State Trooper Throwing Owner Off His Own Property

[edit on 29-6-2010 by LadySkadi]

"What we have here .... ta da da dum .... nothing but assumptions in this thread."

Is that so?


"If he was not on his own property, there are no rights."

So you respond by making your own assumption?

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch
UPDATE!!!!

Found this on THIS Link....

State trooper, keeping owner of truck wholesale off his own property without a court order. It seems nowadays that officers cross the line and get away with it. Lets stand up against police brutality...please pass this on and help owner of truck wholesale, Danny Lambeth and son Joe Lambeth.

If this is in fact true, my thoughts on the matter change entirely! I stiill think there's more to this situation, but this is seriously messed up if this guy owns this land!

Offering an alternative explanation to an unproven statement is not making an assumption.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by LadySkadi]

Finally found a statement from the man himself..Danny Lambert..NOW WE KNOW THE REAL STORY>>

Mods..sorry, long quote

After 34 years in business, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and her administration chief counsel Sally Howard, Secretary of Transportation Debbie Miller, and KDOT Kansas department of transportation and several other people have shut me down and have taken over my business.

They passed the resolution to make a legal business illegal.
And they revoked my salvage license after 34 years in business.
The Kansas Department of Transportation has Sold all my inventory for $73 a ton regardless of value to a little scrap yard from Emporia Kansas by the name of Gibson Recycling, owned by Ronnie Gibson, to scrap all my inventory.
I still have my 2009 dealer license, I am still licensed to sell trucks on my property but the Department of Transportation has told Gibson Recycling to scrap everything on the lot regardless of condition.
They have destroyed a thousand good running trucks, most of them worth anywhere between $2500 to $65,000.
The Kansas State police and the KCC have continuously harassed me and they have impounded three of my wreckers. The troopers state that Danny Lambeth should have a commercial license and thats why they have impounded my trucks.
In turn I took them to court and a judge ruled in favor of Danny Lambeth Truck Wholesale, it was stated that a dealer in Kansas is not required to have a commercial permit to operate a big truck. So even though I won in court, the Highway Patrol will not release my three wreckers that they have impounded.
I cant believe in America, after 34 years in business that they can pass a resolution and destroy my lifes work. It is scary how much power the state has. Please watch this video, pass it along, and stand up against this brutality in America.
Thanks, Danny Lambeth owner of Truck Wholesale in Wellsville Kansas.

I knew is smelled fishy!!! HA!
LINK

Originally posted by LadySkadi

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
"What we have here .... ta da da dum .... nothing but assumptions in this thread."

Is that so?


"If he was not on his own property, there are no rights."

So you respond by making your own assumption?

Offering an alternative explanation to an unproven statement is not making an assumption.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by LadySkadi]

Read above..no assumptions anymore..smarty pants..the doom and gloom posts are -----> that way..ciao

Here is the court case:
caselaw.lp.findlaw.com.../data2/circs/10th/053207.html

FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
April 11, 2006
Elisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT



DEBRA L. MILLER, Secretary of
the Kansas Department of Transportation,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. No. 05-320
DANNY LAMBETH,
Defendant - Appellant,
and
JOEL LAMBETH; SHELL ANN PLEKOWSKE; DANA LYN DAWES; MARK LAMBETH, doing business as Truck Wholesale

Johnson v. Mississippi, 421 U.S. 213, 219 (1975) (internal citations, quotation marks, and brackets omitted). Mr. Lambeth alleges that the KDOT action has violated a number of his civil rights, including guarantees under the Equal Protection, Full Faith and Credit, and Privileges and Immunities Clauses of the United States Constitution. He also asserts violations of the Kansas constitution and statutes and the North American Free Trade Agreement. But none of these claims, whatever their merits, arise "under a federal law providing for specific civil rights stated in terms of racial equality." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). At most, he asserts violations of federal laws of general applicability, which are not sufficient to qualify for removal under  1443(1). See Colorado v. Lopez, 919 F.2d 131, 132 (10th Cir. 1990) (rights to a speedy and fair trial); New Mexico v. Torres, 461 F.2d 342, 343 (10th Cir. 1972) (per curiam) (equal protection); Alabama v. Conley, 245 F.3d 1292, 1295-96 (11th Cir. 2001) (per curiam) ("[B]road assertions under the Equal Protection Clause . . . are insufficient to support a valid claim for removal under 1443(1)."). Because Mr. Lambeth's petition clearly fails the first prong of the Johnson test, we need not assess under the second prong whether he has asserted some aspect of Kansas law that would prevent him from vindicating his rights in state court. See Robertson, 534 F.2d at 66.

From what I can gather the KDOT (Kansas Department of Transportation) shut down his truck auction as being in violation of state law (selling wholesale), and he is no longer allowed to go on the property until it is settled in court or some penalty is imposed (Probably a fine and/or taxes for things he sold wholesale without sales tax). You bet your butt they can take your property away if you did not pay sales taxes and continue to refuse to pay them.

Here's a link to the court case that started all this.
ecf.ksd.uscourts.gov...

From what I can gather the guy had his salvage yard license revoked, lost his appeal, and the sheriff's office was going to auction off his stuff, he had already been kicked off the property.

EDIT: Dang it, beat to the punch again!

Always 2 sides to a story...

The best line is "let me see your ID and I'll tell you who you are"

The police state is here folks!!!!

[edit on 29-6-2010 by Signals]

reply to post by Yummy Freelunch


Good job!
line

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch

Originally posted by LadySkadi

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
"What we have here .... ta da da dum .... nothing but assumptions in this thread."

Is that so?


"If he was not on his own property, there are no rights."

So you respond by making your own assumption?

Offering an alternative explanation to an unproven statement is not making an assumption.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by LadySkadi]

Read above..no assumptions anymore..smarty pants..the doom and gloom posts are -----> that way..ciao

I was going to ask for the court case, but it's been referenced above.

That's all for now.

READ his statement I just posted!!!!


For gods sake..this man has been reemed!!!

Originally posted by defcon5
Rather then speculate lets see what we can find out about it…
From the other Youtube version of this video:

State trooper, keeping owner of truck wholesale off his own property without a court order. It seems nowadays that officers cross the line and get away with it. Lets stand up against police brutality...please pass this on and help owner of truck wholesale, Danny Lambeth and son Joe Lambeth.

Wow, that's sort of interesting so far. There's a ton of legal proceedings back and forth - basically the guy Danny Lambeth was operating a scrap yard called Truck Wholesale. KDOT and EPA tried to take it from him as a nuisance and a polluted site. It's non-stop combat in the court system after that.

Protip: Never defend yourself pro se. Never.

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch

 

Good job!
line

Thank you..at least someone agrees ...too many cop kissers here...this poor man..my god what if that was YOUR business..

Perhaps it has something to do with this, going back to 2003.

court case

For some reason I can't copy and past much, without the whole page highlighting, but:

Case Number: 03C 000027

It goes on to explain that the Kansas Department of transportation, revoked a salvage license for Danny Lambreth. This could be it, because it sort of looks like a salvage yard of some sort.

Sorry I couldn't cut and past more. Y'all will just have to read it.

I think the reason we can't get much current info, is because this video is not so new.

reply to post by Yummy Freelunch


You know what, it has NOTHING at all to do with the cop, he was following a court order…

Cops don’t make the laws they enforce them, he had a valid law to enforce and a court order to back it up…

HOW MANY TIMES TO I HAVE TO SAY IT!!!

Please read his statement I posted..it will tell you the WHOLE story!..
at least Mr Lambert's side.


sighs

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch

 

You know what, it has NOTHING at all to do with the cop, he was following a court order…

Cops don’t make the laws they enforce them, he had a valid law to enforce and a court order to back it up…

There was NO court order!!!! He just told him to leave.

State trooper, keeping owner of truck wholesale off his own property without a court order.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by Yummy Freelunch]

reply to post by Yummy Freelunch


Ya and if you look up a couple of posts, I have a link to the actual court document.

Your welcome!

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch

Originally posted by RestingInPieces

Originally posted by Yummy Freelunch

Point taken..but the cop didnt even know who the man was.

Sure he didn't "KNOW" who the man was, but I'm sure he had a pretty good frickin idea that he was the guy he was looking for!

Also..you have to take in mind..IF the man had been issued a court order..then the cop would have said that when the camera man asked why is he being arrested.

Why would he have said that? Do cops have to tell bystanders why they are arresting people? Ever heard of the rights of the accused?

He just made up some stupid excuse, basically..

So..looks to me like he wasnt breaking a court order..or the officer would have said it.

Again, why?

Then why did the cop bother to answer at all..why did he give a reason for arresting the man at all..

Anyway..I still like it!

Why did the cop bother to answer? It's his prerogative, apparently. Perhaps cops are allowed to give a standard response like that, but not say, "Oh, he's under arrest for molesting 3 little kids"... who knows what their local PD policy is? If you are so interested, why not write the PD there and find out why?

He told that guy that he had already been "shown the court order". What do you think that means?

The camera man stated "... but you didn't show him the court order" to which the officer responded, "It doesn't matter, sir".

... and it DOESN'T MATTER. A police officer doesn't have to show an order to make an arrest, it would make bank robberies too easy!

Originally posted by Blanca Rose
reply to post by Yummy Freelunch

 

Ya and if you look up a couple of posts, I have a link to the actual court document.

Your welcome!

You must be a lawyer..screw the court documents..

I want to hear it from the horse's mouth..

Im for the PEOPLE>.not the courts.