Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Keeping you updated as promised.


 


TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2015- The documents required for our Response to the letter/memorandum requesting Dismissal of our Motions have been printed and bundled and have as of late this afternoon been hand carried to the District Court in Trenton.  This filing consisted of the Reply and a Cover letter addressed to the Judge.  Download or read them by clicking on the file name below:


 


COVER LETTER FOR OUR RESPONSE TO DISMISS 


 


RESPONSE TO DISMISS SUMMARY JUDGEMENT


 


 


MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2015-  Nick worked many hours over this weekend gathering data for the response to the letter/memorandum he received this past Saturday. (See below)  He sent me the draft with his findings late last night and I began preparing the final Reply at 5:00 am this day and completed it about 8:00pm.  


 


A few back and forth discussions on content and the final document and the cover letter is ready for submittal to the Court.


 


 


SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2015- This day Nick received yet another filing from yet another attorney.  This submittal which was presented to the Court was called a letter/memorandum​ and is the latest effort by the State Attorneys to get the Brief thrown out, or in the terms of the lawyers, Dismissed.   If there were any doubt that we have their full attention now, this flurry of activity should be proof enough that we do.


 


This filing by the Defense is no less faulty than those which have come before it.  It is also untimely (late) and according to Federal Rules of the Court, it should not even be accepted by the Court, let alone considered.  But the judicial systems, both Federal and State seem to have an aversion to following rules if they run contrary to a specific ideology.  Therefore, Nick has informed me that he has begun researching the claims of the defense and will begin preparing a response since we cannot let even faulty submittals go unanswered.


 


Link to all District Court Documents filed to date. 


http://www.tpath.org/sappa-district-court-documents.html


 


Regards,


Dwight


and


Nick


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question was asked- "Is there any place we can go to read the documents submitted by opposing counsel?"

Nick and I were just discussing that and wondered if enough people wanted to see them to warrant the work required to scan them in and post them on the web site.  

If I get a few more requests we will take the time to do that. That's a promise.

I'll discuss this again with Nick and see if he thinks it's okay to email them to people who request.

​Thanks for this question DirtyDigz. Send me your email address if you want to have those documents emailed to you.

Send your request to   [email protected]

 

THanks,

Dwight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know today was the date for a decision on a default judgement.  The other side has petitioned for dismissal and that also should have been ruled on today.  I have an email in to Nick and Dwight.  I hope I hear something tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay Guys,

The Judge has apparently gotten cold feet.  Not sure about this, but we got word he has not ruled yet.

By the way, we just sent another registered letter today requesting yet again, an oral argument. The word we got, unofficial is that the new date for the ruling is now the 8th.  No one told us why the change.  We are hoping it's because this Judge now knows this case is moving on to the Circuit Court and then to the US Supreme Court. They may have expected to dismiss this case and that we would just go away. They know now, that's not going to happen.  He may not want to be on the side of a ruling which could stay with him his entire career, if that ruling is not based upon law.  Which would be the case if he ruled against us.

 

Just so you guys know, the last letter we sent to Judge Shipp not so very subtly suggested that it will be our intention to either subpoena and/ or request an affidavit from the Court explaining the legality of his ruling.  He just may be concerned about that. We will see.

 

I will be posting( the latest letter) on the SAPPA web pages tomorrow when I post the updates.

 

Also, many more people are asking to see the Defenses' Motions and letters.  That is enough to convince me its worth the trouble to upload them.  I will do that tomorrow too.

 

When I get it done, I'll drop off a message here.

I have a golf match in the AM. I'll get to work on these uploads when I return.

 

By the way, we will be giving an update presentation at the Wed meeting of NJR&PC .  If any of you are members you might want to come hear and see what Nick has prepared.

 

Thanks All,

Dwight

www.tpath.org

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if today was the deadline for them to make a ruling, isn't there something illegal about them delaying it again? without notifying you first? not trying to be a wise ass towards you, just asking........

 

thanks for all you're doing man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

A question was asked by LtCap about whether the judge or the court can delay or alter schedules without notifying the Petitioner.  

The answer, unfortunately is they can and do anything they want.  If we had not been as vigilant as we were they would have closed this case 3 weeks after it was filed.  If that had happened we would have had very little grounds for an appeal.

 

Since they failed in that effort now they must make a ruling and the ultimate dismissal on law or untimely documentation.  Now an appeal based upon the misapplication of procedure and Federal law will provide a strong basis for appeal to the Circuit Court.  This, both Nick and I believe has got the court and the judge a bit nervous and is most likely the impetus for these last few delays.

 

So actually, Nick thinks that these delays are a good thing.  That they are working real hard to find some way to dismiss this case without giving us ammo (ammo, love that word) in the appeals process.

 

I hope that answers your question. And I take no umbridge with any questions anyone may have.

 

Now, I told everyone that I would work to get all the Court documents and the Defense documents scanned in, dated and uploaded to the SAPPA web pages.  That has been done.  If anyone wants to read the crapolla these lawyers are trying to use to evade answering the question as to if their clients have infringed on the Constitution, have at it.  

 

 ONe very clever trick they pulled was to send an electronic filing to the Court, knowing the court would take their time getting that info to Nick, then 8 days later they mailed it to NIck.  This was done to prevent us from an effective response due to lack of time.  But Nick already had his response ready and to their shock, he responded in time with a Motion that must have had them scratching their collective pin heads.

i

Then this lawyer , swore in a legal document to the Judge that he sent this filing via the electronic method and by typical word jockeying made it sound like he mailed it to Nick the same day even though he did not ( sent it 8 days later).  So technically this clown may not have perjured himself, but he clearly put forth an effort to deceive the Judge.  If we get oral arguments, that will be one of many topics we bring up.

 

HERE IS THE LINK TO ALL THE DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENTS

http://www.tpath.org/sappa-district-court-documents.html

 

Before I finish I want everyone to know that from the beginning we have said we expect this case to be dismissed.  Our goal was to have it dismissed in a manner that will give us a strong appeal. Remember, our ultimate goal is the US Supreme Court, It looks like we may have done more than that.  This court is certainly concerned, hence these ruling delays.  We can only keep our fingers crossed at this point.

 

Thanks again for all the support this forum has given us.  You are a great bunch of guys and gals.

 

Regards,

Dwight 

and Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question was asked- "Is there any place we can go to read the documents submitted by opposing counsel?"

Nick and I were just discussing that and wondered if enough people wanted to see them to warrant the work required to scan them in and post them on the web site.  

If I get a few more requests we will take the time to do that. That's a promise.

I'll discuss this again with Nick and see if he thinks it's okay to email them to people who request.

​Thanks for this question DirtyDigz. Send me your email address if you want to have those documents emailed to you.

Send your request to   [email protected]

 

THanks,

Dwight

 

Emailed you Dwight, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Yes, created their own inhouse court order with official court logo and all.  Included it in their package requesting dismissal. Some bit of arrogance wouldn't you say?

 

The good sign here is that the Judge apparently did not sign it and in fact delayed his first scheduled ruling date.

 

Dwight 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Yes, created their own inhouse court order with official court logo and all.  Included it in their package requesting dismissal. Some bit of arrogance wouldn't you say?

 

The good sign here is that the Judge apparently did not sign it and in fact delayed his first scheduled ruling date.

 

Dwight 

Any news yet today Dwight?  I am sooo impatient!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No news yet.

Nick and I spoke today about his call to the Court tomorrow.  He intends to speak with as many clerks as he can in an effort to let them know that thousands of people are waiting for the decision from the Judge about granting an oral argument.

 

I'll post anything he culls from that conversation.

 

In the mean time you might enjoy my latest articles relating to gun control.  One is a parable the other is laced with facts the gun control progressives pretty much hope no one notices.

 

http://www.tpath.org/liberals-and-gun-control.html

 

 

http://www.tpath.org/rattlesnake-pass.html

 

 

That's all for tonight.  I'll keep you all posted.

By the way, if anyone in this Forum would like to be notified when we put up a new article or post you can sign up here.

http://www.tpath.org/sign-up-page.html

 

Good Night 

Dwight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • olight.jpg

    Use Promo Code "NJGF10" for 10% Off Regular Items

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Similar Content

    • By 124gr9mm
      Received this last night.
      Sent a message to all the contact names on the list they provided at the link:
       
       HONEST GUN OWNERS TREATED
      THE SAME AS MURDERERS FOR
      INADVERTENT, TECHNICAL LAW VIOLATIONS   No Violent Crime Required Rot in Jail for Years While Awaiting “Trial”
      Tell Lawmakers to Fix or Oppose This Poorly-Crafted Bill
      On Monday, March 14 at 1:00 p.m., the New Jersey Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee is scheduled to consider A2426 – an apparently well-intentioned but badly botched piece of legislation whose intended purpose appears to be to throw the book at violent gun criminals – which law-abiding gun owners actually support.
        But as written, the bill does not distinguish between violent criminal behavior and innocent technical infractions for the draconian presumption against bail to apply.  Law-abiding gun owners who inadvertently violate NJ’s thicket of hyper-technical firearms possession laws would be treated exactly the same as murderers—thrown in jail to rot for years without bail while they await trial someday for their “crimes.”
      This is not an imagined concern, as the Garden State has a well-documented track record of throwing the book at honest gun owners for innocent technical infractions.  As written, this bill adds insult to injury and would throw honest gun owners in the gulag for years while they await trial for “infractions” like:
      -Stopping for food, fuel, going to the bathroom, or medical treatment on the way to or from the target range.
      -Transporting firearms to or from one’s place of business, a gun store, hunting, fishing, target shooting competitions, target ranges, re-enactments, gun buyback events, vacation homes or other destinations.
      -Widows or widowers turning in firearms of their deceased spouses.
      -Possession of antique and black powder firearms (even these firearms could trigger the draconian penalties under this bill).
      PLEASE IMMEDIATELY CLICK HERE TO EMAIL EVERY ASSEMBLY MEMBER AND TELL THEM TO EITHER FIX OR OPPOSE A2426.  The law should distinguish between MERE POSSESSION of firearms by honest gun owners, vs. MISUSE of firearms by violent gun criminals, and draconian penalties like presumptive denial of bail should only apply to violent criminals who misuse firearms, and not to innocent mistakes of honest gun owners like technical possessory infractions where no violent misconduct is present.  Honest gun owners should not be treated the same as murderers!  Throw the book at the bad guys but take extreme care not to lump the good guys in with the bad.  The bill can easily be amended to make it clear that its penalties apply only to persons accused of violent criminal behavior.
       
       
    • By NJGF
      Judge Kavanaugh and the Second Amendment
      http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/judge-kavanaugh-and-the-second-amendment/
      "....Kennedy sided with his more conservative colleagues in finding a Second Amendment right to have a handgun in the home, and there is no reason to believe that Judge Brett Kavanaugh, if confirmed, is likely to disagree"
      "....We know from his recorded dissents from the denial of review that Thomas would vote to review and overturn some existing gun laws, and we know that Gorsuch – at least to some extent – agrees with him. But it takes four votes to grant review in a case, and we do not know whether Roberts and Alito also agree with Thomas but have opted not to say so publicly, or whether they instead are content to leave the court’s gun-rights jurisprudence as it is."
      ".... just this week, the 9th Circuit struck down Hawaii’s ban on carrying weapons openly outside of the home; even if the case goes to the full 9th Circuit, the losing party is almost certain to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in."
    • By NJGF
      Second Amendment challenge to New York state stun gun ban
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/12/07/second-amendment-challenge-to-new-york-state-stun-gun-ban/?utm_term=.8affecbeea72&wpisrc=nl_volokh&wpmm=1
       
      A law suit was filed that challenges New York's stun gun ban based on second amendment issues.
       
      The filing is here:
      http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/New-York-sued-in-federal-court-over-Taser-ban.pdf
       
      The suit cites Heller, McDonald, and the more recent Caetano v. Massachusetts decision.
       
      If NY falls then maybe NJ will be next.
       
    • By NJGF
      Don Kates, the father of the modern Second Amendment revival, has died
       
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/11/04/don-kates-the-father-of-the-modern-second-amendment-revival-has-died/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_term=.c54f683896c7
       
      Don wrote “Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment,” 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204 (1983), the first modern article in a major law review arguing for the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment.
       
    • By JibbaJabba
      http://www.gunssavelife.com/?p=11186
       
       
      Gun confiscation is one step closer in Connecticut. The mainstream media spins it as “one more chance” for non-compliant gun owners who failed to register their scary guns before the January 1 deadline.
       
      In reality, these letters - 106 to rifle owners, and 108 more to residents with standard capacity magazines – are the first step in the Connecticut State Police beginning to round up guns arbitrarily made illegal last year in that state. These guns include America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15 and magazines over 10 rounds, which include the standard capacity magazines made for that America’s favorite rifle.
       
      Failure to register is now a felony now in Connecticut.
       
      How long will it be before there is bloodshed over this law? We’re not sure, but we’re confident it is coming unless the law is rescinded or struck down by the courts.
       
      Mike Vanderboegh of the edgy Sipsey Street Irregulars released an open letter a couple of weeks ago, warning of what’s coming to Connecticut. The Connecticut State Police aren’t listening. Yet.
       
      We suspect attitudes may change after the first few rounds of bloodshed.
       
      As it stands right now, the best estimates are that 4% of newly-regulated guns and magazines in The Nutmeg State have been registered, leaving a hundred thousand or more newly classified potential felons looking over their shoulder.
       
      Editor’s note: We’re not going to link to the article because they are hiding most of the content behind a paywall and we won’t drive thousands of readers to their website.
       
      One more chance for gun owners
       
      Posted: Monday, February 24, 2014 3:35 pm | Updated: 3:36 pm, Mon Feb 24, 2014.
       
      Manchester, CT (Journal Inquirer) – When state officials decided to accept some gun registrations and magazine declarations that arrived after a Jan. 4 deadline, they also had to deal with those applications that didn’t make the cut.
       
      The state now holds signed and notarized letters saying those late applicants own rifles and magazines illegally.
       
      But rather than turn that information over to prosecutors, state officials are giving the gun owners a chance to get rid of the weapons and magazines.
       
      This entry was posted on February 24, 2014 at 5:55 pm and is filed under Blog. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
       
      -------------------------------
      100 letters don't seem like much, but it might be their strategy to tackle a little at a time when it comes to the overall 100k non-compliant gun owners. I'm giving strong consideration to the idea of making future purchases outside state lines.
  • Posts

×
×
  • Create New...