Firearms Ownership and Divorce

[GURPS]

NUTMEG STATE SWAT STORMS GUN OWNER’S HOME, SEIZES FIREARMS


“High risk SWAT team rolls in and takes all my guns,” said Edward F. Taupier the respondent in a two-year divorce action that has escalated to an all-out war. “It took two armadillo armored vehicles, 75 officers with weapons drawn, and 45 minutes to raid my house.”

Although he said he posed no risk to the officers, Taupier was thrown to the ground and arrested.

Taupier, who is a former Wall Street chief officer at Citibank, said he has no prior record of arrests or charges – not even a speeding ticket – yet his home was invaded and his guns stolen based on a false allegation made by a person he does not even know, he said.

Linda J. Allard, a West Hartford family law attorney, contacted Superior Court Judge Elizabeth L. Bozzuto, the judge assigned in his divorce proceeding, to discuss a private email she never received directly, he said. “I have never met Linda Allard. I didn’t do anything wrong. I sent an email to seven people that did not include Allard.”

 

[PsyOps]

This article is a little confusing... what was he charged with?

 

[vraiblonde]

This is all according to Mr. Taupier, therefore it may or may not be entirely true. It sounds pretty fantastic, so my guess is that he's embellishing or leaving a few details out.

 

[kwillia]

This is all according to Mr. Taupier, therefore it may or may not be entirely true. It sounds pretty fantastic, so my guess is that he's embellishing or leaving a few details out.

Details like this... looks like a valid raid to me....


A Cromwell man was arraigned on threatening and harassment charges Tuesday for allegedly making threats against a Hartford Superior Court judge.

State police received a report on Thursday that Taupier sent a threatening email in which he allegedly made threats against the judge, the judge's family and "referenced the use of firearms." State troopers obtained the search warrant for Taupier's home and served it Friday afternoon.

http://articles.courant.com/2014-09...mwell-man-charged-search-warrant-divorce-case

In addition to his divorce case, Taupier has a criminal case pending against him in Superior Court in Middletown for two felonies: voyeurism with malice and disseminating voyeuristic material. On Tuesday, the threatening case was transferred to Middletown as well. Taupier is scheduled to appear there on Thursday.

 

[GURPS]

This is all according to Mr. Taupier, therefore it may or may not be entirely true. It sounds pretty fantastic, so my guess is that he's embellishing or leaving a few details out.

Indeed ....

it seems to stem from an alleged email, missing statements

Allard’s statement to the police, which is missing from evidence, falsely accuses Taupier of threatening Bozzuto in that email,

the wife initiates a hearing

Taupier’s arrest happened just two days after Tanya A. Taupier initiated an ex parte emergency hearing on Aug. 29 in which Bozzuto ordered ...

[clip]

Mrs. Taupier then filed a full protective order against him, even though there was no family threat, he said. In court, Mrs. Taupier said Taupier’s possession of guns exposes the children to potential, deadly thugs that can hurt them.

the lawyer for the children:

It was the court appointed guardian ad litem, who initiated the gun ban against him without any evidence his hobby was a threat, he said.

it seems to boil down to this:

Family court circumvented criminal law by issuing a criminal order in a civil court arena, he said. “The risk warrant allowed officials to take custody and employ the SWAT teams.” In the criminal court, the risk warrant was deemed invalid, he said.

based on other stories in the news involving Divorce, Children, and Firearms
...... it is not much of a stretch to believe the the mother made a complaint to the GAL about weapons in the house, and fear, concern .... etc and GAL moved to have the weapons removed with no proof of any potential illegal activity - #because ya know GUNS

 

[GURPS]

the is interesting:

Tanya Taupier v. Edward Taupier Emergency Motions

Published by JournalistABC
According to the Connecticut Judicial Branch's certification stamps noting the date and time of entry of these court documents:

(1) p.1-2, On 8/25/2014 at 9:29 am, Tanya Taupier filed an emergency ex parte motion (form JD-FM-222).

(2) p.3, On 8/22/2014 at 4:11 pm, Judge Elizabeth Bozzuto issued and filed orders with the court in response to the motion that Tanya Taupier did not file until 3 days later on 8/25/2014. Judge Bozzuto's signature is dated (by hand) 8/25/2014.

(3) p.4-5, On 8/25/2014 at 3:59 pm, Tanya Taupier filed a corresponding Affidavit Concerning Children (form JD-FM-164)

some real mind reading Minority Report stuff going on there ..
.... the legal profession is real paticualr about getting dates and times correct

 

[vraiblonde]

Okay, but it's all "he said". Are there any documents backing his story up? Certainly charging docs are a matter of public record, as are arrests. "He" also says the charges are trumped up and all allegations are completely false - don't they all say that?

Remember that woman who spray painted racial slurs all over her own car to get people all jacked up about racism? Remember Tawana Brawley? This guy smells like them.

 

[kwillia]

It doesn't seem like he's a good choice for gun rights poster child. There is definitly more to the story than his side of story proclaiming complete innocence.

http://www.14news.com/story/22556817/accused-cromwell-voyeur-due-in-court

A man from Cromwell accused of voyeurism is due in court Tuesday.

MOREAdditional Links
Edward Taupier was arrested last month.

Police said he posted an intimate video online, but police won't say where the video was taken or what was on the video.

During a search of his home, police said they also found related photographs and other videos.

 

[rdytogo]

This is all according to Mr. Taupier, therefore it may or may not be entirely true. It sounds pretty fantastic, so my guess is that he's embellishing or leaving a few details out.

He said he didn't do anythign wrong. We should all be up in arms about this!

 

[MMDad]

Okay, but it's all "he said". Are there any documents backing his story up? Certainly charging docs are a matter of public record, as are arrests. "He" also says the charges are trumped up and all allegations are completely false - don't they all say that?

Remember that woman who spray painted racial slurs all over her own car to get people all jacked up about racism? Remember Tawana Brawley? This guy smells like them.

Sounds a little "War of the Roses" to me. That's why the best way to handle divorce is to just swallow your pride, control your greed, and get it over as quickly as possible. In the long run the only people who win a divorce battle are the lawyers.

 

[vraiblonde]

Sounds a little "War of the Roses" to me. That's why the best way to handle divorce is to just swallow your pride, control your greed, and get it over as quickly as possible. In the long run the only people who win a divorce battle are the lawyers.

The story Kwillia posted indicates he's lying. And gun nutters picked this story up and ran with it before checking any sources. This is why people like me don't want to get involved with "rights" organizations - because they're just propaganda machines who will lie their asses off to further their agenda and rouse the rabble.

 

[kwillia]

Sounds a little "War of the Roses" to me. That's why the best way to handle divorce is to just swallow your pride, control your greed, and get it over as quickly as possible. In the long run the only people who win a divorce battle are the lawyers.

I agree it sounds ugly but I also think there was probable cause to disarm dear Eddie when... and I will cut/paste his own words “I have never met Linda Allard. I didn’t do anything wrong. I sent an email to seven people that did not include Allard” which is not at all a denial of making the threats but rather that he didn't threaten "directly".

 

[tommyjo]

The story Kwillia posted indicates he's lying. And gun nutters picked this story up and ran with it before checking any sources. This is why people like me don't want to get involved with "rights" organizations - because they're just propaganda machines who will lie their asses off to further their agenda and rouse the rabble.

This post adequately describes the majority of posts by GRUPS, Hijinx, BOP, Mamatutu and the rest of the far right crew. Checking the story, verifying the facts is not important...pushing the negative propaganda is.

 

[Merlin99]

This post adequately describes the majority of posts by GRUPS, Hijinx, BOP, Mamatutu and the rest of the far right crew. Checking the story, verifying the facts is not important...pushing the negative propaganda is.

You say this like it's only the far right that does it, have you ever read a Huff Po article? They've dedicated an entire online newspaper to doing for the left exactly what your ascribing to the right.

 

[Ted-Taupier]

1) I was charged with Threatening and Harassment for an email that never made it to the suppose victim
2) They raided my home and my 50K of custom and antique guns - not because I was a criminal but because they those in power said I was a threat ( Risk warrant was thrown out of court 6 weeks later after my incarceration )
2a) Risk warrant was illegal and signed by a judge that is bias and known to hate the 2nd amendment and stated in a court of law that any lawyer protecting the 2nd amendment should be ashamed of them selves ( Mullarkey - J and Rachel Baird - esq)
3) My original bond was $350K = $35,000 cash only which was extremely excessive ( pluto range ), 95-99% have less than a $1000 Bond = 100.00 cash
4) My original arraignment was 12 Sept, however once i was bonded out, it change to 02 Sept
5) 02 Sept Bail was jacked up $40K more because they said I had guns...( i was in jail and i was arrested and the state police took my pistol permit - how exactly did I acquire more guns?) I have the transcript I will send/share you can read ...
6) Now my bail is 3/4 of a million dollars for a pleaded misdemeanor : totally logical ( 8th amendment violation)
7) This is punitive and purely retaliation for me finding out that BOZZUTO is corrupt and with her ex-husband was acquiring foreclosures/banckrupcies found in family court - she owns 20-25 properties in CT acquired while she was on the bench and now sealed in their divorce records
8) I was arrested 2 years ago when my then wife found a new boyfriend Rodger London at Work Aetna insurance - she also hired the ex - corrupt criminal attorney Christopher Morano - I keep requesting a trial and the state refuses to let me have one ? Why ..?
9) Barbara Hoffman signed a warrant with judge David Gold on the basis that Chris Morano called and said he had the evidence and seen the evidence and now Ted needs to be arrested - 4 months later Barbara call Chris Morano back and says please provide evidence and Chris has amnesia ..Barbara walks off the case and leaves the prosecution office to do administrative work ?

http://rebelpundit.com/corrupt-courts-strip-divorcees-of-constitutional-rights/

http://humanevents.com/2014/11/17/nutmeg-state-swat-storms-gun-owners-home-seizes-firearms/

http://youtu.be/JMDdceGIbrM
Here is the kidnapping with Cromwell Police, BY THE WAY, police had no authority to call the school and tell them they are extracting and terrorizing my children, there was no court order to criminalize the children on their first day of school.
ted.taupier@sbdllc.net

 

[Ted-Taupier]

please tell me what are the lies exactly .. i dont know you tommyjo

 

[Gilligan]

.. i dont know you tommyjo

Don't mind her. She's just a one-post sock puppet with a bad case of acid reflux...

 

[Ted-Taupier]

here is the statue what they based the arrest on >>
( private protected speech does not show intended - or meet the true threat standard ) - this is the same as John Bolton wanting to hang Edward Snowded .. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/john-bolton-edward-snowden_n_4461196.html

- Sec. 53a-61aa. Threatening in the first degree: Class D felony. (a) A person is guilty of threatening in the first degree when such person (1) (A) threatens to commit any crime involving the use of a hazardous substance with the intent to terrorize another person, to cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly or facility of public transportation or otherwise to cause serious public inconvenience, or (B) threatens to commit such crime in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror, evacuation or inconvenience, or (2) (A) threatens to commit any crime of violence with the intent to cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly or facility of public transportation or otherwise to cause serious public inconvenience, or (B) threatens to commit such crime in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such evacuation or inconvenience.

(b) For the purposes of this section, "hazardous substance" means any physical, chemical, biological or radiological substance or matter which, because of its quantity, concentration or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health.

(c) Threatening in the first degree is a class D felony.

 

[kwillia]

1) I was charged with Threatening and Harassment for an email that never made it to the suppose victim

here is the statue what they based the arrest on >>
( private protected speech does not show intended - or meet the true threat standard ) - this is the same as John Bolton wanting to hang Edward Snowded .. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/john-bolton-edward-snowden_n_4461196.html

- Sec. 53a-61aa. Threatening in the first degree: Class D felony. (a) A person is guilty of threatening in the first degree when such person (1) (A) threatens to commit any crime involving the use of a hazardous substance with the intent to terrorize another person, to cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly or facility of public transportation or otherwise to cause serious public inconvenience, or (B) threatens to commit such crime in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror, evacuation or inconvenience, or (2) (A) threatens to commit any crime of violence with the intent to cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly or facility of public transportation or otherwise to cause serious public inconvenience, or (B) threatens to commit such crime in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such evacuation or inconvenience.

(b) For the purposes of this section, "hazardous substance" means any physical, chemical, biological or radiological substance or matter which, because of its quantity, concentration or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health.

(c) Threatening in the first degree is a class D felony.

IMO number 1 of your first post matches the charges you have in this last post. If you indeed made a direct threat of bodily harm about a person in an email it doesn't matter that you didn't CC that person on the email. It doesn't make it less of a direct threat just because you didn't warn them directly. The rest of your points in your first post may or may not pan out to be a big conspiracy against you but even if its all true none of it changes the fact that you threatened someone with bodily harm. Because of this I believe you gave them just cause to take away your firearms by doing so.

 

[MMDad]

IMO number 1 of your first post matches the charges you have in this last post. If you indeed made a direct threat of bodily harm about a person in an email it doesn't matter that you didn't CC that person on the email. It doesn't make it less of a direct threat just because you didn't warn them directly. The rest of your points in your first post may or may not pan out to be a big conspiracy against you but even if its all true none of it changes the fact that you threatened someone with bodily harm. Because of this I believe you gave them just cause to take away your firearms by doing so.

Look now missy, don't you start getting all logical and stuff! This is about emotion and conspiracies. Leave your silly facts out of it.