Attorney Searched for Gun at Courthouse

[Alamo]

Would a story of county government getting to pay attorney's fees for harassing a guy who complained about their courthouse carry policies cheer you up?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Always.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Always.

I am guessing that they still have the janitor'd closet marked as a courtroom.

 

[cobber]

6. While on the "tour" on May 2, 2017 I noted that there were metal detectors. I asked why. I was told there was a courtroom in the basement of 111 North 4th Street. I went downstairs. There was a dark, locked room with stacked chairs (and a gym for the prosecutors). (IF NO COURTROOM AT 111 NORTH 4TH THEN PUBLIC CAN CARRY IN .GOV BUILDING)

At best two investigators use it on a regular basis. It's not a place one goes to see and be seen, unlike the Y, which attracts the hormonal crowd in droves...

 

[Kirk Freeman]

At best two investigators use it on a regular basis. It's not a place one goes to see and be seen, unlike the Y, which attracts the hormonal crowd in droves...

Cob, you are way too inside baseball. Lol.

As a taxpayer, I am not mad about giving our employees a gym. I think it is a smart idea. Burn off stress, incentive to work past 4:30, etc.

However, I am really mad at the crap that was pulled on me. I think what was done was dangerous and beyond the pale for judicial immunity, but the Court of Appeals disagrees.

 

[Birds Away]

[FONT=&amp]“[J]udicial immunity is granted even when judges act maliciously or corruptly.”[/FONT]

That just warms the cockles of the citizen's heart right there.

 

[WebSnyper]

One cannot carry inside the courthouse. My lawsuit for defamation for being falsely accused of a crime was thrown out because of judicial immunity. The Court of Appeals upheld that decision holding that judicial immunity, even if judge malicious or corrupt, trumps any individual claim.

See if this helps:

1. You cannot legally carry in the Tippecanoe County courthouse.

2. Tippecanoe County purchased 111 North 4th Street from Huntington Bank. 111 North 4th Street is ACROSS THE STREET from the courthouse here.

3. 111 North was to house the Prosecuting Attorney and Public Defender (regular and conflict).

4. 111 North opened in April while I was at the NRAAM in Atlanta 2017.

5. When I returned the Chief Deputy Public Defender invited me over for a tour of 111 North 4th.

6. While on the "tour" on May 2, 2017 I noted that there were metal detectors. I asked why. I was told there was a courtroom in the basement of 111 North 4th Street. I went downstairs. There was a dark, locked room with stacked chairs (and a gym for the prosecutors). (IF NO COURTROOM AT 111 NORTH 4TH THEN PUBLIC CAN CARRY IN .GOV BUILDING)

7. I walked out of 111 North 4th Street to the County Building, Commissioners' Office to fill out a APRA (Indiana's FOIA request) about 111 North 4th Street the same day, May 2nd.

8. Pinner comes out May 9, 2017. I put the decision on my Facebook blog and then 2 days later link Guy Relford's article on Pinner. No comments either time. Several attorneys ask me questions about Pinner in the courthouse for several days after it is out, IIRC mostly drug cases, stops, frisks, inter alia.

9. May 17, 2017 I am asked to step into a bathroom.

10. Sheriff deputies clam up over who made false report that I was carrying gun. I file ITR27 to depose cops.

11. Newspaper breaks story that it was Tricia Thompson. I confirm with Sheriff Richard that it was indeed Tricia Thompson who made false report. Judge Busch, Circuit Court, denied my 27.

12. A criminal complaint is made about the false report. No action taken.

13. I sue in Tippecanoe Superior Court 4 for defamation June 2018.

14. October 2018 Special Judge grants defendant's motion to dismiss because of judicial immunity.

15. I appeal and we now have Court of Appeals decision which I may or may not ask Indiana Supreme Court to review.

Quoted, because I think that is the most clear post I have ever read from Kirk...

Keep us posted on point 15.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Quoted, because I think that is the most clear post I have ever read from Kirk...

Keep us posted on point 15.

If it helps I can throw in some Roman history, arcane gun culture references, advanced economic theory, legal reasoning, analogies from English literature, projectile motion references or Jeff Cooper quotations to make it more Kirk Freeman

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Quoted, because I think that is the most clear post I have ever read from Kirk...

Keep us posted on point 15.

LOL!

It's funny because it's true.

 

[Alamo]

Would a story of county government getting to pay attorney's fees for harassing a guy who complained about their courthouse carry policies cheer you up?

Always.

Background: In Texas it is illegal for state and local government entities (hereafter "governmental entities") to prohibit licensed carry on property they own or lease, with a few exceptions delineated in state law. Prisons, state mental hospitals (10 of them listed by name in the statutes), secure area of a police station (but not the public access areas), and a few others including court rooms. The statute provides a mechanism to complain to the State Attorney General if a government entity posts a sign or otherwise refuses to allow licensed carry. The citizen can write a letter to the governmental entity challenging the ban, and if they refuse to remove it, the citizen can forward the complaint to the State AG. The AG investigates and if the governmental entity is breaking the law, the AG will issue a "cure letter", and if that is ignored, he can take them to court to have civil fines levied.

There is a dispute about whether the exception for court rooms covers the entire building that the court is in, or only the court room (and "offices utilized by the court" i.e. judge's chambers). The State AG says only the courtroom, some counties say it's the entire building. There are some cases in the judicial pipeline about this.


Waller County, however, decided to short circuit the statutory process. When a local gun activist complained in writing, per the statute, to the County about their ban of licensed carry in the court house, the County turned around and sued the activist for a declaratory judgment about the meaning of the law, included seeking court costs and attorney's fees from him. The case was of course heard in front of a local judge who didn't want licensed carry in the courthouse, and SURPRISE, he ruled against the activist as well as issuing a declaratory judgment that state law prevented licensed carry in the entire courthouse.

The activist appealed to the next level, and Waller County got smacked down for lack of jurisdiction and under the Texas anti-SLAPP law called the Texas Citizen Participation Act, TCPA. The appellate court sent the case back to the trial court for the sole purpose of determining court costs, attorney's fees, and other reasonable costs to be awarded to the activist. And Waller has to pay appellate court costs as well.

Waller County appealed to the SCOTEX which denied review.

I don't know if Waller County has coughed up its dollars yet, it is hard to track these things at the county level once they fall out of the news, but at least Terry Holcomb (the activist) is off the hook and Waller got a smack on the head.

 

[WebSnyper]

LOL!

It's funny because it's true.

[video=youtube_share;oA8hn1w_Nd0]https://youtu.be/oA8hn1w_Nd0[/video]

 

[historian]

Sorry. The Appeals court made me think of this:

 

[JettaKnight]

Sorry. The Appeals court made me think of this:

We have a poker game variant with that title... I forget exactly how it's played, but I think a Jack gives you diplomatic immunity (must be accompanied by a dramatic expression of the phrase), if you get a black ace, "It's just been revoked", and your hand is dead.

 

[actaeon277]

Sorry. The Appeals court made me think of this:

I also thought of that.

And an expression I've said a LOT lately..
Vigilantism is what occurs when the population loses faith in the Justice System.

 

[Trigger Time]

Judges protecting judges. Im not surprised. Disappointed but not surprised.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Judges protecting judges. Im not surprised. Disappointed but not surprised.

Yep. Today its that judge. Tomorrow it could be them. They arent going to rule in favor of Kirk because that judgement would just tie a noose for them in the future that could be used if the time comes.

This will only change legislatively. No way in hell judges are going to take away their own protections.

 

[historian]

So...appealing?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Despite my shock of the Court of Appeals unwillingness to consider a bad faith exception to judicial immunity, I declined to seek review by the Indiana Supreme Court.

Given the broad immunity given a judge, even one acting in malicious retaliation for a lawful action of a fellow attorney, going up on transfer would only give further support to judges behaving badly getting judicial immunity.

 

[jamil]

So let me see if I can translate the lawspeak. Probably gonna lose because judges’ **** don’t stink. And if you lose then it’s kinda like a precedent set for judges **** to not stink even more.

 

[Trigger Time]

Despite my shock of the Court of Appeals unwillingness to consider a bad faith exception to judicial immunity, I declined to seek review by the Indiana Supreme Court.

Given the broad immunity given a judge, even one acting in malicious retaliation for a lawful action of a fellow attorney, going up on transfer would only give further support to judges behaving badly getting judicial immunity.

Damn. I wanted to see this judge ousted for abuse of power and ethics.
Looks like the good ole boy club circled the wagons fast enough and protected one of their own. The good guys lost this round but the good guy didn't take it lying down like a chump amd thats still a victory imo. Most people just take it with no lube and dont fight back.kirk stood up for what was right and that deserved to be applauded