798 replies to this topic

[Don Moran]

Good morning Howard, what we are allowed to do and not, will be decided by the Appellate Court Justices at this point... there may not even allow oral arguments... I'm not an attorney either, but from what I understand it is very unusual to have the court allow briefs and then not allow responses from the opposition, but that is what they have done at this juncture in this case. (Of course, by amending their brief, the Defendants were able to rebutt some of our arguments;))

So, the question is, would we be allowed discovery to try and find out if their "error" was intentional? My answer would be that anyone can file a complaint with the ethics committee of the Illinois Bar when they see something they feel deserves it. I know there are probably quiet a few people that may have that impression around here... the time limits for such complaints are very lenient and I'd ask that if anyone were interested in doing such a thing, to wait until the Appelate Court has ruled.

Thanks to all that have welcomed me here. This seems to be a very nice community and I'll try and post occasionally as my time allows and issues arise
.
Thanks,

Don Moran

Mr. Moran, thanks for your kind words. Will the plaintiffs in this case be able to perform discovery to determine whether the direct mis-quotations of the Supreme Court Heller decision were intentional?

I'm not a lawyer yet I can see that the direct quotation of Heller on page 1 of Anita Alverez's States Attorney Office brief missing from the United States Supreme Court's Heller case. Much worse is the fact that the entire argument presented in Cook County's brief is based on that false quote.

I'm sure you agree that The Illinois Bar Association is probably interested to know if lawyers knowingly lie in court. Shouldn't the court allow discovery interviews of Anita's office to ameliorate the harm already done to our side in this case?

P.S. Please accept this small gift of appreciation for your fine work with the ISRA. This non-copyrighted, improved version of your likeness is presented to you for any Seasonal purpose you see fit.

[abolt243]

So, the question is, would we be allowed discovery to try and find out if their "error" was intentional? My answer would be that anyone can file a complaint with the ethics committee of the Illinois Bar when they see something they feel deserves it. I know there are probably quiet a few people that may have that impression around here... the time limits for such complaints are very lenient and I'd ask that if anyone were interested in doing such a thing, to wait until the Appelate Court has ruled.

Thanks,

Don Moran

Don,

When the time comes that you determine that complaints need to be filed, please let us know. The members of this community have become quite adept at contacting legislators regarding pending legistlation. I would guess that we could channel that expertise towards the Ethic Committee of the Illinois Bar Association if it would benefit the cause.

Thanks,

Tim

[Howard Roark]

.

Attached Images

• 

[mstrat]

Does anyone know a timeline when we're expecting to receive any updates?

[Druid]

Could be any day now. I'm surprised the Appellate court hasn't released their decision yet. I hope that's a good sign.

There was an expected decision on Feb. 2rd, but that was "canceled". Whatever that means.

[Druid]

The new Appellate opinion. Broken into parts and compressed so I can upload it to IllinoisCarry.

Attached Files

•  Wilson Decision 2-9-11 part1.zip   4.66MB   355 downloads

[Druid]

part 2

Attached Files

•  Wilson Decision 2-9-11 part2.zip   5.07MB   335 downloads

[Druid]

part 3 (of 3)

Attached Files

•  Wilson Decision 2-9-11 part3.zip   4.74MB   345 downloads

[Druid]

I think it's clear from the new Appellate decision that the justices didn't even bother to read our brief. They basically just re-wrote their old opinion and threw in a few more things about Heller and McDonald. They talk about old arguments that were not even made in our brief, such as claiming the ordinance to be "vague or overbroad". They also seem to accept the fabricated quotation of the Federal Supreme Court about "common handguns", and equate so called assault weapons with automatic machine guns, falsely claiming them be "rapid fire".

[mstrat]

Thanks for the update Druid.

Going to give this a read tomorrow. I've attached a single PDF with all the pages in it for you.

Attached Files

•  Wilson Decision 2-9-11.pdf   4.31MB   476 downloads

[Gary]

This is very disappointing.

[GarandFan]

I think it's clear from the new Appellate decision that the justices didn't even bother to read our brief. They basically just re-wrote their old opinion and threw in a few more things about Heller and McDonald. They talk about old arguments that were not even made in our brief, such as claiming the ordinance to be "vague or overbroad". They also seem to accept the fabricated quotation of the Federal Supreme Court about "common handguns", and equate so called assault weapons with automatic machine guns, falsely claiming them be "rapid fire".

If this is true ... and my initial reading of it would concur ... a good lawyer would (or should) be able to thoroughly thrash this current opinion on appeal to the IL Supreme Court. Not only did their analysis seriously lack substance (how on earth can you rule that semiauto guns with detachable magazines are not in common use for lawful purposes?), but since both decisions contain so much overlap, and apparently issues in the new brief weren't discussed, they appear to have been negligent in doing their job.

[GarandFan]

This is very disappointing.

Disappointing? Yes. Travesty of justice? Arguably so.

[Druid]

They have posted the PDF on the Appellate Website (valid for 90 days): http://www.state.il....ary/1081202.pdf

[Sigma]

How do you think the supreme will rule

[Druid]

How do you think the supreme will rule

Who knows. Some say that they feel this case will eventually go Federal to get a fair trail and some justices who will actually read the briefs. I would like a win at the Illinois Supreme court, there is a good chance but I'm not getting my hopes up.

[Talonap]

Any news on this yet?

[Tvandermyde]

Petiton for cert filed

[Talonap]

Petiton for cert filed

Thank you! Good News! (I hope)

[Sigma]

I was reading the heller again and maybe because im bias but i dont see how they think they can get away with this.
my understanding is simple. its a modern firearm and you can ban an entire class of firearm.

[Talonap]

I was reading the heller again and maybe because im bias but i dont see how they think they can get away with this.
my understanding is simple. its a modern firearm and you can ban an entire class of firearm.

They're in Illinois... Orland Park does the same thing. They also have ammo registration from what I understand here:
http://www.isp.state.../orlandpark.pdf

[Sigma]

What the heck is up with Orland, when have they ever had a problem justifying this stupid ordinance. This is why preemption is so important.

[billzfx4]

Years ago they had a gun shop/shooting range open up in the nearly vacant mall across from Orland Square, and the sheeple got their undies all in a twist over it.

[Talonap]

Time for my monthly post... Anyone hear anything on this yet?

[JR1987]

I have been keeping an eye on it for some time now trying to get new information. I have found nothing.

It boggles my mind that in one bill you can compare an AR15 or Ak47 to a 10/22...

It just shows how ignorant and stupid the legislatures in this county are.

I mean honestly... I can follow the logic of AR15's and AK47s being in a group of assault weapons. I think its wrong, but the two share similarities.

But putting a 10/22 in that category...? Shameful.

[Sigma]

Logic doesnt matter. Facts dont either. If it is long and black they are afraid of it. (thats what she said)

[GarandFan]

It boggles my mind that in one bill you can compare an AR15 or Ak47 to a 10/22...

I compare them all the time. They are all commonly-owned rifles.

[JR1987]

No, it is obviously because they are "evil"...

[Talonap]

Petiton for cert filed

Is there anything we can do to encourage the IL Supreme Court to hear this case - i.e. file some sort of brief or something like in Heller? (I don't know how this works.) Or do we just wait for the Justices to decide?

[Davey]

Petiton for cert filed

What does this even really mean?