Police Confiscate Man's Firearm After Anonymous "Antifa" Members Accuse Him Of B

[Route 45]

Question: if a judge signs off on a search warrant and seizure, is that not due process?

Maybe we should ask a FISA court judge.

 

[chipbennett]

Question: if a judge signs off on a search warrant and seizure, is that not due process?

Please show me where in the fourth amendment that "a judge's sign-off" constitutes the grounds to conduct an otherwise unconstitutional seizure.

The standard is: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation..."

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure I can look up examples of "fruit of the poisoned tree" stemming from insufficient warrants for search and/or seizure, due to lack of probable cause.

 

[JettaKnight]

Please show me where in the fourth amendment that "a judge's sign-off" constitutes the grounds to conduct an otherwise unconstitutional seizure.

The standard is: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation..."

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure I can look up examples of "fruit of the poisoned tree" stemming from insufficient warrants for search and/or seizure, due to lack of probable cause.

SO, Mr. Casarez should have his CZ returned to him on Friday, and Sgt. Grgich should get his wrist slapped?

 

[chipbennett]

SO, Mr. Casarez should have his CZ returned to him on Friday, and Sgt. Grgich should get his wrist slapped?

That depends on whether Mr. Caesarez wants to pursue an allegation of deprivation of rights under color of law against your affiant. I suspect that he won't, assuming his unlawfully seized property has since been returned to him.

 

[KLB]

It seems they both are agenda driven. The latter article an attempt to justify the "why" about removing someone's legally owned firearm because of what he believes or said. Nothing in either article support anything that would violate a law being broken. The entire warrant and Probable Cause is here: https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/search-warrant-andrew-casarez-1595974650.pdf which is so flimsy it would only be signed in Cali.

“This individual had a lengthy history of promoting violence online, targeting minority groups,” Nothing in the PC supports this. He had a DUI arrest...that is his criminal history.

"The sheriff's office said detectives found open-source images online that Casarez posted, displaying "ideals for violence against minorities and called for murder and rape of law enforcement and people of Jewish descent." Nothing in the PC supports this. In fact, the word rape or Jew do not appear, and the word murder only appears when defining another persons actions, not the accused. The word threat is not used in any way to describe the accused other than "his access to firearm(s) make him a realistic threat to the community". "open-source images" is someone else's that was re-posted by the accused. Sounds like he got caught in a honeypot.

"Detectives were told that if we wished to speak with Andrew we would have to go through his attorney, even though he has no known pending criminal charges." sounds like they got bent out of shape and retaliated.

Let's fill in the parts you left out from the second article.

Casarez is known as the leader of the online group "Bowl Patrol," named after domestic terrorist Dylann Roof, who donned a bowl cut haircut when he killed nine people at a church prayer meeting in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015. The sheriff's office described the online group as one "that endorses violence against minorities."

Court documents obtained by KCRA 3 show the sheriff's office began investigating in October 2019 for hate speech on social media and the dark web when they discovered posts by Casarez — using "Vic Mackey" as a moniker — praising Roof's mass shooting.

Casarez also posted comments detectives found that stated he "reloads his own ammunition and was attempting to obtain an '80% AR,' referring to an 80 percent-built AR-15, which would be unregistered and illegal in the state of California."

So, he leads a group that apparently reveres Dylan, the investigations began last October, and he posted his intentions online of trying to break California law by acquiring an 80% lower.

Does any of that mean that the police should have taken these measures? Probably not, unless there were specific threats made that we don't know about.

There is a lot more there though than

Police Confiscate Man's Firearm After Anonymous "Antifa" Members Accuse Him Of Being a "Racist"

Police Confiscate Man's Firearm After Anonymous "Antifa" Members Accuse Him Of Being a "Racist"

 

[KLB]

What I find odd is that the Sacramento County Sheriff was investigating this from last Oct, yet they didn't know who he actually was. I wonder how they knew he was local. Unless of course he said so in one of his posts.

 

[rhrlaw]

IAAL and the "PC" makes me sick to my stomach (but not surprised, total CYA move) that a judge signed off on it. Also, his father is Arturo Cazarez and the search warrant says his kid is "white"...ok....

 

[buckwacker]

The way I see this is if he is that much a danger, why would a court not be permitted to arrest and jail him? If that is a violation of his rights and due process, is not confiscating his firearms on the same grounds also a violation?

 

[2A_Tom]

Is there something significant about gray levi's lol. The same standard they used for this guy "SHOULD" i'm sure be applied to members of BLM and Antifa.

Fixed That For You!!!!

 

[2A_Tom]

So, we don't want dangerous people to have guns, but we don't want police to take them away?

Got it.

No I don't want guns arbitrarily taken away from anyone!

If someone commits a crime they are fair game. That is the threshold for gun confiscation and not in all cases.

 

[2A_Tom]

It's really hard to see just what Mr. Casarez has said, because of lot of it must be on the dark web, but I think it's fair to say it's much more vitriolic than, "bad opinions".

On what evidence?

 

[Somemedic]

Isnt it a bit strange that ANTIFA and LE are working together? A latino white supremacist... and not only did they confiscate his gun but his shirt as well?

This whole thing smells like a big steamer. Way to go Sheriff on tearing corners off the constitution.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Casarez also posted comments detectives found that stated he "reloads his own ammunition and was attempting to obtain an '80% AR,' referring to an 80 percent-built AR-15, which would be unregistered and illegal in the state of California."

he posted his intentions online of trying to break California law by acquiring an 80% lower.

Technically 80% lowers are not illegal in CA, it's only illegal to finish them without first applying for and obtaining a serial number from the state. I'll grant you that he almost certainly had no intention of doing that, but unless he explicitly stated that he wouldn't register it I don't think this rises to the level of proof of criminal intent

 

[Expat]

There have been a couple of these white supremacists lately get arrested that I don't think would have made it in back in the old days.

 

[KLB]

Technically 80% lowers are not illegal in CA, it's only illegal to finish them without first applying for and obtaining a serial number from the state. I'll grant you that he almost certainly had no intention of doing that, but unless he explicitly stated that he wouldn't register it I don't think this rises to the level of proof of criminal intent

That is the problem of course, they don't need to prove criminal intent for these things.

Let me clarify something. I am not saying what was done to this guy was warranted or right. All I was pointing out is that it was not what the original posted article portrayed.

 

[qwerty]

Let's fill in the parts you left out from the second article.



So, he leads a group that apparently reveres Dylan, the investigations began last October, and he posted his intentions online of trying to break California law by acquiring an 80% lower.

Does any of that mean that the police should have taken these measures? Probably not, unless there were specific threats made that we don't know about.

There is a lot more there though than

Please point out the violation of a law in what you quoted.

 

[sempifi99]

https://national-justice.com/police...-probable-cause-after-antifa-doxed-him-racist

Thanks for sharing... only in California could this happen.

 

[2A_Tom]

Please point out the violation of a law in what you quoted.

It is feels now days.

Thanks for sharing... only in California could this happen.

Coming to a dem city near you.

And national law when the dems take office.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Our gun rights are screwed. Hell, even gun owners are supporting this. Sad times in America.

 

[indykid]

Our gun rights are screwed. Hell, even gun owners are supporting this. Sad times in America.

This follows the Fudd problem, that since the Fudd don't use AR-15s as they hunt, why care if the feds or others ban them? I am afraid of the end result if republicans cannot get together and keep the left away from being able to write laws.