Small Legal Victory for Military Veteran Arrested After ‘Rudely Displaying’ Rifle
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Small Legal Victory for Military Veteran Arrested After ‘Rudely Displaying’ Rifle

  1. #1

    Small Legal Victory for Military Veteran Arrested After ‘Rudely Displaying’ Rifle

    Small Legal Victory for Military Veteran Arrested After ‘Rudely Displaying’ Rifle on Hike With His Son
    By: Jason Howerton
    I saw the original video this summer of him being arrested. Hope everything works out for him.
    BELTON (AP) — A mistrial was declared Friday in a Texas case against a soldier carrying his assault rifle on a hike, in a proceeding that was being closely watched by gun-rights advocates.
    The six-person jury in Belton was deadlocked after two days of deliberations Thursday and Friday. Prosecutors did not immediately reveal whether they intended to retry him.
    Army Master Sgt. Christopher Grisham, who was charged with misdemeanor interference with the duties of an officer, declared victory afterward. Grisham was arrested in March by a Temple police officer responding to a report that Grisham was carrying an assault rifle while hiking with his 15-year-old son for a Boy Scouts merit badge.
    “The state, the entire time, has looked and gone out of its way to find something to charge me with,” Grisham said in an interview.
    Grisham said he was driven by the fear that a conviction or guilty plea in the case would create “ripple effects” for gun owners elsewhere, “if we’re allowing our police officers to go around stealing people’s weapons for no reason.”
    Grisham also expressed frustration Friday of having to go through an entire trial because of the “actions of an abusive police officer.”
    He was defended by Blue Rannefeld, an attorney for the National Association of Legal Gun Defense.
    Temple police officer Steve Ermis, whose confrontation with Grisham was captured on cellphone video and posted online, testified Wednesday that Grisham’s behavior concerned him and that he wasn’t entirely sure why Grisham had the AR-15 rifle.
    Grisham, who’s stationed at Fort Hood, was carrying an AR-15 rifle and a concealed handgun, for which he had a permit. Texas law allows for rifles to be carried in public.
    Court documents say Grisham tried to prevent Ermis from taking his rifle and later resisted as the officer attempted to place Grisham’s hands behind his back. Prosecutor John Gantt Jr. told jurors that Grisham refused to follow Ermis’ orders.
    Original Video of arrest.

    Small Legal Victory for Military Veteran Arrested After ?Rudely Displaying? Rifle on Hike With His Son | TheBlaze.com
    The only easy day was yesterday
    Dedicated to my brother in law who died
    doing what he loved being a Navy SEAL

  2.   
  3. Although I am a staunch supporter of the second amendment and a veteran myself, I fail to understand why he felt that an AR-15 was necessary for a hike with his son. I also don't understand why he felt the need to lock a magazine into the weapon when he had a concealed carry on his side. Texas is not that dangerous! I hope things work out for him also.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by DRDuff View Post
    Although I am a staunch supporter of the second amendment and a veteran myself, I fail to understand why he felt that an AR-15 was necessary for a hike with his son. I also don't understand why he felt the need to lock a magazine into the weapon when he had a concealed carry on his side. Texas is not that dangerous! I hope things work out for him also.
    It may not have been necessary but, by law, he could carry it legally and he did. There should have been no problems except the local "Barney Fyffe" took exception to it and became too overbearing in his duty which resulted in a problem where there was not one. "Rights," does that have some meaning?

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Read the previous articles when this guy was originally manhandled by the police. He was on a hike with his son for Boy Scouts and he wanted his rifle in case there were any wild animals around. Where he got stopped by the police is when he was walking along the roadside to the cars. This is all from memory from reading the articles originally. So if my facts may be a bit sketchy, forgive me. The point actually isn't even about that.

    The point is, regardless his reasoning, the law in TX allows him to carry his rifle publicly. The law in TX (nor any place according to the Constitution) does not allow a LEO to grab at your personal possessions without a warrant. The rifle was in a sling and his hands were not on it. I'm not sure, DRDuff how you can both be an advocate for the 2nd Amendment and admonish his exercising of it in the same sentence and the two that followed.

    Using your logic about having a magazine in the rifle, I guess you are a supporter for lowering magazine capacities too? I mean crime has gone down substantially since 1993; America is not as dangerous as she used to be.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by DRDuff View Post
    Although I am a staunch supporter of the second amendment and a veteran myself, I fail to understand why he felt that an AR-15 was necessary for a hike with his son. I also don't understand why he felt the need to lock a magazine into the weapon when he had a concealed carry on his side. Texas is not that dangerous! I hope things work out for him also.
    He was exercising a civil right, he doesn't need a reason to carry, other than he wants to.
    War to the Knife, Knife to the hilt.
    If we don't want to live in a trashy area, we all have to be willing to help pick up the trash.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Louisville Ky.
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Oldgrunt View Post
    It may not have been necessary but, by law, he could carry it legally and he did. There should have been no problems except the local "Barney Fyffe" took exception to it and became too overbearing in his duty which resulted in a problem where there was not one. "Rights," does that have some meaning?
    Exactly! Whether I, or anyone else, thinks he needed or didn't need to carry the rifle with him it was his legal right to do so. I am pro cop but some officers seem to think that their beliefs are law whether they actually are or not.

  8. #7
    I found this on Military.com
    it shows the officers dash cam + the crappy cell phone video version.
    Texas Cop Violates Open Carry Law | Military.com

    Any jury that can convict based on dash cam video is stupid and seriously needs education on legal carry.
    Its obvious the cop just walks up and trys to yank the rifle away - but its attached so wouldn't come free - cop then goes into "oh **** gotta manhandle this guy" mode..

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,418
    That dashcam video is pretty clear-cut. I can't imagine Grisham being convicted with that video in evidence. Then again, one trial already ended in a hung jury, so there's no tellin' really.

    After watching that vid on Military.com, I wanted to see if it had been posted on YouTube yet so I could embed it here for everyone to see. I didn't find the whole thing, but the first 30 seconds or so are posted there, that shows the gun-grab and pulling of the cop's sidearm while he was throwing Grisham on the hood of his patrol unit. It's there if anyone wants to search on it and post it up, but that's not really why I mentioned it.

    There was another search result of a local (Temple, TX) news report that mentioned a trial date of Nov. 18th, so I did a web search on "Sgt. Christopher Grisham trial coverage" to see if I could find any new info. Didn't find anything about his trial, but I did find his name show up on Michael Yon's blog. If you don't know who Michael Yon is, this Wiki is a good start. In short, he's a Special Forces vet who parlayed his military career into a journalism career writing almost exclusively about military issues. He has spent more time in-theater embedded as a journalist than he did in Iraq as a soldier. He is widely regarded as a no-nonsense, truthful freelance writer, and I've read him a lot over the last several years.

    So anyway, I clicked on the search result to Yon's blog, mostly thinking it would be a supportive posting about Sgt. Grisham's current legal troubles in TX. Not hardly. Grisham is a guy with a long history of getting himself in the media, including a run-in he had with Huntsville, AL's School Board while he was stationed here at Redstone Arsenal. Yon mentioned that, and it's a mildly interesting story of parent vs. the establishment School Board, but the thrust of Yon's blog (quite long) blog post is about Grisham's time in Afghanistan and his status in Yon's mind as one of "...only two soldiers [who] represented lethal threats."

    Yon is convinced that Grisham set up the Temple PD, using his status as a "combat vet" (which Yon dismisses as a lie), his son, the slung AR and his route through busy areas where he knew someone would call him in as nothing more than props for his "play." I don't know if I buy it really, but y'all decide. Yon is a sharp writer and is trustworthy in my experience with reading him, but even if he's right about Grisham's military peccadilloes, it's hard to blame him for what we see on that video, even if he did intend for it to happen.

    That said, while I generally trust Yon's writings, I equally distrust the local radio talk show host who took up the Grisham controversy with the School Board and backed him unquestioningly. I can't stand the guy, Dale Jackson, and have gone as far as writing to the radio station to tell them that I will never listen to their station during the hours of his show as long as he remains a host. So someone I trust doesn't like or support Grisham, and someone I can't stand does like and support him. This is a tough one for me to decide how to feel about after reading all that.

    Things aren't always what they seem on the surface though, that's for sure. Y'all should read the Yon piece and see if you find any reason to question the current Temple case.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  10. #9
    I think the fatal flaw in Grisham's argument is that Grisham grabbed the stock. Until then, the officer was not on a heightened state of alert, nor was he aggressive in his actions. The LEO did handle the gun, but it did not look like he was trying to disarm him. It was not until then that it escalated to him being detained on the hood of the car. There's two sides to every story. The LEO may have over-reacted, but I maybe not. Had both left their hands off of the rifle, it would have likely ended with nobody in a courtroom.

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,418
    Quote Originally Posted by jrs View Post
    I think the fatal flaw in Grisham's argument is that Grisham grabbed the stock. Until then, the officer was not on a heightened state of alert, nor was he aggressive in his actions. The LEO did handle the gun, but it did not look like he was trying to disarm him. It was not until then that it escalated to him being detained on the hood of the car. There's two sides to every story. The LEO may have over-reacted, but I maybe not. Had both left their hands off of the rifle, it would have likely ended with nobody in a courtroom.
    The cop was clearly in the process of disarming Grisham when Grisham put his hand on the stock. The cop was trying to work the QD attachment. That is indisputable from the dash-cam video.
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast