked in, so there was nothing to give rise to a "reasonable suspicion based on clearly articulable facts" (Terry stop language) that a crime was being committed or was about to be committed. Therefore, legally they didn't really have any right to lay a finger on you. In fact, since the incident didn't meet the criteria for a Terry stop or a Terry frisk, they had no right to disarm you even if it was for their safety. You really REALLY should sue them for false imprisonment.

How would I go about this? They told me repeatedly that I was not arrested, but that I wasn't free to go. What should I do? I would certainly like legal recourse toward the officers involved if any is possible, even if they're just told "DON'T DO THAT AGAIN!"

 

[NavajoNPaleFace]

You are asking this forum, in general, about advice involving Colorado laws that only a Coloradan (preferrably a Lawyer) could answer.

My advice is get an Attorney if you look for a factual answer.

I can tell you this, in most states, law enforcement have every right to detain anyone they might deem a "suspect" even if that "suspect" is later allowed to leave due to insufficient proof or reasonable belief for an arrest.

Your situation is unfortunate and I empathize with you. But if you are looking to get even get an Attorney and your wallet out.

MHO

 

[Ergosphere]

Contact a lawyer. You have cause for a lawsuit, though I think it's likely you'll be told it's not worth pursuing. Your other avenue is to file a formal complaint with the department, but IMO those rarely lead to any substantial corrective action.

 

[cbrgator]

+1 on getting a lawyer. And if you are truly curious, do some research on exactly what false imprisonment entails.

 

[PTK]

Ok, I'll be contacting a lawyer in the AM it seems. Thanks folks!

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

whats your goal? cash? or principle? are your feelings easily hurt?

 

[PTK]

I'd like the police in Lakewood, Colorado to be reminded that carrying a gun =/= "causing public alarm" and that it certainly isn't, in and of itself, a cause for what happened to me.

I suppose that would be filed under principles.

 

[Kind of Blued]

PTK, I was told last week by the former Police Chief of Arvada (and Aurora before) of a couple of resources through which, if a complaint is filed, the departments HAVE to investigate the incident and write you a letter personally explaining their findings and their planned interior resolution. I could ask him about it again and see what he says.

I honestly wish YOU had the chance to talk with him about this incident. He's prosecuted quite a few of his OWN officers on ethical motivation and of course, legal grounds.

 

[PTK]

PM me with details, if you would.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I can tell you this, in most states, law enforcement have every right to detain anyone they might deem a "suspect" even if that "suspect" is later allowed to leave due to insufficient proof or reasonable belief for an arrest.

Yes, police may detain "suspects" for investigation. But in order for there to be a "suspect," there has to be a reasonable suspicion "based on clearly articulable facts" that a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed. PTK was carrying legally, so there could be no justifiable suspicion "based on clearly articulable facts" that any crime had been committed or was being committed. Therefore, detention was not legally justified.

Google up "Terry stop" and "Terry frisk" for further information.

 

[deaconkharma]

careful though

in some places (I am no Colorado Lawyer) exposure of weapon can equate to brandishing. Could have been said you showed it... Hey don't shoot the mesenger but stranger things have been twisted... Wasn't it colorado that said Concealed Weapon when the poor guy had it in a case in the hotel recently?
It's your money though, just be prepared for either eventuality.

 

[shotgun12321]

I live in Lakewood as well.. and the cops around here are more.....on edge, i guess you could say, than others i have seen.

But of course, if he had the gun in a holster with the correct paperwork, I do not see any reason why they should have done this.

 

[mgkdrgn]

This incident, this quote:
They told me repeatedly that I was not arrested, but that I wasn't free to go.

Contradiction in terms. It's either one or the other, not both. You are either under arrest, or free to go.

If you try to go, and they stop you, then the next words out of your mouth should be "I would like a lawyer present".

 

[PTK]

If you try to go, and they stop you, then the next words out of your mouth should be "I would like a lawyer present".

I'll keep that in mind if this ever happens again. I knew I forgot part of what to do.... :banghead:

 

[novaDAK]

actually there is a condition between arrested and free to go. It's called "detainment" where you are not being arrested (yet...) and not free to go.

 

[rino451]

Wasn't there a lawsuit settled recently where a similar thing happened? He was arrested and then released for carrying or somesuch.

ETA I guess the duestion is whether carrying is grounds for detainment. Unfortunately, I suspect that anyone can be detained for any reason these days.

 

[mgkdrgn]

actually there is a condition between arrested and free to go. It's called "detainment" where you are not being arrested (yet...) and not free to go.

Is there a time limit to this "detainment"?

Can they use what you say during this "detainment" against you?

Do you have a right to council during this "detainment"?

Personally, I'd still go with the council of the guys that taught my CCW class (one former state LEO, and one former FBI officer) "Never pass up the opportunity to shut the f**k up."

 

[PTK]

I didn't manage to contact a lawyer today. Tomorrow seems more likely. I'll keep you all posted as much/little as she advises.

 

[scottgun]

I don't think that you have a case. The store called the cops on you, the cops show up, what do you think they are going to do? Yes, cuff you and then ask you questions. I did read your main post, and while it doesn't sound like a pleasant situation, the cops didn't do anything that merits a lawsuit. The cops aren't the ones who caused a public alarm, they just responded. IMO.

 

[TexasRifleman]

The store called the cops on you

He says a shopper did, not the store.

Nit picky maybe but I think it changes things a little vs the store calling.

I can't see why they would cuff anyone. 12 officers surrounding him?

One officer: "Do you have a firearm on you?"

PTK: "Yes, I do and I have a permit to carry concealed"

Officer "May I see the permit, do not touch the gun".

PTK "Here is my permit"

Officer "Your gun was exposed and a citizen saw it.

a. You need to be more careful, have a nice day
b. You are under arrest for brandishing (which ever)

I can't see any reason for it to play out any other way. What they did may very well turn out to be legal, but it certainly seems like a power trip.

If someone called in saying there was a shooting at Wal Mart THAT person should be arrested and charged with making a false report.

 

[Torchman]

Detainment is most certainly legal. In my CG career I was trained, used it, and TAUGHT it to younger members routinely. Hypothetical...As a FEDERAL LEO, you stop someone with a STATE warrant. As FEDERAL...you do not have ARREST authority. So...you are not just gonna send them on their merry way...you DETAIN until the STATE authorities arrive to ARREST. What does that detainment look like? Handcuffs, full search (every pocket elephant eared) shoes removed, etc. I would never transfer a suspect to another agency knowing they MIGHT have a "bad thing" on them. But they were just DETAINED at this point.
Here is where the rubber meets the road. Its called the TWO PRONG TEST.
Is the subject in a CUSTODIAL situation?
Is the subject being asked incriminating questions?
If I cuffed and searched you to hold for the Staters...I WILL NOT question you...I already have PC to hold you..let THEM deal with it. If I want to TALK to you about the crime...this is where RIGHTS ADVISE must be given ("Miranda warning" is passe, it went out years ago, although it is exactley the same). So..as has been stated...you WILL NOT talk your way out of cuffs...EVER. If you get hooked up..SHUT UP! Be polite, answer non incriminating questions, (I would always ask if they were comfortable..get them a drink etc...that is NOT INCRIMINATING). Saying "Lawyer Lawyer Lawyer...is frickin ANNOYING...if all I asked was did you see the Seahawks yesterday?

Use common sense and be smarter than the guys holding you...most of the time its not that tough

 

[Torchman]

+1 to TexasRifleman....it was a non issue gone bad

 

[poor_richard]

All this time, I'm sitting there in handcuffs (my back hurts) and asking "Am I under arrest?" to which the response was "No, you're being detained for our safety."

I don't think that you have a case. The store called the cops on you, the cops show up, what do you think they are going to do? Yes, cuff you and then ask you questions. I did read your main post, and while it doesn't sound like a pleasant situation, the cops didn't do anything that merits a lawsuit. The cops aren't the ones who caused a public alarm, they just responded. IMO.

Actually, it sounds like you have an excellent case, and most certainly should pursue it. You didn’t do to bad by asking if you were under arrest. They made a big mistake in stating that the reason they were detaining you was “for their safety.” They may only detain you upon reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed, about to be committed, or has been committed, and they must be able to articulate that RS. “Officer safety” does not meet that requirement (RS). Furthermore, carrying a gun may or may not constitute RS. It’s always important to ask the officer what crime they are detaining you under suspicion.

Always remember to ask:

1. Under suspicion of what crime am I being detained for?
2. What is your “reasonable suspicion”? (if they state that someone saw you with a gun, or if it’s just that, “you have a gun”, be sure to ask if that is the extent of their RS, or if there is anything else. The reason for this is that (depending upon jurisdiction), a gun in and of itself may not constitute RS).
3. Am I free to go?

[/LIST]​

Wash, rinse, repeat.

According to your original post, these officers were inept enough to tell you that they were illegally detaining you (“officer safety“ is not a crime). Don’t discuss this with anyone else except your lawyer. It might even be advisable to delete your posts and comments. Definitely tell your lawyer what you’ve posted here so he/she may make that call. If your lawyer can’t see that what happened was actionable, find a better lawyer. They illegally detained you, and admitted to it (providing your original account was accurate).

 

[novaDAK]

Is there a time limit to this "detainment"?
I'm not sure but I think there is.

Can they use what you say during this "detainment" against you?
Yes. At any time.
Do you have a right to council during this "detainment"?
I don't know. Best to keep quiet anyways.
Personally, I'd still go with the council of the guys that taught my CCW class (one former state LEO, and one former FBI officer) "Never pass up the opportunity to shut the f**k up."

Agreed ^^.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

if you endup in court you will need to convince a jury, not made up of thr members, that just because you carry 3 guns concealed you are not a nut and the cops didn't need to be concerned. i suspect the lawyers aren't gonna fist fight to get this case so be prepared to pay for one. i evaluate a case by whether the lawyer wants cash up front or a piece of the action. good luck they will be inclined to dig and display anything that could be construed to cast you in an unfavorable light. if you are not ready/able to endure that you need to think it over. you'd be surprised what they can dredge up