Just more nonsense - honeymooners nabbed in Atlanta

L

labgrade

Member In Memoriam
Just more nonsense .... figured I'd pass it along. We ARE the good guys & act as such. What the hell does any of these stupid laws have to do with "us!?" Even when acting in good faith, we still get banged.

Time to start turning all this crap around, folks.

BTW, sorry if no links works - didn't try any of 'em - just did a clean-up of an e-mail forward.
---------------------
http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/today/local_news_9
http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/today/local_news_9>
3b247355175c1680035.html

This is just one more example of the Gestapo attitude of the government...

(name removed for privacy = e-mail forward)

New bride finds pistol in bag, then self in jail

Lyda Longa - Staff Wednesday, May 24, 2000

What was to have been the happiest weekend of Alison Reed's life instead landed the University of Arkansas student in the Atlanta City Jail.

Reed had just gotten married and was on her way through Atlanta to her honeymoon in Mexico. She arrived at Hartsfield International Airport on Sunday with her new husband --- and a .22-caliber pistol.

Reed and her groom, Jason Combs, discovered her little faux pax as they sat in the international concourse after a flight from Little Rock.

Alarmed because she didn't pack the pistol and had no idea where it came from, Reed dutifully reported her deadly discovery to a security guard. The guard called the Atlanta police and minutes later, Reed was arrested and placed in a holding cell at Hartsfield. Four hours later, instead of frolicking on the seashore, she was in the city jail.

According to Atlanta Maj. M. Lee Brooks, Reed told officers the gun belongs to her mother because the carry-on bag also belongs to her. Tommie Reed confirmed the gun is hers, saying she uses it on weekends to shoot snakes at the family farm.

Reed said she remembered being asked by security guards at the Little Rock airport to walk through the checkpoint twice, but said that guards there never checked her bag. Security officials at the Little Rock airport refused to answer questions regarding the breach of security.

Atlanta police said they felt badly about Reed's predicament because the newlywed acted in good faith, but won't apologize. Brooks said Reed's innocent intent wasn't enough to overcome the airport's "zero tolerance policy regarding weapons."

A Municipal Court judge did temper justice with mercy on Monday, dropping the charge so the honeymooners could catch a noon plane to Cancun.

"They're just now getting over this ordeal," said the bride's mother. "I hope they're having a good time."
 
S

Slowpoke_Rodrigo

New member
UPDATE

Airport gun arrest backfires
Officer defied order: When honeymooner tried to turn over gun, police squabbled over response.
Lyda Longa - Staff
Thursday, May 25, 2000


Before an Arkansas newlywed was arrested at Hartsfield International Airport last weekend after telling authorities she had found a gun in her luggage, Atlanta police had some obstacles to overcome --- namely one of their own police officers, who refused to charge the woman, and a Clayton County judge, who refused to issue a warrant for her arrest.

"The officer became very emotional and he said he would not arrest this girl," said Maj. M.L. Brooks, commander of Atlanta's airport unit. "He yelled at his supervisor."

The officer, whose name was not released Wednesday, did not agree that 20-year-old Alison Reed of Alexander, Ark., should be arrested Sunday at Hartsfield.

Reed, who had just gotten married eight hours earlier and was on her way to Cancun through Atlanta, had discovered a .22-caliber pistol wedged in her carry-on bag.

The gun belongs to her mother, Tommie Reed, who had forgotten the weapon was there when she loaned the bag to her daughter.

When Reed, a student at the University of Arkansas, found the gun, she immediately reported it to a security guard who in turn called police.

"The officer called his supervisor and told him he was faced with a situation he did not know how to handle," Brooks said. "His sergeant called a lieutenant, and the lieutenant told them to arrest Ms. Reed. He should have followed the order and discussed it with his supervisor later."

That didn't happen, and Sgt. S. Hutchins had to send in a second officer to arrest Reed.

The first officer in the meantime was relieved of duty for the day, Brooks said.

But the Atlanta officer wasn't the only one on Reed's side.

Clayton County Magistrate Judge John Campbell said Atlanta police called him shortly after they nabbed the newlywed. The officer was seeking an arrest warrant from Campbell so Reed could be taken to the Clayton County Jail.

"I did not feel there was probable cause for an arrest warrant," Campbell said. "The police did nothing wrong or unusual, but there was no probable cause."

The officer is now under investigation for refusing to follow an order and possibly for insubordination, said Chip Warren, vice president of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers.

"The officer believed he was receiving an improper order," Warren said Wednesday.

"My concern is, the girl did the right thing. What's going to happen to other people faced with this same situation?"

Reed --- honeymooning at last in Cancun with her husband, Jason Combs --- laughed about her experience Wednesday.

"At least I know there was one person in that Police Department that wanted to help me. I tried do do the right thing, and they put me through hell. This makes you wonder what to do the next time."
 
S

Skyhawk

New member
Didn’t we have a recent incident where a Texas state Representative was briefly “detained” at an airport for a similar event? Seems that he had no “intent” and was released without penalty. What happened to “equal justice”?

Skyhawk
 
4

45King

New member
Skyhawk-
Sometime last year, former SC Gov. Caroll Campbell was briefly detained at the Greenville/Spartanburg, SC airport because a .357 revolver was found in his carry on bag when he sent it through the Xray machine at the security checkpoint. He explained to the authorities that there were two similar bags in the trunk of his car, and being in a hurry, he had accidentlly grabbed the wrong one without realizing his mistake. After a few hours of deliberation, airport authorities released him without pressing charges, because they decided that "he had no criminal intent."
Remember guys, the "zero tolerance policy" is not "policy," it's federal law. Anyone who attempts to bring a firearm aboard a commercial flight without checking it through baggage is in violation of federal law, period (unless he's a LEO who declares the weapon and turns it over to security who in turn give it to the captain of the flight who will then reverse the procedure at the LEO's destination.)
Campbell's revolver was returned to him a few weeks after the incident.

Bulls**t with "who you know", it IS who you are.

Notice, too, that in this particular case, the cops decided to play judge and jury. I had always been under the impression that deciding the criminality of actions was up to the courts, not the police. (Sarasm on.) Why don't we just do away with the court system and have the cops decide who's guilty and who's innocent? We could save a lot of time and money that way. Of course, a few(?) innocnet people would suffer, but hey, what do you want, law and order, or freedom? (Sarcasm off.)


------------------
Shoot straight & make big holes, regards, Richard at The Shottist's Center
 
P

Piggy

New member
Pretty clever slowpoke; gave me a good chuckle. I think you may be in the physics books too much though : ) However, as my old professors would say, "check your units" a proportionality constant may be in order : )

[This message has been edited by Piggy (edited May 26, 2000).]
 
T

TEX

New member
This is exactly why zero tolerance policys are a problem. Administrative idiots think that they can replace common sense and good judgement with these zero tolerance policys.

What the officer should have done, if he thought the girl was sincere, was simply escort the couple to a nice quiet room or area. Then take poossesion of the firearm and help the couple go through their carry on stuff to be sure there would not be any more problems. He then should have asked for the mothers name, address and phone number, and told the girl that he would see to it that the pistol got back to her mother or that he would hold on to it and they could pick it up when they returned after their honeymoon. He could have walked them out to their car, taxi or bus after securing in their luggage after their return. This is called good judgement, reasonablness, compassion and (SURPRISE!) simply good law enforcement. I don't see that he needed to get a supervisor involved at all. I am proud of him for refusing to run someone through the ringer that had no evil intend. I compliment the judge also. The supervisor should be demoted. Just my 2 cents

TEX

[This message has been edited by TEX (edited May 28, 2000).]
 
J

jimpeel

New member
American jurisprudence was founded on three things to prove guilt; method or means, motive or intent, and opportunity. If a person were carrying a concealed weapon, in contravention to the law, and they got caught; the prosecutor would seek to prove that they were guilty of the crime by means alone. Surely, an armed man has the means to destruction and he surely has the opportunity at every meeting of a fellow human being. The thing that they would lack would be a motive. But these days, there is no need to prove motive.

The best example of the death of motive are zero tolerance laws. A kid goes to school and gives another girl Midol for ladies cramps and is deemed guilty and thrown out of school. Another kid uses his Swiss Army knife to tighten a screw on a computer case and is thrown out of school. A kid hands out lemon drop candies and the authorities think it is drugs and panic. He is thrown out of school. A girl picks up the wrong lunch bag and is thrown out of school. A kid takes nail clippers to school and is thrown out of school. The common thread of these young people is that they had no motive to act in an aberrant manner. The means was there. The opportunity was there. There simply was no motive. This is also the example that has been set in Atlanta.

More and more this has crept into the justice system wherein the accused need only have means and opportunity and they are found guilty. DO NOT ever bring a case before me that lacks the three tenets of the judicial finding of guilt as I will not convict. I have a brain that is quite developed and I know the difference between right and wrong. I also know that there are things that must be proven prior to simply saying "Hang the defendant!"

------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
 
J

jimpeel

New member
The original story from the 24th may now be found at http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/wednesday/local_news_93b247355175c1680035.html and should be active for 2 more days before falling off into the paid archive. The followup story from the 25th may now be found at http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/thursday/local_news_93c21cc54666610700c7.html and should fall off into the paid archives in about 3 more days.

While you are there, also be sure to read the story at http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/thursday/local_news_93c21cd4466602310007.html which should fall off at about the same time. It is about a Boy Scout that was suspended from school for having an ax, Swiss Army knife, and cell phone in his car. Weren't cell phones what first got the attention of the cops at Columbine?

------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
 
A

ak9

New member
Thank God she found it in this country. If they had found in Mexico- well lets just say her husband would not have been the one sleeping in the bed with her on the wedding night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top