Wright v. Beck - USDC-CD Cal (LAPD firearms retention policy)

[JDale@Michel&Associates]

On behalf of war veteran and former police officer Wayne Wright, our office filed a federal lawsuit in Los Angeles on Friday against the LAPD, the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office, and involved employees and policymakers who conspired to destroy Mr. Wright’s firearm collection. Mr. Wright’s firearm collection was seized by LAPD in 2004 after he was entrapped by them into allowing one of their undercover detectives to carry a firearm that was being transported to an FFL for a lawful transfer. LAPD then used this bad arrest to get a warrant to seize the entirety of Mr. Wright’s collection, some 400-plus firearms comprised primarily of curio and relic pieces.

After Mr. Wright became eligible for the return of his firearms, LAPD’s notorious Gun Unit and the City Attorney’s office put Mr. Wright through a five-year odyssey of illegal requirements to “prove” he owned the guns they seized from him in order to purportedly gain their return. While LAPD represented to Mr. Wright that his firearms would eventually be returned if he complied with LAPD’s unlawful requests for proof of ownership, the City Attorney’s office surreptitiously applied for an ex parte order to destroy the collection, and the LAPD then did so without any notice to Mr. Wright.

LAPD has been previously sued for its failure to provide basic due process or follow state law when it comes to returning firearms to their owners. In that prior matter, Sarah McGee, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al., USDC Central District of California Case No. 98-2043GHK, then-Chief Bernard Parks agreed to implement Special Order No. 1, making compliance with state law regarding return of firearms an express policy of the LAPD. Once again, LAPD has ignored state law as well as its own policy, and the result is the destruction of priceless collector’s items valued in the aggregate at nearly three-quarters-of-a-million dollars.

The matter filed on Friday is captioned Wayne William Wright v. Charles L. Beck, et al., USDC Central District of California Case No. 2:15-cv-05805-R-PJW. A copy of the complaint is linked here.

[pacrat]

Go Get em Guys.

Until Police are made personally responsible for their illegal acts. Nothing will change. They have carte blanche to pursue their political agendas and the taxpaying citizens of their respective city foot the bill.

I feel it should be illegal for municipalities to foot the bill for the illegal acts of their employees.

This is the fourth time in recent memory that City Police have illegally destroyed the personal property of citizens to further their political agendas.

And that is just the ones that got sued for their actions. How many citizens just walked away and let the cops have their way?

JM2c

[slayer61]

Good job fellas. Keep it up.

[John J]

subscribed.

[anthonyca]

Is there a place to donate? I will gladly give some funds to go after them.

[cdtx2001]

Wow, I would have been beyond pissed.

Go get em and make them pay. It's really too bad that no monetary amount will replace historic artifacts.

[strongpoint]

Holy cow, the facts alleged in the complaint are egregious. Go get 'em, M&A.

ETA: Wow, RICO claims? I can't even describe how happy that makes me.

[Window_Seat]

Originally Posted by strongpoint

Holy cow, the facts alleged in the complaint are egregious. Go get 'em, M&A.

ETA: Wow, RICO claims? I can't even describe how happy that makes me.

YES... RICO... I always thought that only the government's prosecution (state or federal) could raise RICO violations. No?

Since there is a jury trial demand, but the firearms were already destroyed, could there later be a claim of "irreparable harm/injury", thus if there is found to be irreparable harm/injury, would there still be a need for a trial?

Erik.

[Ubermcoupe]

Ditto: "Go get 'em"

[Urban Achiever]

Good!! Make an example out of them and make it painful.

[bohoki]

i hope the judge is disgusted and allows punitive damages

[strongpoint]

Originally Posted by Window_Seat

YES... RICO... I always thought that only the government's prosecution (state or federal) could raise RICO violations. No?

Per Wikipedia:

RICO also permits a private individual "damaged in his business or property" by a "racketeer" to file a civil suit. The plaintiff must prove the existence of an "enterprise". The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise:

• either the defendant(s) invested the proceeds of the pattern of racketeering activity into the enterprise (18 U.S.C. § 1962(a)); or
  
• the defendant(s) acquired or maintained an interest in, or control of, the enterprise through the pattern of racketeering activity (subsection (b)); or
  
• the defendant(s) conducted or participated in the affairs of the enterprise "through" the pattern of racketeering activity (subsection (c)); or
  
• the defendant(s) conspired to do one of the above (subsection (d)).

In essence, the enterprise is either the 'prize,' 'instrument,' 'victim,' or 'perpetrator' of the racketeers. A civil RICO action can be filed in state or federal court.

Both the criminal and civil components allow the recovery of treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).

Light formatting added, references deleted.

[Fate]

Tear them a new one.

Twice.

[inalienable]

Reading the complaint has left me speechless. Everything about this case stinks to high heaven. Guns or no guns, I don't see a judge letting the LAPD off easy here.

- inalienable

[broofy]

And how do you think it will turn out when, pursuant to the new criminalization of standard capacity mags, some poor bastard gets nicked for having a magazine he's had for 20 years? Seach warrant, seizure....and a nice press release about all the children that were saved when all the nasty firearms he's collected over the decades is destroyed. After being used, abused, loaned, damaged or lost for a few years.

Corruption at its finest. The power of the state to violate the individual because they are in a politically unpopular class (gun owner).

[noozeyeguy]

Looks like somebody got some nice guns.

Oh wait, they were "destroyed." Never mind.

[TeddyBallgame]

Originally Posted by noozeyeguy

Looks like somebody got some nice guns.

Oh wait, they were "destroyed." Never mind.

even worse, they use OUR money (taxpayer) to defend themselves against US...then, when we win they use OUR money (taxpayer) to facilitate the payoff...sigh

they really have NOTHING to lose in the matter; then it'll be on to the next gun owner, business as usual

how can we possibly get ahead with that type of system'

that said, i hope Mr. Wright wins a boat load of $$$$

[ldsnet]

I hope he wins! More importantly, I hope the jury finds the people were NOT acting in good faith of the law and are therefore not protected by law and could be held personally responsible for the destruction of this gentlemen's property. Sadly, any cash award won't compensate for his loss, and it will be borne on the backs of the tax-payers, not the individuals responsible.

[Sutcliffe]

Originally Posted by noozeyeguy

Looks like somebody got some nice guns.

Oh wait, they were "destroyed." Never mind.

Sadly, I don see anybody goinq to prison over this.

[VegasND]

I hope Wright gets a big pay day but I'm sure the guilty will be protected.

[Epaphroditus]

Best case here ends up with a hefty settlement.

[Scottie15]

Read the whole thing last night. What an infuriating situation! I wonder what the internal emails and memos provide in terms of damning evidence... or maybe they got deleted by accident?

Best of luck to you and your client!

[mshill]

Originally Posted by Scottie15

Read the whole thing last night. What an infuriating situation!

^^^^ this

Except for the ADA going to a different court to get the order to destroy the firearms, they can just claim that the whole system is in disarray and that they "were misinformed of the policy in the manual".

I hope you kick their ***.

[TeddyBallgame]

Originally Posted by Scottie15

Read the whole thing last night. What an infuriating situation! I wonder what the internal emails and memos provide in terms of damning evidence... or maybe they got deleted by accident?

Best of luck to you and your client!

yeah, it seems like they lead Mr. Wright around like a mule with a carrot

they never had any intentions of giving him back his firearms...they use the detective to play nice guy, "we're working on it", all the while they already knew they had a different agenda

Beck is a disgrace, nothing more than a tool...they all think they are above they law, mainly because they know they'll never be held personally accountable

[Sleighter]

Wow...that is an infuriating situation and I can't imagine how frustrating it must be to deal with the "gun unit." Years and years to go over receipts? How is that possible/permissible?

I wish that this case would end up the way we all know it should, but for some reason I have my doubts that justice will actually prevail in this case. It seems like a slam dunk corruption case, but I'm sure it'll get twisted and no judge wants to be the one that "fries" the LAPD. It's way too politically charged for this to go the way we all know it should.

[six seven tango]

Originally Posted by Sleighter

...It seems like a slam dunk corruption case, but I'm sure it'll get twisted and no judge wants to be the one that "fries" the LAPD. It's way too politically charged for this to go the way we all know it should.

Then again, after the recent Torrance case, the fact that LA was successfully sued over this exact issue (Sarah McGee v. City of Los Angeles), resulting in LA's Special Order No. 1, and LA's back door court filing for the destruction of Mr. Wright's firearms, we just might get a judge who's tired of cities thumbing their noses at the courts and is willing to b***h slap Los Angeles to make a point.

One can at least hope for a positive outcome, right?

[Drivedabizness]

Originally Posted by six seven tango

Then again, after the recent Torrance case, the fact that LA was successfully sued over this exact issue (Sarah McGee v. City of Los Angeles), resulting in LA's Special Order No. 1, and LA's back door court filing for the destruction of Mr. Wright's firearms, we just might get a judge who's tired of cities thumbing their noses at the courts and is willing to b***h slap Los Angeles to make a point.

One can at least hope for a positive outcome, right?

You might...except for the track record that would indicate otherwise. Looks to me like individuals in LA would have to face personal criminal sanctions in order to make an impact.

[rlc2]

Please pass this along to the larger gun press...so that it will get wider exposure, and perhaps "traded up the chain" to national news level.

Just copy and past into a forum, or email to bloggers and 2A news reporters:

http://michellawyers.com/former-poli...ce-department/

LAPD and City Attorney Office sleaze deserves more attention nation-wide, and its not limited to that only- look at recent arrogance by the Mayor and Council on magazine limits, etc. The Left will always chip away at gun-rights, and property rights if the end justifies the means in their minds.

Time for the protection of limited immunity to be pierced, and responsible individuals to be sued, and held personally accountable for obvious malfeasance.

[ErstO]

I read the complaint and almost cried looking at the list of firearms that are now gone for good, I have a special place in my heart for old guns.

But I have a question, At the very end of the pdf there is a copy of the LAPD press release where they say “... is actively engaged in unlawful gun trafficking”

So how many guns do you have to have to get that label?

I don't have anywhere near 400, but I have more then can be taken to a range at the same time, just as I am sure many others on CalGuns do.

When the LAPD looks in someone's gun safe, what number do they count up to when determining someone is just a collector or a gun trafficker?

[StuckInTheP.R.O.Ca]

Originally Posted by TeddyBallgame

even worse, they use OUR money (taxpayer) to defend themselves against US...then, when we win they use OUR money (taxpayer) to facilitate the payoff...sigh

they really have NOTHING to lose in the matter; then it'll be on to the next gun owner, business as usual

how can we possibly get ahead with that type of system'

that said, i hope Mr. Wright wins a boat load of $$$$

^This. As usual they will hang us with the rope that we paid for.

[panzer]

too bad they can't get the death penalty

[pacrat]

Crooked cops who steal from citizens under color of authority to line their own pockets are the scum of the earth and a disgrace to the badges they carry.

Same goes for scum sucking attorneys and prosecutors who do the same while feeding at the tax payers trough.

JM2c

[cdtx2001]

Originally Posted by ErstO

I read the complaint and almost cried looking at the list of firearms that are now gone for good, I have a special place in my heart for old guns.

But I have a question, At the very end of the pdf there is a copy of the LAPD press release where they say “... is actively engaged in unlawful gun trafficking”

So how many guns do you have to have to get that label?

I don't have anywhere near 400, but I have more then can be taken to a range at the same time, just as I am sure many others on CalGuns do.

When the LAPD looks in someone's gun safe, what number do they count up to when determining someone is just a collector or a gun trafficker?

For LAPD or any other CA law enforcement agency it's simple, the number is 1.

But why should that even be an issue? If someone wishes to collect 1200 or so guns and is not hurting anyone, why bother them? Besides that, this guy was acting in good faith and LAPD cornholed him many times over.

As I said before, this sort of abuse by LAPD has got to stop and I will be donating to the lawsuit.

[1bulletBarney]

A alleged sting by LAPD/City of Los Angeles DA conspiring to confiscate/destroy a C&R collection from a retired LEO to prop up firearm seizure statistics thus securing Federal Grant money goes beyond corruption...

I do not live under a rock, but this level of corruption has truly woken me up. We are gonna be in for really bad times when Gaven Newsome gets elected as the next Govener of California...

[rlc2]

Originally Posted by 1bulletBarney

A alleged sting by LAPD/City of Los Angeles DA conspiring to confiscate/destroy a C&R collection from a retired LEO to prop up firearm seizure statistics thus securing Federal Grant money goes beyond corruption...

I do not live under a rock, but this level of corruption has truly woken me up. We are gonna be in for really bad times when Gaven Newsome gets elected as the next Govener of California...

Makes you wonder what actually happpened to some of those 400 guns..in a culture of corruption.

LAPD covers up straw man sales by LEOs:

http://www.rt.com/usa/police-sell-lapd-guns-433/

[rlc2]

Noticing how these all follow a pattern:

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-l...011-story.html

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-c...ry.html#page=1

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...811-story.html

[rlc2]

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/20...n_city_goi.php

[Hoooper]

Originally Posted by ErstO

I read the complaint and almost cried looking at the list of firearms that are now gone for good, I have a special place in my heart for old guns.

But I have a question, At the very end of the pdf there is a copy of the LAPD press release where they say “... is actively engaged in unlawful gun trafficking”

So how many guns do you have to have to get that label?

I don't have anywhere near 400, but I have more then can be taken to a range at the same time, just as I am sure many others on CalGuns do.

When the LAPD looks in someone's gun safe, what number do they count up to when determining someone is just a collector or a gun trafficker?

I dont know what they count to, but I dont think you are a very good gun trafficker if you end up with a large amount of stored guns. You dont end up with 400 guns by trafficking, you end up with 400 guns by buying and never selling.

[PhillyGunner]

Originally Posted by Hoooper

I dont know what they count to, but I dont think you are a very good gun trafficker if you end up with a large amount of stored guns. You dont end up with 400 guns by trafficking, you end up with 400 guns by buying and never selling.

Yeah, but this is LAPD... they mean trafficking like on the 405 freeway where traffic means a bunch of cars stacked up and apparently trafficking means stacking up a bunch of (insert thing being trafficked here). :roll eyes:

Besides, if the victim had been a good criminal, they would not have had to entrap him in the first place.

[jeffrice6]

Give um hell!!!