Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 80

Thread: CO Cop “Red Flagged” by Mother of Deceased Suspect.

  1. #41
    Member Rock185's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    The Great Southwest, under the Tonto Rim

    Thumbs up

    Well, I guess it was inevitable that aggrieved persons would use Red Flag laws against LE. If upheld, which I can't imagine, I could see this becoming a favored tactic against LE in future. Such Red Flag orders could end officers careers. After all, LE has all those scary guns, which should never, ever be used against anyone at anytime. In fact, we are already seeing those laws being used against people some person may have a beef with. And as indicated in this case, a court is unlikely to initially deny such an order, just in case it might be appropriate. I dealt with Orders of Protection, and Injunctions against Harassment as an LEO. Prohibitions against the defendant possessing, having access to, or buying a firearm during the period the order was in force(one year), was a common part of theses orders. I never saw or heard of a judge denying an Order of Protection or Injunction against harassment, no matter how flimsy, far fetched, or ridiculous the allegations. The defendant could request a hearing, wherein the court could quash, continue or modify the order. Sometimes, people would obtain, what I thought of as Dueling Orders of Protections and Injunctions, against each other from different courts. As an officer, who never attended law school, those were sometimes hard to figure out. The chain of command, Dept. legal adviser, etc. sometimes had to put their heads together to figure out how these orders were to be lawfully addressed...

    FWIW, the larger Dept. where I worked for 20+ years was reluctant to charge false information against any member of the public, no matter how egregious their lies were were found to be. This seemed to be changing over the years as anti-police activists, and lawsuits, IMHO, were starting to eat the Dept. up, as they knew they were unlikely to ever face any repercussions from their false accusations. The media, City Council, police upper management more and more seem to side with the anti-police special interest groups. So it's easy to see why persons would have little concern about filing false reports, Red flag and otherwise, with such support. The Phoenix City Council now has an anti-police activist member who wears an "End Police Brutality" T-Shirt to Council meetings. A much smaller Dept., where I later served for a decade or so, was more willing to pursue false info type charges.
    Last edited by Rock185; 01-24-2020 at 04:06 AM.

  2. #42
    Revolvers Revolvers 1911s Stephanie B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    East 860 by South 413
    Quote Originally Posted by Rock185 View Post
    Well, I guess it was inevitable that aggrieved persons would use Red Flag laws against LE. If upheld, which I can't imagine, I could see this becoming a favored tactic against LE in future. Such Red Flag orders could end officers careers. After all, LE has all those scary guns, which should never, ever be used against anyone at anytime. In fact, we are already seeing those laws being used against people some person may have a beef with. And as indicated in this case, a court is unlikely to initially deny such an order, just in case it might be appropriate. I dealt with Orders of Protection, and Injunctions against Harassment as an LEO. Prohibitions against the defendant possessing, having access to, or buying a firearm during the period the order was in force(one year), was a common part of theses orders. I never saw or heard of a judge denying an Order of Protection or Injunction against harassment, no matter how flimsy, far fetched, or ridiculous the allegations. The defendant could request a hearing, wherein the court could quash, continue or modify the order. Sometimes, people would obtain, what I thought of as Dueling Orders of Protections and Injunctions, against each other from different courts. As an officer, who never attended law school, those were sometimes hard to figure out. The chain of command, Dept. legal adviser, etc. sometimes had to put their heads together to figure out how these orders were to be lawfully addressed...

    FWIW, the larger Dept. where I worked for 20+ years was reluctant to charge false information against any member of the public, no matter how egregious their lies were were found to be. This seemed to be changing over the years as anti-police activists, and lawsuits, IMHO, were starting to eat the Dept. up, as they knew they were unlikely to ever face any repercussions from their false accusations. The media, City Council, police upper management more and more seem to side with the anti-police special interest groups. So it's easy to see why persons would have little concern about filing false reports, Red flag and otherwise, with such support. The Phoenix City Council now has an anti-police activist member who wears an "End Police Brutality" T-Shirt to Council meetings. A much smaller Dept., where I later served for a decade or so, was more willing to pursue false info type charges.
    Where I practiced law, I saw a lot of orders of protection denied. A hearing was mandatory. The only times that a preliminary order was extended was when the respondent was making himself unavailable.

    (The hearings were held just before one of the docket calls, so when I was at the courthouse early, I'd sit in on them. They were very educational as to what the judge was looking for. Unsupported accusations were never enough.)
    If we have to march off into the next world, let us walk there on the bodies of our enemies.

  3. #43
    Site Supporter Erick Gelhaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Wasatch Front
    Honestly, I did not think I would see this happen ...

    https://kdvr.com/2020/01/30/perjury-...s-confiscated/

    It'd be nice to see a conviction, a cell door getting slammed shut, and a lost key.

  4. #44
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    I'd be surprised if that's not coming soon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Erick Gelhaus View Post
    Honestly, I did not think I would see this happen ...

    https://kdvr.com/2020/01/30/perjury-...s-confiscated/

    It'd be nice to see a conviction, a cell door getting slammed shut, and a lost key.
    I figured she'd be charged. Media attention + sympathetic CLEO. Like I said earlier in the thread, just wait.

    The next thing of interest will be what the plea offer is. That's were it's likely to be softballed, especially if she doesn't have any priors.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  5. #45
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin
    "Where I practiced law, I saw a lot of orders of protection denied. A hearing was mandatory. The only times that a preliminary order was extended was when the respondent was making himself unavailable.

    (The hearings were held just before one of the docket calls, so when I was at the courthouse early, I'd sit in on them. They were very educational as to what the judge was looking for. Unsupported accusations were never enough.)"

    My experience is a lot more limited than yours but that is exactly what I have observed.

    I'm glad they're going to charge that woman with perjury. I wasn't sure how that was going to turn out

  6. #46
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    D352020CR219 is her case number. 2/14 is her first appearance.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  7. #47
    Revolvers Revolvers 1911s Stephanie B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    East 860 by South 413
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    D352020CR219 is her case number. 2/14 is her first appearance.
    Here's the link to the case look-up tool.

    So folks don't have to scroll back through the thread, the defendant is Holmes, Susan.
    If we have to march off into the next world, let us walk there on the bodies of our enemies.

  8. #48
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Seminole Texas
    What a fiasco. Although the outcome is fortunate for the officer, there is no guarantee at all whatsoever that this will play out for everyone strung up on ERPO shit.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    D352020CR219 is her case number. 2/14 is her first appearance.
    Happy Valentine's Day, Susie!
    We wish to thank the United Network Command for Law and Enforcement, without whose assistance this program would not have been possible.

  10. #50
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    I didn’t start a new thread as the judge dismissed this one. Inmate filed ERPO request against CO Sheriff from jail...

    Made a false claim that he met the ERPO petitioner standard because he “resided” with the Sheriff for 6 months or more.

    Name:  F801EFC3-9A8E-4A07-AB5A-14114DDA0118.jpg
Views: 260
Size:  38.3 KB

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •