The Russel Laing Story The R E S T of the Story!

Greetings,

Several have asked me to have Russell Laing account in Chronological order, the events focusing on the day he was taken into custody, to the day he won in court, that lead to his tremendous victory against one of the most hideous "NRA" backed laws of the 20th century. I feel you, the reader, will benefit a great deal in reading this short Chronological history of Russell's sufferings, for the sake of Liberty. This article may have a tendency to give you renewed vision, in walking that extra mile for freedom, and Liberty. And believe me, we could all use some encouragement along the way.
 
 
 

Good reading,

Chris W. Stark
Gun Owners Alliance
 
 

Chris,

Thanks for the postings. I've gotten a great deal of e-mail from around the nation by freedom loving individuals who are horrified by my story of how my home was invaded, and without any due process I was thrown into a mental
hospital and had my property confiscated by a local police department. All this under the banner of recent (1995) firearms legislation Act 17, which was hailed at its passage as the "model for the nation".

[Editor's note: go to http://www.gunownersalliance.com/process1.htm for a better understanding]

Per your request I will try to provide a very concise outline of the events, focusing on progression of my case in the courts and the legislative process. There is yet much I have to leave out in the interest of keeping to the main points; I hope this will suffice:

LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND:

1995 Act 17 is passed by the Pennsylvania legislature to create an overhauled Uniform Firearms Act for Pennsylvania. It includes a new provision that anyone subjected to an emergency detention for psychiatric observation under the 1976 PA Mental Health Act (Section 302 detention) is automatically prohibited from ever owning or possessing a firearm. A citizen may be held under Section 302 detentions for up to 120 hours based on the discretion of any law enforcement officer; no warrant is required. No due process hearing of any kind, no right
to an attorney is involved with a Sec 302 detention, unless the hospital seeks to hold the individual longer than the statutory maximum of five days. This is basically the equivalent of arresting an individual without having to state
any cause (and without a warrant), and being able to hold them in jail for five days without even charging them with any offense!

[Editor's note: go to http://www.goa-texas.org/PA-act17.htm for a better understanding of "PA Act 17 Law"]

What Act 17 did was marry this non adjudicated and unprotected detention process to the firearms code and gave a green light to use these non adjudicated detentions as way to permanently void the constitutional right to keep and bear arms of at least several hundred thousand Pennsylvanians who had ever been subjected to this process over the past two decades, and confiscate their lawfully owned property. As related below, event the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms has ruled that Pennsylvania's Act 17 Section 302 provisions are unconstitutional on their face in their lack of due process protections, and will not be recognized for the purpose of applying federal firearm statutes.

My story, condensed and in chronological sequence:

April 1996

West Deer Township Police officers surround my home for 45 minutes and then make a dynamic, gun-waiving entry to find me asleep in my bedroom. They document their actions as being based upon receiving information that my
employer was concerned that I had not reported to work and did not call off sick. They did not possess a warrant to enter my home, nor to detain me for psychiatric observation, nor to search my home and seize property. I have no
criminal record at any level, and was not charged or alleged to have been involved in any criminal, violent or threatening behavior. I was not alleged to have been causing any public or private disturbance. At some point during the incident the WDPD apparently contacted my employer and tried to solicit a statement that I was believed to be "armed and dangerous" (probably after they found nothing more than me sleeping in my bedroom, and by their own testimony, my gun collection locked in a metal safe). My employer flatly refused to make such a false and ridiculous statement, and later provided me with a written account of this exchange. I was then escorted by the WDPD to a waiting ambulance (the West Deer EMS is managed by the father and mother of the WDPD Chief of Police), which took me to a local hospital where I was detained for observation under Sec 302 of the PA Mental Health Act based on a WDPD officer's statement that he believed that I "was unable to care for myself".

On the second day of my stay, the hospital filed its only official statement on my condition: a legal notice to the local county mental health office that they did NOT believe me to be mentally ill and NOT in need of further
detention, therefore they wished to cancel a hearing that otherwise would have been held with a County Mental Health Officer to determine my mental condition, and whether I should be committed for a longer period of time.
Despite this filing, I was held at the hospital for six days, even though the legal maximum is five days (120 hours). I filed a written protest with the hospital, which to this day has not explained why I was held past the point of their own determination that I should not be there, and past the legal maximum of five days. To the best of my knowledge, they had some kind of administrative mix-up and simply forgot about me for a few days -- which I spent confined in close quarters in the company of individuals such as a child rapist.

Before I was discharged, without ever having had any hearing or other formal adjudication, I was visited by the same WDPD officer who committed me. He advised me that if I did not give him the combination to unlock the
gunsafe (which they dragged from my home after I had been taken away), that the WDPD would cut it open with a blowtorch. Upon my discharge, I visited the WDPD police station and opened the gun safe for them, not wanting to see my property damaged. At that time I was threatened by another WDPD officer that I might be prosecuted for violating federal gun laws unless I gave up my gun collection.

A few days later I contacted the WDPD Chief of Police Charles Fleischer, and respectfully asked if I might have my property returned to me. He advised that he had just instituted a new policy whereby any seized firearm would only be returned upon a court order. I asked if he would oppose my efforts to get such an order, and he replied that he would not.

August 1996

My attorney Rob Keenan files a Motion for Return of Confiscated Property with Allegheny County Common Pleas Court Judge David Cercone. The filed motion refers to the fact that I have a valid PA Licensee to Carry Firearms. About a week after the filing of this Motion, I receive a notice from the Allegheny County Sheriff that my License to Carry Firearms had been revoked (some five months after the incident, but only a week after I filed a petition to have my property returned)-- the notice is copied to the WDPD and also the PA State Police.

September 1996 - 1st Hearing (Motion to Return Property)

Because my Motion involves firearms, it is assigned a miscellaneous docket in the Criminal Division of Common Pleas Court. The District Attorney's Office is assigned to represent WDPD, even though I am not charged with any crime and have no criminal record. Just before the hearing starts my attorney and I learn that the WDPD will strongly oppose me. Judge Cercone listens to the testimony of the WDPD (described above) as to why they invaded my home, committed me, and seized my gun collection. He seemed somewhat bewildered, asking at one point: "Was there some kind of gun threat or domestic situation?" When the WDPD failed to provide such testimony, but still insisted on keeping my gun collection, they emphasized that their actions were for "the safety of the community" and that my collection consisted of "big, powerful guns, your honor, with big magazines". Judge Cercone then asked me to explain why I owned the number and type of guns in my collection (it wasn't me, but my
guns that were on trial!). Apparently satisfied with my answer, he then made an offer: "Look, I think I know a way out of this. How about if Mr. Laing undergoes a psychological evaluation and if he passes, we return his property?"

My attorney and I agree to this proposal, as does the Assistant District Attorney and the WDPD. I undergo a grueling exam by a licensed psychologist, including administration of a 600+ question written test used to evaluate
candidates for sensitive jobs such as police officer candidates. The written report of the psychologist is glowing, reading like a personal testimonial to me.

December 1996 (2nd Hearing)

My attorney presents the report of the psychologist to Judge Cercone and the DA. Neither has any question or challenge, and the Judge then issues a written court order directing the WDPD to return my gun collection. The Assistant District Attorney Dan Fitzsimmons expresses his sneering belief that the 2nd amendment only applies to the National Guard, and not to private citizens. It is apparent that he believes that any confiscation of firearms serves the public interest.

I present the order at the WDPD police station and it is refused. I am told that the WDPD are "inventorying" my property and cannot return it yet. Several days later I learn from my attorney that the DA & WDPD have obtained a request to re-argue their "case" against me and we have another hearing in about a week.

January 1997 (3rd Hearing)

The prosecuting attorney from the DA's Office notes that I am prohibited from owning or possessing firearms due to the newly created prohibition under Act 17 for anyone who has been detained for observation under Section 302, even though such detention involves no adjudication process, can be accomplished without a warrant on the say-so of any law enforcement officer, and does not even require a warrant. The Judge is clearly caught off guard (not familiar with the law/Act 17), and schedules a fourth hearing.

January 1997

The individual from whom I bought every gun I own, who is himself an active duty police officer in a Pittsburgh suburb, contacts me and advises that he has received an anonymous phone threat that if he ever sells me any more guns he will be prosecuted by federal authorities.

January 1997 (4th Hearing)

The Assistant District Attorney repeats that I am prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm under both federal and state law due to my non adjudicated Sec 302 detention. Judge Cercone indicates that he will issue
a ruling in several days.

February 1997

After several reminders from my attorney, Judge Cercone issues a ruling reversing his previous order to return my guns and instead denying my Motion. His opinion states that since PA Act 17 defines a non adjudicated Sec 302 detention as an "involuntary mental health commitment", therefore this also applies to FEDERAL law. And therefore I am prohibited by FEDERAL law from owning or possessing firearms. My attorney files a request for rearmament, similar to the DA's earlier actions. I am assured by Attorney Keenan that my appeal rights have been preserved.

July 1997

After several reminders and requests over the course of almost six months of silence, Judge Cercone finally issues a response denying my attorney's request for rearmament (even though the DA got a new hearing within 10 days of his request). My attorney now files an appeal with PA Superior Court.

Meantime, I file a second action with another attorney: Gary Selway. Gary's petition asks the court to invalidate my Sec 302 detention record as being illegal and lacking a sufficient basis under the law, as well as alleging
that the actions of the WDPD in invading my home, detaining me, and seizing my property all violated my civil rights under both the Pennsylvania and United States constitution. The court is unsure about even allowing Gary's petition to be filed, as they insist that neither the Court nor the County Mental Health Office have any record of my detention and therefore it does not legally exist for me to challenge it!!!

December 1997

PA Superior Court refuses to hear my appeal. Their staff attorney cites that my appeal -as a Criminal Court filing--should have been filed within 30 days of the date of judge Cercone's original denial in February 1997, rather than the later date in July 1997 when he denied my attorney's request for rearmament. This time limit exists only because my case was heard in the Criminal Court Division (vs Civil Division), even though I wasn't charged with
a crime and have no criminal record. The mere fact that it involved firearms automatically made it a matter for Criminal Court, and I was now subject to the same rules and strictures as drug pushers, even though I was NOT afforded the basic due process protections that would be provided for any accused felon. Or even someone fighting a parking ticket, for that matter. We appealed to PA Supreme Court -- just to be given the opportunity to tell my side of the story -- and were curtly denied without comment.

January 1998 (Petition to Overturn Sec 302 Dention/Expungement)

After being bounced around for six months, Gary Selway's petition is finally accepted by Orphan's Court Division of Allegheny Common Pleas Court -- which issues a citation to WDPD, the hospital, and the County Mental Health Office -- asking each of them to show cause why my record should not be expunged and the actual event of my detention declared illegal, based on Gary's petition (for which the primary evidence is the actual written documentation of the WDPD and the hospital).

February 1998 (Lawsuit Seeking Damages from WDPD and Hospital)

I file a one page notice that I am suing the WDPD and the Hospital for damages. This filing is necessary to preserve my rights, as the statute of limitations would soon run out my ability to sue for an event within the past
two years. I will not activate the notice and begin the actual litigationuntil I get a ruling on the Selway petition.

March 1998 (Vacate/Expungement Hearing)

First hearing before Judge Zavarella on Gary Selway's petition to overturn. Judge Zavarella mentions that there are some 8,000 similar hearings every year in Allegheny County alone. He dismisses the County Mental Health Office as they had nothing to do with my case, and were never consulted or involved in any way. He then suggests that WDPD and the hospital might avoid my case by claiming ...that it wasn't filed in a timely manner!!! (Sound familiar?). And this after making us wait six months just to accept our case, and then schedule a hearing three more months after that!! Judge Zavarella asks all parties to file, within two weeks,  briefs on the timeliness of my petitionand whether it should even be heard. Judge Zavarella also mentions that he is a Life Member of NRA.

April 1998

Through a merger, my employer acquires the hospital where I had been detained. I make personal contact with their attorney and discuss my case, basically telling her my story (she has reviewed all the records from the WDPD and the Hospital). We talk for two hours and at the end she tells me she thinks I have a pretty good case. She sends me a letter offering to withdraw from the case if I agree not to sue the hospital for damages. This offer is later tabled, when this attorney learns that she cannot withdraw from the case unless theWDPD agrees (which they now obviously will not). Nevertheless, the hospitalhas apparently lost all interest in trying to support the illegal actions ofthe WDPD. Interestingly, since the time of my conversation with her, the Hospital's volume of Sec 302 detentions decreases by 70%!

June 1998 (New Legislation: Act 70, 1998)

Governor Ridge signs new legislation passed by the PA legislature - Act 70 of 1998. Buried in this bill are provisions amending the Sec 302 prohibition which now adds the clause: "Provisions of this section (the prohibition) shall not apply to any proceeding under Section 302 unless the examining physician has first issued a certification that the detained individual needed inpatient care or was commitable." Described by the NRA as adding "due process" to Act 17, this provision now merely adds the requirement that the hospital type up a one sentence letter and mail this unchallenged, unrebutted document into thePA State Police in order to activate the gun disability under Act 17...that is the new "due process". Immediately, the PA State Police begin issuing notices to every mental health provider (institutions and private practitioners) in the state to provide such certification and records on every patient they've had contact with. Act 70 is slammed through the PA legislature exactly during the time of the Philadelphia PA Annual Meeting of NRA, as was Act 17 three years earlier. The written legislative transcript of Act 70 discloses Republican sponsor Bob Godshall referring to my case, and the NRA support, asthe reason for why the amendment is being introduced. In my case, the Hospitalhas not filed the certification required under Act 70 of 1998, as indeed their only official filing was to notify the countymental health office that I was not mentally ill and not in need ofhospitalization.

July 1998

PA Instachek begins on July 1st, and I immediately test it by purchasing a handgun and undergoing the required electronic background check by the PA State Police. I pass, and become the proud owner of a Smith & Wesson 9mm.

July 1998

I retain a third attorney, referred through, and funded by, the NRA through an intermediary, who at my request files a Motion with Allegheny County Common Pleas Court asking the Allegheny County Sheriff to reinstate my License to Carry Firearms. This attorney (Jon Pushinsky) is highly regarded in legal matters of civil rights and is on the board of the Pgh Chapter of American Civil Liberties Union. His filing questions the validity/legality of my being detained, mentions that the local Pgh Chief Enforcement Officer of BATF has verbally affirmed that the feds do not recognize PA Act 17's Section 302 provisions because they are unconstitutional in their lack of due process
protections, and mentions the amending language of Act 70 and my purchase of firearms -- among other things. The Sheriffs Office is extremely friendly and cooperative with this petition, and even agrees to support it in court.

August 1998

The court Motion to Reinstate my License to Carry Firearms is granted by the court and my licensee is immediately re-issued to me, thus ending my long battle to regain my rights that were taken from me by the illegal actions of a local police department, and supported by "cry-witch" gun laws that automatically forfeited my constitutional right to own and possess firearms without ever providing me any hearing or the slightest protection of due process.

September 1998

The BATF issues a formal ruling declaring that Act 17's Section 302 provisions will not be recognized at the federal level as they are unconstitutional in their lack of due process protections.

TODAY

Today my gun collection still sits, I suppose, in the garage of the WDPD where they placed it after stealing it from my home. They refused to answer a certified letter sent in October 1997 to provide a lawfully required listing of the property they had taken from my home. During the course of my petition to vacate/expunge my 302 record, they filed a cleverly worded statement with the court implying that they could not open the gun safe that they dragged out of my home (how did they know it had/has guns in it?)...even though I personally  unlocked it for them after they threatened to destroy it.

But my story is not about the illegal and outrageous actions of a few local police officers who deviated from the honorable and trustworthy profession of law enforcement. My story is about legislation which was passed unanimously by Pennsylvania legislators which actually writes into law provisions that deliberately circumvent the PA and United State's constitutionally provided right to due process under the law...so that just about anyone can "cry-witch" against any lawful abiding gun owner, as was done to me, and take their right to own firearms, their lawfully owned valuable property, their personalliberty, and their reputation with less due process than would be need to assess a parking fine!

PA Governor Ridge signed Act 17 of 1995 into law, along with its numerous fixes and amendments - including Act 70 of 1998. What would help me more than anything else right now would be for everyone who hears about my case to contact Pennsylvania Governor Ridge's office and ask him this question:

"GOVERNOR RIDGE, WHERE ARE RUSSELL LAING'S GUNS?"

And until he can answer that Russ Laing's guns are in the possession of their lawful owner, let's keep reminding him that there is still work to be done in terms of restoring the constitutional right of due process protections to
Pennsylvania gun-owners. Governor Ridge aspires to national office in Washington, and he needs to give a true account of his stance on the 2nd amendment -- and all of our constitutional rights for that matter-- with action, not just vague posturing.

You can contact PA's Governor Ridge at governor@state.pa.us Tell him how outraged you are about this case, and ask him, "Where are Russell Laing's guns?" Report back to us any replies you may receive from him, or any of his staff members.

And in the meantime, my guns can sit in the West Deer Township Police station like a memorial to bear witness to all who value freedom as to the terrible cost of electing populist accomidators instead of true leaders grounded in
timeless constitutional principles.

As for me, I sleep a little better these days, in the restoration of my 2nd amendment rights and my belief in the fellowship of free men.

Sincerely,

Russell Laing,  rlaing@usa.net