Stephen Nichols in MA

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

I can't find the thread (I thought we'd talked about this case) on 84-year old Stephen Nichols, a Korean War veteran and former police officer who was fired from his job as a school crossing guard, and had all his guns seized under the Mass. "red flag" law. All over somebody at a coffee shop overhearing him complaining that the school's assigned "resource officer" was taking off-campus breaks and leaving the property unguarded, exposing it to the risk that anybody could come in and shoot the place up.

This abuse of the "red flag law" was the topic of an article in the January 2020 issue of America's First Freedom, one of the NRA's magazines for their members.

If there isn't a thread already in progress about this case, then I'll start this one.

 

[MRH]

Sub'd. This thread is very likely to make me angry, as the brief summary already did, but I still want to know what's going on out there. Call it self torture.

 

[rbstern]

Like California, Massachusetts is too far gone to save.

The distressing thing is, unlike California, Massachusetts is the birthplace of the most profound American expression of individual libery.

 

[Grub Master]

Update

On Oct. 15, Nichols returned to his twice-daily post at the crosswalk on the corner of Spring and Pine Streets by the office of the Martha’s Vineyard superintendent of schools. Numerous motorists waved, beeped, or gave Nichols the thumbs-up as they passed. As students began to trickle down the sidewalk, Nichols offered them Life Savers candies whether they crossed or continued walking on the sidewalk. A handful of staffers from the superintendent’s office came outside and watched Nichols perform his duties. Nichols told The Times he was glad to be back helping the students.

In a statement released Monday, Police Chief Mark Saloio, who was actively involved in the investigation of Nichols, said he was never fired, but his job was under review.
“The town, collectively, has expressed an outpouring of concern about Mr. Nichols, and his employment as a school crossing guard. We as well share those concerns. We wish to make you aware that today, Mr. Nichols was informed that he may return to his crossing guard duties tomorrow morning,” Saloio wrote in an email to The Times. “This return to work was always pending upon a final review that was in process. Throughout this period, Mr. Nichols has retained his position as a crossing guard for the town. However, these reviews are thorough and complete, and neither immediate nor instantaneous.” [MV Times]

No news about his guns being returned as of the date of the article.

 

[Lionheart]

Yep. Got his job back but I'll bet they still have his guns. I wish some 2nd Amen law firm would represent him and sue their ass.
Fire the police chief who took his guns. They are acting like they did him a damn favor to give him his job back. Disgusting.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

Mass. law says that the person whose guns were taken by that "red flag" (extreme risk protective order) has a right to a court hearing within 10 days.

At such a hearing, the government has the burden of proof and persuasion, to show the truth of what was in the sworn statement that got the Court to issue its temporary Order.


So.... was such a hearing offered to Mr. Nichols?

Did he (and his lawyer) attend the hearing, cross-examine the State's witnesses, and offer his own testimony and evidence?

What was the judge's ruling from that 10-day due process hearing?

If NO SUCH HEARING WAS HELD, and thus no "opportunity to be heard" ever given, it sounds like the authorities have acted IN VIOLATION OF the red flag law, not in compliance with it.

--------------

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

Maybe the Massachusetts cops didn't even TRY to obey the law, and just took his guns because--well-- because they're the cops, and all the Socialists up in that commie state just know that it's the job of Big Brother to disarm the little people. A naked power grab and violation of rights outside of any legal authority.

EDITED: It doesn't appear to me that the big problem was taking his guns initially. That's wrong, based on the unverified statement of some random stranger who overheard part of a conversation at a coffee shop. BUT THE BIGGER ISSUE is why the man didn't get his guns back 10 days later. It's now been 3 months and 1 week since his guns were seized. (Sept 20th was when the emergency protection order was served, in response to what some customer overheard from a Sept. 18th conversation at the diner).