Spronz vs County of Suffolk

As much as I would like for him to just get his stuff back, there is a part of me that would really like to see the county push back and lose.

stalker42 said:

As much as I would like for him to just get his stuff back, there is a part of me that would really like to see the county push back and lose.

Click to expand...

Same here, that's what REALLY needs to happen to stop them from their unconstitutional shenanigans

The punitive damages claim, by Mr. Spronz, may make him a very wealthy person and set the stage for the elimination of the SCPD's handgun and long gun licensing division. It would appear that SCPD intentionally violated several of Mr. Spronz's Constitutional rights.
Gary

If in fact it gets that far Gary

They will probably offer to give him back his firearms and license but no money as settlement... If he takes it then they keep on violating our rights.

Couldn't SCPD have charged him with a felony for carrying in a restricted location?

firemanvin said:

Couldn't SCPD have charged him with a felony for carrying in a restricted location?

Click to expand...

No. He had permission, from the soon to be ex-wife, who was, still a legal resident there.
Gary

Shotgun682 said:

If in fact it gets that far Gary

They will probably offer to give him back his firearms and license but no money as settlement... If he takes it then they keep on violating our rights.

Click to expand...

I hope his attorneys are smart enough not to do that, as their portion of the punitive damages would be substantial.
Gary

Gary_Hungerford said:

I hope his attorneys are smart enough not to do that, as their portion of the punitive damages would be substantial.
Gary

Click to expand...

The attorneys don't get to decide weather or not Mr Spronz takes a deal or moves to trial

This Wustenhoff sounds like a miserable piece of s#!t. This could have been cleared and forgotten about by simply talking to the responding officers, but HE chose to escalate it simply because he can. Disgusting. Now the taxpayer may have to hang on the hook for his s#!tty gritty. Doesn't sound fit to be dog catcher let alone a cop.

Sorry to the dog catchers.

Shotgun682 said:

The attorneys don't get to decide weather or not Mr Spronz takes a deal or moves to trial

Click to expand...

No, they don't get to make the final decision but they do advise their clients how to proceed. An intelligent or angry client will follow the attorney's advice, if he wants justice. Given the loss of his income, I would suspect that he would want to holdout for the anti-SCPD verdict and the largest jury award, not an out-of-court settlement, with a gag order.
Gary

Do you they think they will try to throw Wustenhoff under the bus, can him ,and then hope to move on saying they 'took care of business'.? I can't see them really enthusiastically trying to defend him.

rapidfiretoo said:

Do you they think they will try to throw Wustenhoff under the bus, can him ,and then hope to move on saying they 'took care of business'.? I can't see them really enthusiastically trying to defend him.

Click to expand...

Regardless of what they do to Wustenhoff, the county and the SCPD are on the hook, as he was, legally, a representative of them, at the time of his actions.
Gary