Re: New here, but wanted to spread the word on this

by miker84 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 3:49 pm

I'm gonna steal 2A's thunder since he has another 2 hours to drive.

The verdict is in............

Dismissed.

drinks

by DirtyWorks on Thu Aug 11, 2011 4:26 pm

Wooohoo ! Glad to hear that!
Was there anyway to get restitution for time and wages lost? Or legal fees? What's been done to reprimand the arresting officers or the arresting authority so this doesn't happen again? Not being charged and having the case dismissed is defiantly a Win but what about the tarnished rep and job loss ?

by p moore on Thu Aug 11, 2011 4:58 pm

CONGRATULATIONS, Irish Tiger!!!!!

Good to know someone heard your roar.....so to speak.

Paul

by 2ALawyer on Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:03 pm

by **captain-03** on Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:28 pm

2ALawyer --- Congratulations!! Well done!!

by bigun220 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:45 pm

Congratulations Irish Tiger!!

by Expat on Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:48 pm

Nice to see the good guys come out on top. What was the reason your job was lost?

by dhollis51 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 8:49 pm

nice job 2A, if I ever need a 2A laywer I will be calling on you for sure, but hope I dont have to.

congrats to irish tiger as well, good luck with the job situation

by biscuitnt on Wed Aug 17, 2011 6:11 am

For what its worth, I had a Judge in Rankin County tell me a year or so ago that it would not be hard for a lawyer to argue that "open carry" is not illegal in Mississippi.

by **Xd357** on Sat Aug 27, 2011 4:13 pm

Congrats on winning the case!

by Stryker60 on Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:06 pm

biscuitnt wrote:For what its worth, I had a Judge in Rankin County tell me a year or so ago that it would not be hard for a lawyer to argue that "open carry" is not illegal in Mississippi.

Based on what? Ask the judge what "....concealed in whole or in part..." means. The MS Supreme Court has interpreted this, several times, to mean exactly that: If ANY part of the weapon is concealed, it is a violation of the statute. This is not a new interpretation. The legislature defined the term "concealed" and the Court accepted that definition. Arguing constitutionality at this point is futile.

Disclaimer: I didn't say I like this position, nor that I agree with it. Nevertheless it is the law and it has been the law for nearly 100 years.

Stryker60