Firearms agitator still waiting to fight gun charge (Embody case)

[K191145]

Especially since Voldemort did nothing wrong, right?

 

Nothing "against the law" in this case. Being an idiot is not against the law.

[Oh Shoot]

By the time the judge was ruling, the proper registration paperwork had been seen (presumably by the judge and others), and the proper registration of the suppressor had likely been confirmed with BATFE, therefor no state law had been violated. At the time of the arrest, however, Lenny declined to show any sort of evidence of his affirmative defense (proper registration).

 
In an Aug. 15 court hearing, Metro police admitted they saw the permit in the case where the rifle and silencer were being stored.
 
The judge at arraignment hearing refused to even view the NFA documents that Lenny brought with him.
 

Is it the same "oops, you're an idiot, you're free to go" judge?

 

That I don't know, not gonna look for the arraignment hearing writeup.
 
 
- OS

[Dustbuster]

They were dropped because the judge knows the law. The judge also advised him on the perils of being stupid. Let's see if he does it again....,

[Sam1]

noticed his FFL is up next year, am curious to see if all of his shenanigans will play into that not being renewed as well.

[Murgatroy]

noticed his FFL is up next year, am curious to see if all of his shenanigans will play into that not being renewed as well.

I thought he lost his FFL already over all of this?

[TripleDigitRide]

I thought he lost his FFL already over all of this?

No. He lost is handgun carry permit. After he lost that, he decided to get his FFL and become a dealer.

[Oh Shoot]

No. He lost is handgun carry permit. After he lost that, he decided to get his FFL and become a dealer.

 

Then he lost his FFL after the arrest under discussion.

 

- OS

[TripleDigitRide]

Then he lost his FFL after the arrest under discussion.

 

- OS

Oops! I didn't know that.

[mikegideon]

Oops! I didn't know that.

 

Not very kwik there, TDR :). They pounded the boy pretty hard this time around. Can't say that I blame them.

Edited August 29, 2014 by mikegideon

[TripleDigitRide]

Then he lost his FFL after the arrest under discussion.

 

- OS

After a little digging, he claims that his FFL was not suspended or revoked. He never violated any BATFE regulations. From what I gather, his FFL business was operating out of the home he lost, so he gave up the FFL for the time being. He has plans of re-obtaining an 07FFL and SOT once this is resolved.  :shrug:  

The felony criminal charge against me played no part in my decision to close. By that I mean that my FFL was not suspended or revoked. I was under no administrative action by the BATFE. I have never violated any BATFE regulation. When the charges are resolved look for me to come back with an 07FFL and SOT.

Edited August 29, 2014 by TripleDigitRide

[mikegideon]

After a little digging, he claims that his FFL was not suspended or revoked. He never violated any BATFE regulations. From what I gather, his FFL business was operating out of the home he lost, so he gave up the FFL for the time being. He has plans of re-obtaining an 07FFL and SOT once this is resolved.  :shrug:  

 

That makes sense. If the gov'ment will let Obama be president, I guess they're more than happy to let Voldemort sell machine guns :)

[TripleDigitRide]

That makes sense. If the gov'ment will let Obama be president, I guess they're more than happy to let Voldemort sell machine guns :)

He may be wanting to get his FFL back, but whether they give it to him or not is a different story. He wanted his HCP back, and we all know how well that didn't work out for him.

[TMF]

The problem with this guy is he's just smart enough not to get himself shot.  Oh well, one can dream.

[Sam1]

Then he lost his FFL after the arrest under discussion.

 

- OS

 

Oh I thought it said in the document that it expired in 2015, didn't know they already pulled it too

[Oh Shoot]

All that he said about his voluntarily giving up his FFL is perhaps (likely?) not true. Being under criminal felony indictment, he could no longer receive firearms even as an individual, let alone as FFL, and he stated so on his site at the time.

 

I'd wager at least a breakfast the ATF was notified and they pulled it.

 

- OS

[monkeylizard]

How many people that 12 people on a  jury would give a woman 4 million dollars for dumping hot coffee from McDonalds on her own lap when she knew it was hot and it was marked Contents are Hot on the lid. Don't count this guy out yet.  There have been quite a few people have jury's give some pretty incredible money figures to over recent years for a lot less than this guy had done.   I bet Metro winds up settling out of court if he does sue rather than look like the fools they really were with this case.......jmho

 

Get the facts.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

 

I'd have given her the money too, and I'd bet most people would too after they get the facts.

[E4 No More]

Unless she ask for Ice Coffee which they did not offer at the time of the law suit common knowledge is you ask for coffee it will be hot.  And McDonalds has had the words Contents are hot on them for as long as I can remember........... :shrug: :shrug:

It wasn't that the contents were hot; it was that they were near boiling causing 2nd degree burns of her junk. I have been handed drinks by the employees of restaurants many times that didn't have the lid on properly. That caused a Route 44 to plop right into my lap. Fortunately, it was cold. I would have sued too if I was her.

[E4 No More]

Personally, I wonder why they just didn't charge him with disorderly conduct?

[TrickyNicky]

I got 2nd and 3rd degree burns on my entire chest when I was about 5 or so from a cup of boiling hot chocolate at the local Winchells Donuts. As bad as it was, my parents didn't sue. Talking to them years later it seems 1. Litigation was not as predominant as it is now. 2. My mother took personal responsibility for not checking temperature. 3. I popped the lid off myself.

No my story is very different in some key areas, but one thing I can tell you, memory of the smell I smelled whenever they changed my body cast alone would have me awarding her a settlement in a heartbeat if it could be established that the accident was caused by negligence other than her own. Easy 2 mil, and that's just from the smell, I don't remember the pain except drifting in and out coherentness in the way to the hospital with my older sister crying and begging me not to die.


As to Em body, I'm torn. He got exactly what he had coming to him and it surely isn't like he was blissfully ignorant either. Even still, a wrongful arrest is a wrongful arrest. It sucks that his stupidity has cost him his likelyhood, but again he's at least a player in his own demise. I'll let the system decide what's best here. I'm torn.

[TMF]

Looks to me like he found exactly what he was looking for. That is the reason I wouldn't give him a dime if I were sitting on the jury for his sure to come civil trial.

What he did is akin to standing out in the rain and acting surprised when he got wet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[monkeylizard]

I'm torn as well. I agree with the others here who think the cops acted in a reasonable manner and the the real failure is on the DA and the first judge. That makes it a wrongful arrest, but one that could have been quickly rectified at that first stop along the way to where we are now.

 

I also agree that he was straight up looking for this kind of confrontation.

 

If I controlled the civil trial jury, I'd probably find in his favor and award him $1.

Edited August 29, 2014 by monkeylizard

[Glock30]

I'm torn as well. I agree with the others here who think the cops acted in a reasonable manner and the the real failure is on the DA and the first judge. That makes it a wrongful arrest, but one that could have been quickly rectified at that first stop along the way to where we are now.

 

I also agree that he was straight up looking for this kind of confrontation.

 

If I controlled the civil trial jury, I'd probably find in his favor and award him $1.

 

I'd pay him a dollar out of my own pocket if it meant he shut up and went away.

[Chucktshoes]

If I controlled the civil trial jury, I'd probably find in his favor and award him $1.

I like the sentiment, but I think it would fail to achieve the ends of forcing the city to make sure they do right. I don't want Embody to be rewarded for his fishing expedition, but I also want the city to be heavily sanctioned for placing themselves on his hook. How do you sufficiently sanction the latter in such a manner that they don't do it again while not rewarding the former? I find myself having to take the position that malfeasance by the state is a worse crime than being a fucking douchebag.

[mikegideon]

I'm torn as well. I agree with the others here who think the cops acted in a reasonable manner and the the real failure is on the DA and the first judge. That makes it a wrongful arrest, but one that could have been quickly rectified at that first stop along the way to where we are now.

 

I also agree that he was straight up looking for this kind of confrontation.

 

If I controlled the civil trial jury, I'd probably find in his favor and award him $1.

 

Will they even accept evidence in an arraignment hearing? I thought no.

[JayC]

First, folks are reading this opinion the wrong way...  The motion to dismiss seems to be the first motion this judge ruled on...  While the judge chooses to add a lot of color commentary to the opinion... none of that matters...  All that matters was he dismissed the case..  and that is a good thing.  

 

Keep in mind a lot of other issues were not covered by this order...  They never considered a motion over the search of the locked container...  Over the probable cause on whether the rifle was loaded, and even if it was load was Leonard in violation of the law...  The specific probable cause to believe the silencer was illegal to begin with...  

 

If he survives summary judgement of a 1983 lawsuit...  he's likely to have a field day with MNPD and TDOS as part of the discovery process...  What people knew and when did they know it will become a key point I suspect...  all sorts of interesting facts could come out that might embarrass those 2 departments.

 

He can show real damages this time, loss of his business, and loss of his job...  

 

I see MNPD having some issues:

 

1.  The search was likely unconstitutional under current case law, locked case, they had control of it, and still ripped it open to get a look inside before having a warrant...  they're on record saying they did that to verify if the weapon was loaded or not...  I don't see how they fit into a valid exigent circumstance to perform the search...  If found to have been an unlawful search, the arrest is likely in question to begin with.

 

2. The contention that he was a threat...  We've all seen video tape of news reporters walking up to Leonard between the 2nd and 3rd stops that day...  and having significant conversation/interview with the news...  The police appear to have testified they were aware of this interaction and used that as an excuse to stop him a 3rd and final time...  Not sure how they're going to be able to reasonably say he was threaten when a news crew felt comfortable enough to approach him on a sidewalk, and have a 5+ minute chat with him...  I'm also curious what type of information maybe found during discovery...  if there is even a HINT that they stopped him a third time because he was talking to reporters...  that may open the department up to a bigger lawsuit.  I'm a little surprised that angle wasn't pushed even more during the testimony over the motion to dismiss, it seems the officer opened himself up to the line of questioning by mentioning the press as a reason for greater alarm.

 

3. The handing out of literature may well give rise to a possible prior restraint violation... 

 

Leonard is an idiot...  he's IMHO not a very good lawsuit fisherman... 

 

But at the end of the day it's likely that MNPD and possibly TDOS violated his rights that day...  the video and audio evidence in any civil case is going to make it hard for officers to prove he was a threat to them or anybody else...  he wasn't abusive to them, he was handing out 2nd amendment literature, and stated that was his intent for being dressed the way he was and carrying the rifle case...  Since TDOS clearly knew who he was at the 2nd stop...  and one can assume they knew he had a history of shall we say legally exercising his 2nd amendment rights...  it's going to be hard to prove everything after they became aware of that fact is going to be lawful...

 

IMHO he shouldn't have a problem finding a good attorney to take this case...  minimum it's got to be worth 50-100k and if they survive summary judgement at the federal level, it's likely to be worth over a million.