Quig et al vs. CHP - Sweet Victory

The most concise and legally accurate description of the helmet law problem in any state, as explained by Richard Quigley....


" ....the government cannot make any objective standards for helmets without taking on liability, and since they are expressly forbidden from taking on any liability, they can never make an objective standard for helmets. There it is.

Without an objective standard it all becomes ad hoc and arbitrary - Ad hoc and arbitrary is the foundation of vague law - Vague law is Unconstitutional." Quig (1943-2007)



Today, February 8, 2008 marked a hearing date in the contempt case of Quigley et al vs. CHP.

It seems a California Attorney General (AG) got a little too big for her "knickers", as you will see. Read on....

This hearing, titled "Summary Judgment Hearing", was for the AG to request dismissal of the case, based on her opinion that the Plaintiffs failed to prove they have a case.

At this same hearing, the Plaintiffs planned to seek a motion to compel compliance with discovery. Great move, and here's why.

And Don Blanscet, CA Abate Executive Director, comments:

"Ask any Attorney what his chances are for Summary Judgment when he is pissing off the Judge by refusing to comply with simple basic discovery rules, to the extent that we are faced to seek a motion to compel."

Here's some history on this case, from the keyboard of Tony "Pan" Sanfelipo himself, founding member of BOLT, when asked for the long and short of it. You'll find the outcome of this hearing below.

(Of course, if you are really into the detailed side of things, there are many informative articles you can read on the BOLT of CA website).

"As you know, the NTSB issued a recommendation that all states should adopt or amend helmet laws to meet compliance with the FMVSS 218 (helmet standard). That's exactly what North Carolina did in January [2008]. Anyway, the boys in California have been fighting tickets there for 17 years...and winning.

"Now comes the great Quig et al vs. CHP, set for trial in May, 2008. That calls for an injunction and declaratory relief, which in road language means, the CHP would be enjoined (stopped) from writing tickets for non compliance with the DOT standard. Quig beat a number, I think 9, of them tickets with his BOLT baseball cap and DOT embroidered on the back. That case had the judge rule to dismiss the tickets, but Quig didn't want a dismissal, because that would just go away for him and not do anyone else any good. So he asked for an injunction, which would stop them from writing everyone up. So be it.

"Meanwhile, the judge was pissed at the CHP for ignoring his earlier ruling that they stop writing helmet tickets unless they sign them off as correctable.

"In California, you can get a fix it ticket for an equipment violation (remember, helmets are listed by NHTSA as motor vehicle equipment, not safety equipment). So it should be a $10 fix it ticket. The problem is, the biker has the right to ask the cop, "officer, how do I fix this?" In other words, tell me what a helmet is or where I can buy one that complies with the law. Since there is no list, there is no law, or at least any way for a cop to tell you how to fix your problem. So we have them right where we want them.

"Then, along comes the Attorney General (AG) and takes this contempt case on in the 6th Appellate Court. The court rules that there is an exclusion in the evidence rule that says, even if it's an equipment violation, if the condition presents an immediate safety hazard to the biker, the cop doesn't have to sign off as correctable and can refuse to let you drive off until you put on a helmet he likes. Wow. The AG thought she had it in the bag at this point.

"The 6th Appellate also ruled that, although Quig's soft cap presented an immediate danger in their mind, as a matter of law if a helmet has a hard shell, it's correctable. That's what we wanted to hear, because the other plaintiffs in Quigs case, Blanscet, Barron, Bianco and Holmes, were ticketed with hard shell helmets. And so were hundreds of others, despite the injunction against this in the Easyriders F.I.G.H.T. Freedom case (an earlier injunction).

"Are you still with me? This ain't easy to explain. Anyway, the AG thought, hey, Quig is dead now, and the 6th [Appellate] ruled that the cops have discretion on whether the helmet is compliant, so let's motion for summary judgment. That means, the Quig et al vs. CHP is no longer relevant. It's a moot case according to the thinking of the AG.

[And the outcome? .... drum roll please....]

"So this motion for summary judgment came up today in court, and if the court granted this, it's all over now, baby blue. Of course, we were on pins and needles because you never know what a judge is going to do. You know what he's supposed to do, but it don't always work out like that. Anyway, low and behold, the judge dismisses the summary judgment and asks why he shouldn't issue the injunction right there and then. That must of blew the AG out of her knickers. I'm sure Quig is dancing in the clouds. So, we go to trial in May.

[After learning the outcome of today's hearing, Don Blanscet went out trolling for another helmet ticket, and I wondered if he could still get one, given the ruling today...]

"Don could still be cited for non compliant helmet, because this still has to be settled in court. He'll have to troll long hours though if the word is out about the summary judgment loss.

"We also want to ask the Supreme Court to retry the 6th Appellate ruling on Quig's soft helmet because, under Buhl vs. Hannigan, and Bianco vs. CHP, followed by the Easyrider case, it was determined that a cop cannot pull you over without probable cause that your helmet didn't comply. The probable cause was, according to the earlier cases, there was no DOT sticker (which later was found not to be necessary anyway) and that the cop knew the helmet didn't comply or he knew there was a recall of that particular helmet, and that the biker knew the helmet didn't comply.

"Whew! How is anyone going to know all that?

[I can hear Tony taking a big breath as he prepares to continue this narrative.]

"As for the baseball cap, it did have a DOT on the back, so there was rebuttable presumption of compliance, because the earlier cases ruled that fabrication isn't an issue. In fact, for a cop or consumer to consider fabrication of the helmet, is absurd (judges words).

"The FMVSS 218 is a performance standard. It tells you what a helmet has to do or prevent to be compliant. Nothing in the standard talks about fabrication. There is nothing in there about a hard shell, 1 inch thickness or any of that nonsense cops say a helmet has to have. They do mention a retention system (chin strap) and that's why Red and Quig and Don have some sort of lace or chin strap attached to their baseball cap, coconut shell or yamaka cap. These guys are characters...I love them."

Let me tell you folks, if you think this has been easy, think again.

And so, as described above, this is a huge victory.

The Judge dismissed the Summary Judgement. And he put the AG in her place by asking why he shouldn't issue an injunction right then and there.

How I wish I could have been a fly on the wall in that courtroom!

And as Don wrote to me today, before firing up the scooter to go "hunting" for another helmet ticket [Got Ticket?]:

Quigley vs. CHP won Big !!!!! I mean we won Big!!!! BIG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Judge says perhaps an injunction is in order for the plaintiffs (thats you !!!!!!!!)

He was very happy with the outcome (ya think?).

As Don says, "we" are the Plaintiffs, and he is right on that point. For this victory was not just for California Bikers, it was for ALL Bikers, as Quigley intended. "Brotherhood knows no boundaries", as is evident here. And this writer is grateful for the work they've put forth to achieve this victory.

What does this mean to you and me? Considerable ground was gained today, through perseverence, a refusal to back down, and a refusal to compromise. They have beat back law makers and law enforcement with the very laws they wrote and [try to] enforce.

But there's no relaxing, as the show is not over.

Trial is set for May 2008. CA Abate and BOLT must still pay their Attorney fees, and they must still keep vigilance. The way looks clearer, but it won't be over until the fat lady sings. They must still fill the Judiciary Fund coffers, to pave the path for the May trial.

Check out the information on the Judiciary Fund and make a much needed donation. Any amount helps. There are hundreds of thousands of bikers out there. Show them you appreciate what they are doing, what Quigley devoted his life to, and help them beat this down to the "whale dung" level (lowest place on earth) where it belongs.

Ya know? I'm hearing the theme for "Rocky" in my head right now... but I hate those musical tunes that play when I open a web page, so I'll let you remember that tune on your own.

And now for the quotes - and I so love good quotes.....

This quote by Napoleon Hill is for the Freedom Fighters in California, and for all those who had/have faith in them and contributed to this cause.

Victory is always possible for the person who refuses to stop fighting.

And this one by Theodore Roosevelt, is for everyone else. But it's not too late. Send your donation today!

Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.


Great job guys!
Florida Freedom Fighters salute you.

Boortz Blasts Hilary

I read Neal Boortz's news on occasion. He offends many, and has a wit as sharp as a tack. He doesn't always portray what my political views are, but when he gets down on Hilary, he wins my allegiance all over again. Especially with his latest nuze, sporting Politico.com's list, and adding his own.

Links to sources are at the bottom of this post.

HILLARY SHOULD BE WORRIED

(From Politico.com)
1. She lost the delegate derby.

2. She essentially tied Obama in the popular vote.

3. She lost more states.

4. She lost the January cash war.

5. The calendar is her enemy.


(And Neal says:)
An accurate, but tame list. So naturally, being the wise-ass that I am, I have devised my own list.

1. She is supported by the uneducated, the poor, and the single women.
[Well, some - I'm single, but I can recognize an intelligent candidate, and Hilary ain't it.]

2. She holds the average American in complete and utter disdain.

3. She is dishonest and will do anything to gain power.

4. She cries to get people to vote for her.

5. She harbors a rapist.

6. She takes pride in a sham marriage.

7. She is fundamentally dishonest.

That list was way too easy. I've asked this question before, what reasons would anyone have to vote for Hillary Clinton ... other than "it's time for a woman to have a chance" or "she did a good job raising Chelsea, so she'd be a good Commander and Chief".
[If this is true, then I'm just as qualified to run for President....]

... oh, and there's one more: "She'll punish people who are more successful than I am by taking money from them and giving it to me."
[I already pay out more than 35% of my salary to fund the excessiveness of our government, and Hilary wants to take MORE????]

Here's my list:

1. What Neal said.

Then Neal goes on to say more, and I couldn't have written it better myself:

Hillary has to loan her own campaign money. That means that she is spending her own cash to get her own self elected president.

Should Hillary be worried? Well she has had to dip into her own pocket to fund her campaign. But in the end, she will win the nomination ... thanks to the unmarried women voters of this country. If their man won't provide them with security, then I guess government will have to do. Maybe these women can dip into their change purses and give Hillary her money back. She's sure willing to give them some money ... though it won't come out of her pockets. It will come out of ours.

Now ... upon more reflection ... is this perhaps just a fund-raising ploy? Let's see .. you loan your campaign $5 [Million] of your own money. Then you send an email to your supporters singing the blues over how you had to loan that money to your campaign. Suddenly you receive .. say .. about $15 million in donations from your worried followers. You pay the $5 million back to yourself ... and walk around with $10 million that wasn't there last week.
[$5 MILLION???? No wonder Hilary is so free with the earnings of Americans. And is so intent on winning the Presidency. I would be too if I managed to accrue $5 MILLION cash to loan my campaign. Perhaps Hilary should offer to fund that "free" Healthcare she wants to give everyone, including illegal aliens.]

Gotta love it.

[Interesting. Ron Paul didn't have to borrow money from himself, to campaign for President.]

Keep it coming Neal. Somehow, some way, this country needs to wake up. Before the loss of Liberty becomes irretrievable.

Neal's Nuze
Politico.com
$5 million cash infusion

The Freedom To Be Owned

From time to time, I may write about my other "children", my dogs, in this blog. With my human children grown and gone, they are often my only companions by choice. And sometimes I choose my cage over my bike in favor of taking them along. They are show dogs and hunters, but most importantly, they are unique individuals that I share my life with.

I have dogs. Big dogs. Gordon Setters to be exact. I can't imagine life without my dogs. They never talk back (well sorta), they love you unconditionally, they are great company, and are my best friends. I don't even have to cook for them. How good is that?

Like most people who have dogs, or other animals, they become your "children". Neither of them has a mean bone anywhere in their big bodies. My two boys weigh in around 75 - 85 lbs. And being purebred, and show dogs, both of them are intact males. Yet they are best friends, and never offer any aggression toward each other, or me.

I take them to dog shows on occasion; one of those money-sink hobbies I like to indulge in now and then. But the past two years have been up and down for me. Both financially and personally. So I have not participated in this activity a long while.







And my dogs? Well, they became couch potatoes.

Setters are lovely dogs. They have long feathery fur on their legs, under-belly, long "spaniel" ears, and long flagging tails. Gordon Setters (so named after the Duke of Gordon in Scotland) are black with tan (mahogany) markings, same as a Doberman or Rottweiler. When they are "show-groomed", they are beautiful, eloquent dogs.



However, in the two years of their couch-potato-dom, my two boys didn't get their haircuts regularly, and they looked more like black Wooly Mammoths. Because, what most people don't know is, their coats grow LONG most everywhere; on top of their heads, between their toes, everywhere. They can be a lot of work if you have too much going on in your life and don't keep up.

So recently, my good friend Patricia encouraged me to show them in the upcoming circuit in town. I bathed them, spent hours removing hair, and general trimming. At last, they looked like the two show dogs they are. I was so proud of my work on them that it was a surprise to me when I saw the clock said 3:30 AM when I finished.

The oldest of my two boys, Zorro, is almost seven years of age - that is, seven going on six months. He never grew up mentally. He is the larger of the two, and it isn't a good idea to get between him and one of his toys, as he will gleefully charge you, and use your body for a backboard while grabbing for the toy. He is, literally, a puppy in a very large body. My living room is large, and has no coffee table, or anything else a large dog with a long tail can knock over.

Zorro has been in the show ring many times. This isn't new stuff for him. He has nearly enough points for his AKC championship. I was hoping it would all come back to him and we could just pick up where we left off. Ha! Not likely, as I would find out.

My other boy, Eliot, is coming up on three years of age, and like most Gordon boys, has matured in body, but not yet in mentality. He is a bit mellower than Zorro; not as stubborn, but still a handful. He has very little experience in the show ring, having only been shown once or twice before the age of one year. But he listens and wants to make me happy, so this should be easy....

So, again at the urging of my friend, I made plans to attend a "handling class", where dog owners meet and practice the art of showing your dog. Piece of cake right? The boys look good, and this should be routine stuff. I'm not sure what I expected from my dogs, but I've been to these classes before - in another life - and this should be a good reminder for them. The operative word being "should".

First in was Zorro - the "experienced" one - or so I thought. Zorro is a "talker". If you scold him, he talks to you with a grumbling sound (my reference to talking back, sorta). Not quite a growl, and not a moan, but something in-between. And when I scolded him for jumping around, when he should be standing still, he responded in this normal fashion as though to say, "FORGET YOU, either let me play with all these dogs, or take me home to my couch!". By the time the class was half over, and I was ready to switch over to Eliot, sweat was running down my face, and my arms felt like lead. Not to mention the sidelong glances from the other dog owners.....

So, at half time, I headed out to the car to swap dogs. But Eliot also wasn't of a mind to cooperate either, and as I struggled with putting on Eliot's collar, Zorro jumped back out of the car and proceeded to gallivant unfettered all over the premises, in the pitch black dark of night. Fortunately he didn't discover the gate leading to the road, or I'd have spent the next hour chasing him down. Eliot was also intent on getting past me so he could join in the fun. But I finally managed to get Zorro back in the car, get Eliot out, and rejoin the class.

I had no idea of what to expect from Eliot, but I soon found out. I'd made the mistake of not locking the flexi-lead and he proceeded to take off at a run toward the front door of the building. Thinking himself loose, he hit the end of the 30 foot flexi-lead at a full run. Which didn't faze him, but very nearly dislocated my shoulder.

I'm thinking.... what the hell WAS I thinking??? But, never a quitter, we went in anyway. Eliot spied all the other dogs and proceeded to jump on the nearest one in play, disregarding the leash held firmly in my hand. Shaking my head, I gained control, and we joined the class.

Eliot is known as a "head tipper". What this means is, when you talk to him, he tips his head to the side nearly 45 degrees when he looks at you. He is also a "grinner". If he thinks another human wants to pet him, his whole body wriggles and he grins at you. So I dutifully "stacked" him for inspection, and when the judge/instructor approached, he immediately attempted to curl around her legs and commenced his wriggling-grin. And while this elicits laughs, smiles and affection (which is exactly what he wanted), it would not do for him to behave this way in front of a real judge.

In this large building, there is also an 8 foot long horizontal mirror, so you can see how your dog looks when you put him in a pose. But Eliot had never seen himself in a mirror before. Upon passing it the first time, his reflection startled him, and I almost hit the floor. He got over that, but would move next to me with his head turned watching himself as we passed. Again, more laughs from the by-standers.

Most people have never seen a Gordon Setter, even if they know what one looks like from pictures. And what that class saw of my two boys was probably typical of most Gordons; the happy-go-lucky attitude, their obvious attachment to me - their owner/mom/buddy, and the "Gordon Setter Agenda" - which is never your agenda unless they choose that it should be.

This morning, after the class last night, my entire body aches. The boys are crashed out on their respective couches. I'm thinking, while I sit here and write this, how great I always feel the next morning after an all-day ride on my scooter. And how fun it would be to have a side-car on my bike for the boys, and far less effort when it comes to sharing my time with them. But, my dogs being the other love of my life, they deserve more of me, and so I am reminded that the freedom to indulge in animal ownership (or actually, their right to own me!), is a gift.

And Freedom is never anything you should take for granted in this country. Just ask Zorro and Eliot.

More On The Steffey Case

http://www.salemnews.net/news/articl...articleID=9849

Couple sues over Stark County incident

By LARRY SHIELDS, Salem News staff writer

SALEM — A Salem couple cited Stark County commissioners, the sheriff, a deputy and 15 unnamed John and Jane Does in a federal lawsuit claiming violations of their rights under the Fourth, Eighth and 14th Amendments to the Constitution.

Hope and Greg Steffey filed the action last October in the United States District Court in Cleveland.

Greg Steffey is the athletic director at Salem High School.

According to court documents, Hope Steffey claims assault, battery, unreasonable seizure and deliberate indifference by failing to provide adequate medical care, while both claim damage from “unreasonable governmental actions by the defendants.”

Named as defendants are Sheriff Timothy A. Swanson, the three commissioners, Deputy Richard T. Gurlea, along with John and Jane Does numbers one through 15.

The Stark County Sheriff reportedly denied the allegations.

The narrative of court documents said that on Oct. 20, 2006 Hope Steffey was allegedly assaulted by another woman on Weimer Dr. S.E. and Gurlea responded, questioned Steffey and asked for identification and she “mistakenly” produced the driver’s license of her dead sister, which she kept as a personal memento.

She immediately recognized her mistake and asked for it back, but Gurlea allegedly refused.

Documents say she “begged” for the return of her license but it wasn’t returned.

The deputy then ran a computer check of the right license and Steffey’s cousin noticed a bald spot on her head from the assault.

The cousin “reminded” the deputy that Steffey was the victim while advising Steffey of the hair loss which made her visibly upset.

The documents alleged Gurlea failed to call for medical assistance despite knowledge Steffey was injured.

Gurlea the, documents allege, warned Steffey to calm down and Steffey replied she was upset and could exercise her freedom of speech and her cousin again attempted to remind the deputy that Steffey was the victim and she had been knocked unconscious by the assailant.

The deputy allegedly refused to acknowledge her injuries.

Court documents said that after searching Steffey’s car, he turned to the two and questioned the cousin when Steffey asked for her sister’s license back.

Gurlea allegedly turned angrily and responded “shut up about your dead sister.”

Steffey pointed her finger at her sister’s license in the deputy’s pocket and said, “she was here, she was someone” and Gurlea allegedly, suddenly exploded into a rage and allegedly slammed her face into his cruiser breaking a tooth, and pinning her against the cruiser, allegedly saying, “are you going to stop?”

The documents allege Gurlea then threw her to the ground causing cuts and bruises and with the weight of his body on her she could not breathe.

Steffey was then handcuffed and told to sit in the cruiser.

At the county jail, court documents allege she was knocked to the ground with male deputies/guard/staff present.

She was questioned and allegedly strip searched without authorization, pursuant to law and policy.

Steffey was allegedly held to the ground and stripped completely naked and left inside the jail cell for six hours without a blanket and “in order to try to keep warm, and regain dignity” she “wrapped herself in toilet paper to prevent the Sheriff’s deputies/guards/staff from seeing her naked.”

The documents allege she was not permitted access to a telephone; was not “booked” for six hours; didn’t receive “reasonable” medical attention for six over hours; repeatedly called for help; went without clothing; spent the entire night in jail naked; and was “eventually” advised by a guard she was charged with resisting and disorderly conduct.

The documents allege she was physically and emotionally brutalized while Gurlea and the John and Jane Does “sought charges against” her to cover up their “unreasonable acts and omissions.”

Greg Steffey claims to have lost the love, society, affection and consortium of his wife as a direct result of the actions and inactions of the defendants in one of the six claims for relief.

The 16-page complaint notes in the fifth claim for relief that the sheriff produced thousands of pages of requested records, but “specifically failed to produce the videotape of the strip search.”

It added, “The available public records indicate the videotape camera that would have captured the incident was functioning.”

Since the October filing, Cleveland television Channel 3 WKYC obtained and posted a video clip of the strip search at: http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_articl...?storyid=82447

The Cleveland station featured the incident on its Thursday night news program and also was to air a second part Friday night.

The couple demands a trial by jury with damages for medical care, incurred bills and future expenses, while demanding judgment in an amount in excess of the courts jurisdictional minimum; punitive damages to be determined at trial; equitable relief; attorney’s fees, costs of action and other associate costs; and any and all other relief the court deem equitable, necessary and just.

Larry Shields can be reached at lshields@salemnews.net

See videos here.

Victim of Assault - Assaulted by Police

This video and story was posted on Big Bend Bikers For Freedom today. In hopes that more will see it, I've posted it here as well.

CANTON, OH -- Hope Steffey's night began with a call to police for help. It ended with her face down, completely naked and sobbing on a jail cell floor.

If you live in Stark County, Ohio, you'd better hope you don't have need of Police protection. Don't live there? It could happen in YOUR town. In fact, count on it.

Please watch the video below. It might make you angry, it might make you feel rage. And it should. How long will YOU allow public office in this country treat innocent citizens this way?



Upon searching, I found the second part video below.



Do you think a victim should be treated this way? How about a criminal? Voice your opinion of what happened to this woman.

The Story in the news.


Write to the Stark County Sheriff Department and express your outrage.

Write to Ohio Governor, Ted Strickland, and express your outrage.

Next time, this could be you, or me.

While President Bush sends more our sons and daughters overseas to fight for someone else's freedom, our own country is doing away with ours. What's wrong with this picture?