Since he was prohibited by the order, if she had sufficient evidence to generate probable cause that the firearms were in the house (it sounds like she knew sufficient specifics for PC), then she could have provided that info to law enforcement and they could have gotten a warrant to seize the firearms.Originally Posted by Sensei
I think this is just something that somebody wanted to let the prosecutor worry about rather than having somebody question their discretion, and seems doubtful it will ever get prosecuted. It will fade from the news feeds and she will plead to some minor thing, and none of us will ever know what ever happened.
In a neighboring community here I know of a situation where a piece of property that happened to be a shotgun that had been gifted to a daughter was in dispute in a nasty divorce situation. And the dad, just to be a dickhead, cut off the barrel of the shotgun to ruin it, then met up for a supervised transfer of the property, at the courthouse... Pretty sure it caused a fuss, but I never heard of anybody going to prison.
Last edited by mmc45414; 06-25-2019 at 09:53 AM.
I think BB has the best approach.
I know of situations where someone checked themselves into an inpatient facility for suicidal ideation, and the extended family moved the guns out of the person's house before they came home. I think that was the right choice. FWIW, the patient agreed after they were home, but suppose they hadn't. Do you prosecute the family even if they give the guns back when requested? That doesn't seem like it's advancing the cause of justice.
Similarly, I know cases where a parent was sliding into dementia and the kids moved the guns and/or car keys. Sure, the legal answer is to force a competency hearing or whatever, but that is traumatic in it's own way. But doing nothing wasn't really fair, either - Granny was coming home with dings on the car and no memory of how they happened, but insisted she was fine to drive. The car keys got 'lost', and Gran was OK with the explanation that they were looking for them - she never remembered that she'd heard the same story yesterday. My sense is that it was the kindest way to solve the problem.
These cases may be morally distinguishable because they don't have any of the adversarial component of divorces - the people here are clearly acting in what they think the best interests of the relative - but legally they are the same: removing property that isn't yours.
That's true, but as the police, I would be pissed if a prosecutor put me in a position to have to say that on the stand (I'd like to think I'm smart enough to avoid this situation). The defense is going to follow up with very polite questions to establish professional qualifications, then repeated shots to my nuts about why I'm too lazy to do my job, and then bend me over and do with me with no lube over why I'm punishing a decent person that is doing my job for me, because I'm a "professional" and just too lazy to do my job. I think a junior grade prosecutor ist going to see that one coming from a mile away, unless there's some bad blood between the prosecutor and an officer, I don't see that part of it happening either.
Whether you think you can or you can't, you're probably right.
Do you mean in a prosecution of the woman for burglary or larceny? If so, I agree and was just pointing out that she had a legal way to accomplish exactly what she wanted while avoiding any potential complications that arose from her course of action.
Well looking at it a little more from the Woman's perspective, he just attacked her and probably threatened her. She could have employed her right to self defense right there.
*Did she know she could have the police get the firearms?
*Based on experience to date, would she have believed it? Would a reasonable person?
*She went to jail, but frankly she is alive. She might not have been had he gotten out and had access to them.
Note: I am recommending NOTHING here, just putting up a point for debate's sake.
Last edited by Zincwarrior; 06-25-2019 at 01:46 PM.
He alledgedly just attacked her. He is presumed innocent just as she is. I'm going to go out on the ASSuME limb and say both of them are assholes and the Lakeland PD has probably been playing referee for a while. The arrests of both of them are likely to have been a little of " If I have to pull this car over and come back there..." to get adolescents in adult bodies to knock off the BS.
Speculating on the charges based on out of state experience is just that. Definitely not burglary where I live, and at most a misdemeanor B&E. Larceny of a firearm (felony here) wouldn't be appropriate due to the elements to prove the charge.
Last edited by CWM11B; 06-25-2019 at 03:29 PM.
This is part of the reason why I知 interested in this case. I routinely place suicidal patients under involuntary commitment. Those who we feel are legit and admit to having access to guns are inevitably held until family members can secure the weapons. By securing I mean the family member keeping them instead of giving them to the police which is far more akin to burglary that what happened in this case. I致e not once heard of a family member being charged, but I知 sure that some of these patients would request charges if the police called over to the hospital and asked them if they wanted to press charges.
Bottom line, the decision to call the husband in jail to inquire if he wanted to press charges for the wife turning over his prohibited guns was the head scratcher for me. I think that BehindBlueEyes has the best solution.
Last edited by Sensei; 06-25-2019 at 03:01 PM.
I like my rifles like my women - short, light, fast, brown, and suppressed.
Depends Doc. If the family members have authorized access to the patient's residence or live with them I see no issue. If not, your commitment order can keep them on hold until the family got an appropriate court order, most likely a civil process involving the SO where we live.The crux of this case, I believe, is that these two were legally separated, living apart, and she had no access or right to his current place of residence. To not ask the husband if he wished to prosecute would be denying him his due process, and could open the officer up to a complaint of malfeasance. This cuts both ways and is one of the many reasons I hated dealing with domestic disputes and am glad that part of my life is forever behind me. Although in jail, he still has his rights.
For anyone interested in how this case is turning out, the state attorney has dropped the original charges of armed burglary and grand theft to trespassing. The woman took a friend with her to the apartment and sworn testimony from the friend shows the woman was planning on pawning expensive items in the apartment. The BS rhetoric that she feared for her life and that is why she turned in the guns is just that, BS. As the Leo痴 on this site know the old saying there are 3 sides to every story still holds true.
Reply With Quote