Need Some Legal Advice

[gsxrjunkie]

Greetings,I have several questions and this post may be long so please take the time to read it all as my freedom is at stake.thank you.

I was arrested for posession of a "tire checker"

http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/de...0982&ppt=C0192

i have started a few posts on law forums but as far as im concerned the replies are from lawyers who are part of the sham.so here i would like some real answers.thanks.
here are the posts that i started

http://forum.freeadvice.com/other-cr...ld-580149.html

http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143659

here are my points

United States v. McAfee, 8 F.3d 1010, 1014-15 (5th Cir. 1993)(“The Government must show that the statements are
so irreconcilable that one of the statements is ‘necessarily false.’ We find the Fourth Circuit’s explanation of §1623(c)
instructive and adopt the standard set forth in United States v. Flowers, 813 F.2d 1320 (4th Cir. 1987). In Flowers, the
court concluded that subsection 1623(c) ‘requires a variance in testimony that extends beyond mere vagueness,
uncertainty, or equivocality. Even though two declarations may differ from one another, the §1623(c) standard is not
met unless taking them into context, they are so different that if one is true there is no way the other can also be true.’”
Id. at 1324; see also United States v. Porter, 994 F.2d 470 (8th Cir. 1993)).


Here are the inconsistincies in the officers statements:

1. Officer stated in the police report and testifying under oath that i stated that i told them i have fallen onto hard times,i dont have a job
(i am self employed i submitted copies to my public defender of my 2011 tax return / my customer work orders for 2012 / copies of vehicle registration,pink slips,motorcycle registration,insurance payments,kelly bluebook value for both car and motorcycle is $12,000 / my business card / copy of all my customers and the work i did for them,(this shows and proves i have not fallen on hard times,and proves i do have a job and i am employed)

2. Officer stated in the police report and testifying under oath that i am out on the streets and i use it for my protection.
(This is also not true,I was arrested in my home where i have resided for the last 3 years,both my motor vehicles are here,i have submitted proof as of mail ive recieved,my parole paperwork,insurance monthly payment i owe,D.M.V mail sent here verifying this is where i reside,but the most important thing is why would this officer say i am out on the streets when in fact he searched my room finding paperwork with my name on it,and my home is where he arrested me at / My public defender is also aware of this

3. Officer stated in his police report that while searching my room me and my father are located in the living room on the couch which is true / but when testifying under oath he stated that i was placed in the back seat of his patrol car prior to conducting the search

Officer also stated that the dangerous weapon was found while i was in the back seat of his patrol car / this is not true,while an officer had me and my father on the living room couch they were searching my room and that is when they found this so called dangerous weapon
( This is also an inconsistent statement)

4. Officer stated in his police report that the billy club appeared to be easily accessable for ready and immediate use / he also stated that i stated,"yeah i forgot about that."
(If something is easily accessable and ready for my immediate use that tends to show that i must be aware of this so called dangerous weapon is there and being this is where i spend all of my time i would know if this so called dangerous weapon is in my room / for me to say," oh that,yeah i forgot about that does not make any sense."(This is also an inconsistent statement)

5. At my first pre trial my Public Defender asks the Officer," In your backround,training,and experience,have you come across these items before?
Officer answeres,Yes,I have
Public Defender asks,"Approxamitely how often?"
Officer answeres,"not that often anymore.it's still common to find it as a weapon.It is commonly disguised as a tire checker.Officer stated it appeared to be a billy club
(Public Defender asks officer,"they are actually used for checking tire pressure,are they not / officer answeres,"yes they are"(The officer previously stated that a tire checker is a weapon commononly desguised as a tire checker / here he states that a tire checker is used for checking air pressure / In his own words he says that a tire checker is used for checking air pressure / prior to this he stated that tire checkers are known as weapons(This is a incostistent statement as he is contradicting his own words)

Blacks Law Dictionary 9th ed. defines Weapon as: An instrument used or designed to be used to injure or kill someone
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

i told my public defender i want this printout submitted for my defense,she said i cant use it because i could have made it myself(is this printed document allowed)?

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/72579798...6047_-Besides-

i also told her i was waiting for ken tool corporate headquarters "the manufactures of this tool" to send me a letter stating that the item they make is not designed or sold as a weapon.she stated that it would be hearsay.(is this true)


police have no duty to protect

Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981) is an oft-quoted[2] District of Columbia Court of Appeals (equivalent to a state supreme court) case that held police do not have a duty to provide police services to individuals, even if a dispatcher promises help to be on the way, except when police develop a special duty to particular individuals.

Washington d.c is not a part of any U.S. state:

Wikipedia (Thumbnails)

Wikipedia (Thumbnails)
Wikipedia (Thumbnails)

if washington dc is not part of any u.s state how is it then people are convicted of breaking laws?aren't laws made in washington d.c?

The accused may have the assistance of anyone/anything in the presentation of his defense.(does it say this in the constitution?if so then i can use the printouts and the letter from kentool office)

am i allowed to use out of state court opinions for my defense?(im in california)

any help would be much appreciated.thank you

[jon galt]

Somethings can be considered weapons even though that is not there original purpose, fe a kitchen knife, generally used for cutting meat/veg can be considered a weapon if carried in public, with out reason. It depends on where you had this tyre checker. if the police found it on your property i do not see how it can be claimed that you intended to use it as a weapon. However if the police caught you in public with it or a member of the public did and reported you, they may have a point. If you had the tyre checker in public you will need to have reasonable cause, ie were checking tyres pressure or had just purchased it and were returning home or going to work.

Find out what you are charged with and check the relevent state legislation and see if your circumstance and item meet the definition of a weapon, or if an offence took place.



Dont know much about us legal system but gather that local law is made at state level and federal law is made by DC. As such some laws may vary from state to state. In the uk this is by devolved legislation granted by an act of parliament, so local law made ie by the scottish parliament, or council by law is under the authority of the uk parliament

Blacks Law Dictionary 9th ed. defines Weapon as: An instrument used or designed to be used to injure or kill someone

Intention/ intended could be added to that,

In the uk tho no you are not allowed weapons for self defense. Clasification as a tool makes no difference, i would say all weapons are tools and all tools can be a weapon.

Not really sure if you will get legal advice on these forums but certainly opinion.

[gsxrjunkie]

i was in my home at 8 in the morning.

you haven't took the time to read what ive said.

my most important questions are

i told my public defender i want this printout submitted for my defense,she said i cant use it because i could have made it myself(is this printed document allowed)?

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/72579798...6047_-Besides-

i also told her i was waiting for ken tool corporate headquarters "the manufactures of this tool" to send me a letter stating that the item they make is not designed or sold as a weapon.she stated that it would be hearsay.(is this true)

The accused may have the assistance of anyone/anything in the presentation of his defense.(does it say this in the constitution?if so then i can use the printouts and the letter from kentool office)

am i allowed to use out of state court opinions for my defense?(im in california)

[jon galt]

Originally Posted by gsxrjunkie

i was in my home at 8 in the morning.

you haven't took the time to read what ive said.

my most important questions are

i told my public defender i want this printout submitted for my defense,she said i cant use it because i could have made it myself(is this printed document allowed)?

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/72579798...6047_-Besides-

i also told her i was waiting for ken tool corporate headquarters "the manufactures of this tool" to send me a letter stating that the item they make is not designed or sold as a weapon.she stated that it would be hearsay.(is this true)

The accused may have the assistance of anyone/anything in the presentation of his defense.(does it say this in the constitution?if so then i can use the printouts and the letter from kentool office)

am i allowed to use out of state court opinions for my defense?(im in california)

I have read all of what you have said and this is a bit rude considering my response was in the spirit of offering what little assistance i can. anyway it makes no difference what the manufacturer intended the object to be used for, it is irrelevant. anything can be a weapon, a brick, a bottle, an axe even a shoe. what is relevant is how you used / intended to use the item.

the response would be hearsay. ie evidence from someone who was not evolved in the event. in any case although the manufacturer would say it was not designed as a weapon, this does not mean it can not be used as a weapon. see example above.

i know you were in your home. my point being did you have the tire checker in public or was a complaint made about you having/using it in public? did the police for no reason decide to check your home for a tire checker? why did they search your home? did they have a warrant or were you already under arrest? (which in most places allows the police to search for evidence related to the crime with out a warrant) was the weapon on your person or in your room? this is not clear from what you write.

unless they have evidence that you had/used this item in public though i would use the defense that you use it for its intended purpose of checking tire pressure.

also if you feel that you lawyer is incompetent, you should keep a note of contradictions that you feel the police are stating and instruct him to bring it up when questioning them.

if out of state decision support your state laws they can be used. if not they may have "persuasive authority".

the link you give in second post does not work. could you elaborate?

[gsxrjunkie]

having the manufacturer wrire a letter you say would be hearsay because he wasnt there,well actually the manufacturer was at the scene because the tire checker was made and designed by ken tool corporation and the tool is a ken tool tire checker.

i was on parole at the time the police were there to do a compliance check
no i was not in public,no one called.
it was in my room
i never had it on my person
i was arrested because the cop said that i stated "im out on the streets and i use it for protection"
im not out on the streets i live in a 400,00 home where i run a business out of.

on the police report the cop stated "when i asked the suspect as to why he had the weapon"he had no right to call it a weapon,it is not a weapon

are you sure i can use out of state opinions?my public defender says i can't.

i have an out of state court opinion that says because the officer admitted a tire checker is used for checking air pressure the case was dismissed.
the officer stated in my transcripts that a tire checker is used for checking air pressure.

can u give me a link showing me out of state cases relevent to mine can be used in california?

thank you for your time