Liberty Co. Florida Sheriff, Nick Finch, found NOT GUILTY !!!!!!!!!!!!

[Contumacious]

If you recall, earlier this year, Gov. Scott sent his goons in the FDLA after Nick Finch for releasing a man from jail who was accused of nothing other than carrying a concealed weapon in his pocket while in his vehicle. Using the 2nd Amendment as his reasoning, Sheriff Finch released the man, who had harmed no one. Charges were levied against , [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByEa_6TT2KI"]Nick Finch [/ame], the sheriff by the Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement, including a felony charge of "destroying" records at the jail, which Finch states had no value since the driver was not charged by the sheriff. Finch was removed from office and replaced with an unelected FDLE agent during his 5 month battle in the court system. "

.

 

[Moonglow]

glad he was cleared.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Ironic the name is 'Liberty' County. Go figure. Congrats Mr. Finch.

 

[ba1614]

That's good to hear.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Awesome!!!! Victory for the 2A!!!!

 

[Vox]

great news!

 

[Freewill]

OK, I am going to take the unpopular view.

The man arrested was in reality guilty of not having a permit, if I heard the sheriff correctly.

So the deputy was correct in arresting the man. The Sheriff was thus incorrect in just releasing him. A judge could have thrown out the charges as is the system.

I have known enough Police Chiefs to know that they take care of their friends and thus taken care of. I am not saying this is the case with this Sheriff BUT that is why the rule of law is up held. To avoid any hint of wrong doing.

 

[Contumacious]

OK, I am going to take the unpopular view.

The man arrested was in reality guilty of not having a permit, if I heard the sheriff correctly.

So the deputy was correct in arresting the man. The Sheriff was thus incorrect in just releasing him. A judge could have thrown out the charges as is the system.

I have known enough Police Chiefs to know that they take care of their friends and thus taken care of. I am not saying this is the case with this Sheriff BUT that is why the rule of law is up held. To avoid any hint of wrong doing.

One does NOT need a permit from a bureaucrat in order to bear arms in order to DEFEND our lives.

.

 

[depotoo]

OK, I am going to take the unpopular view.

The man arrested was in reality guilty of not having a permit, if I heard the sheriff correctly.

So the deputy was correct in arresting the man. The Sheriff was thus incorrect in just releasing him. A judge could have thrown out the charges as is the system.

I have known enough Police Chiefs to know that they take care of their friends and thus taken care of. I am not saying this is the case with this Sheriff BUT that is why the rule of law is up held. To avoid any hint of wrong doing.

if I recall correctly it was a case of his knowing someone.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Remember one thing. The deputy who file the charges had already gotten another job before doing so.

 

[Freewill]

OK, I am going to take the unpopular view.

The man arrested was in reality guilty of not having a permit, if I heard the sheriff correctly.

So the deputy was correct in arresting the man. The Sheriff was thus incorrect in just releasing him. A judge could have thrown out the charges as is the system.

I have known enough Police Chiefs to know that they take care of their friends and thus taken care of. I am not saying this is the case with this Sheriff BUT that is why the rule of law is up held. To avoid any hint of wrong doing.

if I recall correctly it was a case of his knowing someone.

If that is the case then the Sheriff got away with something.

 

[Freewill]

OK, I am going to take the unpopular view.

The man arrested was in reality guilty of not having a permit, if I heard the sheriff correctly.

So the deputy was correct in arresting the man. The Sheriff was thus incorrect in just releasing him. A judge could have thrown out the charges as is the system.

I have known enough Police Chiefs to know that they take care of their friends and thus taken care of. I am not saying this is the case with this Sheriff BUT that is why the rule of law is up held. To avoid any hint of wrong doing.

One does NOT need a permit from a bureaucrat in order to bear arms in order to DEFEND our lives.

.

True enough, but I thought the law was if you want to carry a weapon concealed you need a permit. At least in most states that is my understanding of the law. I am not sure of the reasoning for the law but that is the law until changed.

 

[Freewill]

Remember one thing. The deputy who file the charges had already gotten another job before doing so.

Why is that important? Did he know what the Sheriff would do?

 

[Contumacious]

OK, I am going to take the unpopular view.

The man arrested was in reality guilty of not having a permit, if I heard the sheriff correctly.

So the deputy was correct in arresting the man. The Sheriff was thus incorrect in just releasing him. A judge could have thrown out the charges as is the system.

I have known enough Police Chiefs to know that they take care of their friends and thus taken care of. I am not saying this is the case with this Sheriff BUT that is why the rule of law is up held. To avoid any hint of wrong doing.

One does NOT need a permit from a bureaucrat in order to bear arms in order to DEFEND our lives.

.

True enough, but I thought the law was if you want to carry a weapon concealed you need a permit. At least in most states that is my understanding of the law. I am not sure of the reasoning for the law but that is the law until changed.

What does officer discretion mean?

.

 

[Freewill]

One does NOT need a permit from a bureaucrat in order to bear arms in order to DEFEND our lives.

.

True enough, but I thought the law was if you want to carry a weapon concealed you need a permit. At least in most states that is my understanding of the law. I am not sure of the reasoning for the law but that is the law until changed.

What does officer discretion mean?

.

Did or did not the man in the car violate the law?

If he did, did the Chief or did he not undercut the officer that used his discretion?

The question isn't a 2A question it is a question of whether or not the law was violated, which it was by the little bit of information I gleaned from the video.

So the question was, why did the Chief feel he needed to release the man?

 

[Contumacious]

True enough, but I thought the law was if you want to carry a weapon concealed you need a permit. At least in most states that is my understanding of the law. I am not sure of the reasoning for the law but that is the law until changed.

What does officer discretion mean?

.

Did or did not the man in the car violate the law?

If he did, did the Chief or did he not undercut the officer that used his discretion?

The question isn't a 2A question it is a question of whether or not the law was violated, which it was by the little bit of information I gleaned from the video.

So the question was, why did the Chief feel he needed to release the man?

The 2A applies to the states.

If he wants to use his discretion because in his opinion no crime was committed then the Sheriff acted properly.

.