mons meg
Member
Geez, you'd think the poor guy worked for the IRS or something, the hostility we're seeing here...
Ask a Bounty Hunter
- Thread starter HMMurdock
- Start date
- Status
beerslurpy
member
Bounty hunters are basically judged on the results of their actions.
If they do something questionable and it results in the capture of the fugitive, they are generally given the benefit of the doubt. If they do something perhaps reasonable that results in harm but the fugitive is nowhere to be found, they get held liable.
It works out this way because the bounty hunters are going to inform any residence of exactly who they are looking for so that the other residents know they are harboring a fugitive if they dont cooperate and turn him over. What is basically strict liability for foulups will cause any bounty hunter with a brain to turn to local LEOs to get assisstance with uncooperative third parties.
I think the system is only broken so far as the type of work attracts people who lack the wisdom and self control to take proper care and end up inflicting harm and risk on third parties.
If they do something questionable and it results in the capture of the fugitive, they are generally given the benefit of the doubt. If they do something perhaps reasonable that results in harm but the fugitive is nowhere to be found, they get held liable.
It works out this way because the bounty hunters are going to inform any residence of exactly who they are looking for so that the other residents know they are harboring a fugitive if they dont cooperate and turn him over. What is basically strict liability for foulups will cause any bounty hunter with a brain to turn to local LEOs to get assisstance with uncooperative third parties.
I think the system is only broken so far as the type of work attracts people who lack the wisdom and self control to take proper care and end up inflicting harm and risk on third parties.
HMMurdock
Member
Beerslurpy is entirely correct. Thank you.
We don't "search" with a bench warrant for anything but the suspect. If he doesn't turn up and we invaded the house, we get arrested. If he does, we captured a fugitive. Exceptions to that rule are the addresses in which the comaker signed.
Brerrabbit, you want the legal action that gives me the right? Taylor vs. Taintor. Check it out. The government has repeatedly given citizens the right to do searches that LEs cannot. We are called fugitive recovery agents. In many states we have to be licensed as such, and thats why LEs cannot be recovery agents. I mean no disrespect, I'm just telling you how it works in most states.
Can we enter 3rd party residences on fishing expeditions? No. But when a fugitive signs his bond contract, he signed away his rights. We can only enter a residence when we can prove beyond a resonable doubt that the skip is inside. If we do our job right, you will never be surprised by our entry. We do not commonly enter 3rd party residences, usually the circumstance is a skip is staying with his girlfriend, we saw him go in and she refuses he is around so we move past her to apprehend the guy-- after showing the warrant. We cannot enter 3rd party residences in all states. For references of the ones we can and cannot, check out http://www.fugitiverecovery.com/laws/
I am well aware of ones right to protect their home. Why do you act like I am not on your side? I am not a criminal nor do I act as such. But we do have the right to affect an arrest, so read up on bail law and get back to me.
Soemkid, what am I discussing with this officer? That IL citizens cannot own guns? The only other statement I said regarding IL is that we cannot search the home of a 3rd party, even if our guy is in that. You said I was wrong. Does that mean you are saying I CAN come inside your house? Get your facts straight. And excuse me, but how long have you worked in the bail bond business? I'm speaking from experience while you're speaking from the hole in your rear. And I know my material. That's why I offered to share. You seem to be claiming you have authority on this topic yourself, so I assume you are a laywer specializing in bond law?
SW 910, I would not suggest you start a thread about how to kill bounty hunters. When we stay within the laws, we are doing our job. Do not liken us to home invaders unless we are breaking the laws. I cannot see THR moderators backing a forum to kill bounty hunters doing their job, just as they would not start a "how to kill police" thread. We are doing our job and if we do violate the laws, you are in full right. But you must first knowt he laws, and many of you apparently do not. Keep in mind I am not saying all of this applies in all states.
Grislyatoms, I agree with you. That is a common fear of mine, and I feel the same about auto repo guys. It takes a special breed and you can't have a desire to be well liked... Obviously.
And for the road, we do not kick in doors because we can. It is dangerous and only done when necessary to minimize the risk of escape and bodily harm. It rarely happens in my experience, and as I've said before-- this varies from state to state.
TRL
We don't "search" with a bench warrant for anything but the suspect. If he doesn't turn up and we invaded the house, we get arrested. If he does, we captured a fugitive. Exceptions to that rule are the addresses in which the comaker signed.
Brerrabbit, you want the legal action that gives me the right? Taylor vs. Taintor. Check it out. The government has repeatedly given citizens the right to do searches that LEs cannot. We are called fugitive recovery agents. In many states we have to be licensed as such, and thats why LEs cannot be recovery agents. I mean no disrespect, I'm just telling you how it works in most states.
Can we enter 3rd party residences on fishing expeditions? No. But when a fugitive signs his bond contract, he signed away his rights. We can only enter a residence when we can prove beyond a resonable doubt that the skip is inside. If we do our job right, you will never be surprised by our entry. We do not commonly enter 3rd party residences, usually the circumstance is a skip is staying with his girlfriend, we saw him go in and she refuses he is around so we move past her to apprehend the guy-- after showing the warrant. We cannot enter 3rd party residences in all states. For references of the ones we can and cannot, check out http://www.fugitiverecovery.com/laws/
I am well aware of ones right to protect their home. Why do you act like I am not on your side? I am not a criminal nor do I act as such. But we do have the right to affect an arrest, so read up on bail law and get back to me.
Soemkid, what am I discussing with this officer? That IL citizens cannot own guns? The only other statement I said regarding IL is that we cannot search the home of a 3rd party, even if our guy is in that. You said I was wrong. Does that mean you are saying I CAN come inside your house? Get your facts straight. And excuse me, but how long have you worked in the bail bond business? I'm speaking from experience while you're speaking from the hole in your rear. And I know my material. That's why I offered to share. You seem to be claiming you have authority on this topic yourself, so I assume you are a laywer specializing in bond law?
SW 910, I would not suggest you start a thread about how to kill bounty hunters. When we stay within the laws, we are doing our job. Do not liken us to home invaders unless we are breaking the laws. I cannot see THR moderators backing a forum to kill bounty hunters doing their job, just as they would not start a "how to kill police" thread. We are doing our job and if we do violate the laws, you are in full right. But you must first knowt he laws, and many of you apparently do not. Keep in mind I am not saying all of this applies in all states.
Grislyatoms, I agree with you. That is a common fear of mine, and I feel the same about auto repo guys. It takes a special breed and you can't have a desire to be well liked... Obviously.
And for the road, we do not kick in doors because we can. It is dangerous and only done when necessary to minimize the risk of escape and bodily harm. It rarely happens in my experience, and as I've said before-- this varies from state to state.
TRL
TallPine
Member
I guess what I am concerned about is you all getting the "wrong address"
Suppose a bunch of armed strangers with out of state plates show up in my driveway by mistake. Probably I'm going to grab a rifle and call the sheriff. Meanwhile, by my not answering the door, you are assuming "probable cause" that your skip is indeed in my house. Do you see a good ending to this situation...?
HMMurdock
Member
Sorry, maybe I didn't clarify. If he isn' in there then you have full right to shoot. That's the sticky area.
Like Beerslurpy said, "If they do something questionable and it results in the capture of the fugitive, they are generally given the benefit of the doubt. If they do something perhaps reasonable that results in harm but the fugitive is nowhere to be found, they get held liable."
I always knock on the door first. I don't assume someone is hiding because they aren't answering the door. And if I made entry and my man isnt in there, then shoot the hell out of me. But that's why we declare we have a warrant long before the hard knocking even starts. I have never had to many entry on a 3rd party residence outside of the infamous event mentioned earlier. Guys I work with have, but all have notified the police before doing so and declared they have a warrant beforehand. After 10 minutes of knocking with no answers, if we believe someone is home we call the police and let them know we are about to make entry. This rarely happens because most of the time we wait them out unless we know for a fact they are in.
If we make entry into a house and our guy isn't there-- we are screwed. Plain and simple. My point all along has been if someone claims to have a warrant, tell them (through the closed door, even) that you are calling the police first. If they insist on staying, then deal with the situation through the police. I don't mind it when it's handled that way at all, as long as no one is hurt.
If we make entry and our guy isnt there, we were in the wrong and have broken the law and deserve whatever we have coming to us-- be it legal action "or worse". I agree. But if you have a brother named "Todd" visiting and he's in the house and we say we have a warrant for someone named "Todd", you might wanna ask some hard questions because we are walking away with the guy. If you are not harboring a fugitive, then any actions to make entry are illegal. My point is that you'll wanna make sure your unexpected house guest hasn't skipped on a bond before pulling the trigger.
I never surprise an entry on a house that isn't that of the bonded individual. People here seem to think we are out to throw our weight and we simply are not. Not that there are not bad apples out there in this line of work... I can tell you there are. It attracts a lot of power-hungry ex-cons and that disturbs me as much if not more than the next person. Some states are more restrictive on who can do the bail recovery than others. I have worked with some very undesirable individuals as well as those so politically correct that it'd make Mr. Rogers puke
I apologize for anyone I offended, but one would be surprised how much legal ability we have in most states. We can do more than a police officer, but it's only for that one individual. And anyone harassing innocent citizens deserves to be in prison. So always feel free to contact the police or, if you do know the person was bonded out, then call their bondsman to complain about the agent's actions.
Thank you for all of your inputs and again, I'm sorry if I seemed short-tempered with anyone. But please do feel free to expand your knowledge on what agent's can and cannot do, for our reach is vast. Police are the muscle of the "long arm of the law", but some would argue that we are the reach.
I am in this business not for the quick bucks (there aren't any, for the pay is usually dismal", but because I am good at it and I like taking fugitives off the streets without filling my hours writing tickets. --No offense to our boys in blue. I respect the hell out of you guys.
I have not checked the states the people posting here live in, so I have not meant to refer to anyone's state. The laws vary. In Indiana, example, we commonly cannot make entry into a 3rd party's residence without permission. As I have demonstrated, however, that is not always the case out of state, assuming you are genuinely hiding a fugitive. If not, you have nothing to worry about!!!
Rest assured, if we genuinely have the wrong address then you are right to defend yourself. Police get the wrong address more often then we do but unfortunately, it does happen. That is why those mistakes are rare. Like the police, we are not afforded the "my bad" if we screw up. Mistakes lead to lawsuits and funerals. Let that be a warning to any prospective agents out there!
Thanks again, everyone. And to those thinking this job sounds cool --read the hostility that has been posted. If you cannot handle such ignorance and short tempered responses then this is not a business for you. Same goes for law enforcement. People are always willing to kill you to prove they were right, despite their ignorance of the law.
And a note to the trigger-happy posters here: Defend yourselves! But identify your targets. A recovery agent, off-duty or undercover police officer can be hard to sort from armed thugs, but look for a badge and listen for declaration of a warrant. I'm sure any responsible gun owner will back me when I say you should always look before you pull the trigger. This is why most states require you to warn the individual before the castle doctrine is allowed. If you tell them to stop and get off their property and they don't declare they have a warrant, be it recovery agent or police officer, then do what you must! But warn before you take a life if not for the recovery agents you seem to hate so much, then do it for the possibility it might be a police officer.
We might be nothing more than citizens ourselves, but those licensed to do bail recovery have immense latitude in what we can do when the person bonded has signed the contract. If you were no part of the bonding process and are not harboring a fugitive, then bounty hunters will not be kicking in your door so don't worry. We can not and do not search any house we feel like whenever we want. We can only do what is necessary to affect the arrest of an "escaped" fugitive. Unless you are breaking the law, then we are on your side!
Good references to check out regarding recovery agent and bail bond law are:
www.fugitiverecovery.com
www.bounty-hunter.net
History Channel episode "Suicide Missions: Bounty Hunters"
Discovery Channel weekly show "Fugitive Strike Force"
Bob Burton's books "Bounty Hunter" and "Bail Enforcer"
And any old-school tapes or DVDs you can find of the "cops" rip-off "Bounty Hunters" and "U.S. Bounty Hunters"
TRL
Like Beerslurpy said, "If they do something questionable and it results in the capture of the fugitive, they are generally given the benefit of the doubt. If they do something perhaps reasonable that results in harm but the fugitive is nowhere to be found, they get held liable."
I always knock on the door first. I don't assume someone is hiding because they aren't answering the door. And if I made entry and my man isnt in there, then shoot the hell out of me. But that's why we declare we have a warrant long before the hard knocking even starts. I have never had to many entry on a 3rd party residence outside of the infamous event mentioned earlier. Guys I work with have, but all have notified the police before doing so and declared they have a warrant beforehand. After 10 minutes of knocking with no answers, if we believe someone is home we call the police and let them know we are about to make entry. This rarely happens because most of the time we wait them out unless we know for a fact they are in.
If we make entry into a house and our guy isn't there-- we are screwed. Plain and simple. My point all along has been if someone claims to have a warrant, tell them (through the closed door, even) that you are calling the police first. If they insist on staying, then deal with the situation through the police. I don't mind it when it's handled that way at all, as long as no one is hurt.
If we make entry and our guy isnt there, we were in the wrong and have broken the law and deserve whatever we have coming to us-- be it legal action "or worse". I agree. But if you have a brother named "Todd" visiting and he's in the house and we say we have a warrant for someone named "Todd", you might wanna ask some hard questions because we are walking away with the guy. If you are not harboring a fugitive, then any actions to make entry are illegal. My point is that you'll wanna make sure your unexpected house guest hasn't skipped on a bond before pulling the trigger.
I never surprise an entry on a house that isn't that of the bonded individual. People here seem to think we are out to throw our weight and we simply are not. Not that there are not bad apples out there in this line of work... I can tell you there are. It attracts a lot of power-hungry ex-cons and that disturbs me as much if not more than the next person. Some states are more restrictive on who can do the bail recovery than others. I have worked with some very undesirable individuals as well as those so politically correct that it'd make Mr. Rogers puke
I apologize for anyone I offended, but one would be surprised how much legal ability we have in most states. We can do more than a police officer, but it's only for that one individual. And anyone harassing innocent citizens deserves to be in prison. So always feel free to contact the police or, if you do know the person was bonded out, then call their bondsman to complain about the agent's actions.
Thank you for all of your inputs and again, I'm sorry if I seemed short-tempered with anyone. But please do feel free to expand your knowledge on what agent's can and cannot do, for our reach is vast. Police are the muscle of the "long arm of the law", but some would argue that we are the reach.
I am in this business not for the quick bucks (there aren't any, for the pay is usually dismal", but because I am good at it and I like taking fugitives off the streets without filling my hours writing tickets. --No offense to our boys in blue. I respect the hell out of you guys.
I have not checked the states the people posting here live in, so I have not meant to refer to anyone's state. The laws vary. In Indiana, example, we commonly cannot make entry into a 3rd party's residence without permission. As I have demonstrated, however, that is not always the case out of state, assuming you are genuinely hiding a fugitive. If not, you have nothing to worry about!!!
Rest assured, if we genuinely have the wrong address then you are right to defend yourself. Police get the wrong address more often then we do but unfortunately, it does happen. That is why those mistakes are rare. Like the police, we are not afforded the "my bad" if we screw up. Mistakes lead to lawsuits and funerals. Let that be a warning to any prospective agents out there!
Thanks again, everyone. And to those thinking this job sounds cool --read the hostility that has been posted. If you cannot handle such ignorance and short tempered responses then this is not a business for you. Same goes for law enforcement. People are always willing to kill you to prove they were right, despite their ignorance of the law.
And a note to the trigger-happy posters here: Defend yourselves! But identify your targets. A recovery agent, off-duty or undercover police officer can be hard to sort from armed thugs, but look for a badge and listen for declaration of a warrant. I'm sure any responsible gun owner will back me when I say you should always look before you pull the trigger. This is why most states require you to warn the individual before the castle doctrine is allowed. If you tell them to stop and get off their property and they don't declare they have a warrant, be it recovery agent or police officer, then do what you must! But warn before you take a life if not for the recovery agents you seem to hate so much, then do it for the possibility it might be a police officer.
We might be nothing more than citizens ourselves, but those licensed to do bail recovery have immense latitude in what we can do when the person bonded has signed the contract. If you were no part of the bonding process and are not harboring a fugitive, then bounty hunters will not be kicking in your door so don't worry. We can not and do not search any house we feel like whenever we want. We can only do what is necessary to affect the arrest of an "escaped" fugitive. Unless you are breaking the law, then we are on your side!
Good references to check out regarding recovery agent and bail bond law are:
www.fugitiverecovery.com
www.bounty-hunter.net
History Channel episode "Suicide Missions: Bounty Hunters"
Discovery Channel weekly show "Fugitive Strike Force"
Bob Burton's books "Bounty Hunter" and "Bail Enforcer"
And any old-school tapes or DVDs you can find of the "cops" rip-off "Bounty Hunters" and "U.S. Bounty Hunters"
TRL
brerrabbit
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 401
So I read the judges decision in Taylor vs. Taintor. No mention of third party homes, no mention that it overrides common law home defense.
Sorry, but you opinion that a bounty hunter has the authority to forcibly enter the home of a person not the jumper nor the person signing for the jumper is not backed by law.
You might want to rethink this in states that have castle doctrines. Even if you announce that you are a bounty hunter, you are just another civvie with no more authority than any other.
You attempt entry forcible entry on a noninvolved third party who happens to live at the previous address of the bail jumper, and some poor jerk with a high powered rifle puts your frontsides out your backsides. He will not be charged. You on the other hand, if you defend yourself and kill the homeowner, can be charged with murder 1. Oklahoma has a very good record with death penalty convictions and executions. Heck we even beat texas one year.
BTW I have arrest authority to as a civilian. I imagine yours is based on the same laws.
Based on my lifestyle, any attempt of a bounty hunter to attempt to gain entry to my home is almost nil. Based on my understanding of the caselaw involved, I will shoot any bounty hunter ever attempting entry to my home as long as I am not the bounty, nor have I signed for him. I thank you very much for citing case law.
No I am not hostile. I am simply explaining the facts of life to a person who apparently does not understand them.
Sorry, but you opinion that a bounty hunter has the authority to forcibly enter the home of a person not the jumper nor the person signing for the jumper is not backed by law.
You might want to rethink this in states that have castle doctrines. Even if you announce that you are a bounty hunter, you are just another civvie with no more authority than any other.
You attempt entry forcible entry on a noninvolved third party who happens to live at the previous address of the bail jumper, and some poor jerk with a high powered rifle puts your frontsides out your backsides. He will not be charged. You on the other hand, if you defend yourself and kill the homeowner, can be charged with murder 1. Oklahoma has a very good record with death penalty convictions and executions. Heck we even beat texas one year.
BTW I have arrest authority to as a civilian. I imagine yours is based on the same laws.
Based on my lifestyle, any attempt of a bounty hunter to attempt to gain entry to my home is almost nil. Based on my understanding of the caselaw involved, I will shoot any bounty hunter ever attempting entry to my home as long as I am not the bounty, nor have I signed for him. I thank you very much for citing case law.
No I am not hostile. I am simply explaining the facts of life to a person who apparently does not understand them.
The problem is that it is already horribly broken and abused by the courts, to the benefit of the bail bond industry. For example; a friend-of-a-friend got busted a couple of years ago for possession of marijuana, personal use, second offense. Bail was set at $25,000. He's got a good job, but there's no way he could come up with that. Reduction was refused, since the second judge pointed out that he could get bonded out for $2500, or barely a month's salary for him or his wife.
See the problem? $2500, is considered a reasonable amount for bail in this case, but it's not bail; he won't get it back when he shows up for court. So even though he could have afforded $2500 as bail, he couldn't afford to just let it go. (Sounds like a perfect bail amount when you look at it that way.)
Bail bonds would be unnecessary if the judges would set bail at a reasonable amount, instead of multiplying it by ten so that any suspect, even a very low flight risk, is forced to pay a bondsman for even a minor offense.
brerrabbit
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 401
Thank you KD5NRH for pointing out the primary reason why bail bondsman are a blight on the system.
Without bail bondsman, bail would be forced to be lower. It would not cost anyone showing up at their court hearing anything for bail.
For serious cases, A high bail without a bondsman would prevent either a bail jump or bail in the first place.
Without bail bondsman, bail would be forced to be lower. It would not cost anyone showing up at their court hearing anything for bail.
For serious cases, A high bail without a bondsman would prevent either a bail jump or bail in the first place.
I've been watching this thread with some interest
Moderator hat on: There are some members posting in this thread who need to step away from their keyboard and cool down. There are some comments being made that are just on the line of approved conduct. If you can't say what you want to say without resulting to personal insults or threats, don't say anything. You're fair game to get the thread locked and lose your posting privledges. If the shoe fits...
Member hat back on:
HMMurdock said;
In post number 68 you said:
There a a million or so legal gun owners in Illinois who would disagree with you. While we have to have a FOID card, we have more gun rights then residents of many other states. Outside of a couple municipalities there are no state restrictions on what kind of firearm a person can own except for NFA items. So what was the meaning of your comment? Were you saying that you couldn't enter a third party residence in Illinois because the people can't own guns?
I have the same opinion of bounty hunters as DMF. The last bounty hunter I dealt with was a member if the Aryan Nations and was later arrested and charged with UUW in Skokie during a Neo-Nazi march. Every profession attracts people who have different views, but that image is the one that your profession is going to have a tough time living down, because the majority of the people I've met who called themselves bounty hunters were exactly as DMF described in post number 29:
In post number 48 HMMurdock said;
Bounty hunters, bail enforcement agents, whatever they want to call themselves enforce no laws. They are not sworn by any government entity at any level and charged with the responsibilty to enforce any law. A more correct description of the job is to compare it to the guy who repos cars for the bank. A bounty hunter's sole right to take any action comes totally from the contract that the skip signed with the bondsman. They have no more legal right to arrest someone with a warrent who doesn't have a contract with the bondsman they work for then anyone else. The skip signed an agreement with the bondsman waiving many rights and giving the bondsman the same right to come after his (the skip's) body as the bank has to take your car if you don't make the payments. Bounty hunters enforce a civil contract between the bondsman and the skip. They are in no way, shape or form part of the criminal justice system.
Later in post 48 HMMurdock said;
A navy blue or black windbreaker with BAIL ENFORCEMENT AGENT or BOUNTY HUNTER on it in big white or yellow letters makes someone a professional? Civilians can buy those jackets that say POLICE, FBI, BATF, DRUG TASK FORCE or anything else in both brick and mortar stores and online without any restrictions. Tell me why someone who identifies himself as a bail enforcement agent is supposed to be accepted as a professional. How many hours of certified training in law, use of force and other necessary subjects do you have to successfully complete to be able to work on your job? What state and national standards does this training comply with?
In post number 48 HMMurdock also said;
What police department do you train with? Or are you referring to being on the range with a shooting buddy who happens to be a cop? There is a lot of difference between formally training with an organization and informally shooting or having a BS session with a cop. If you don't want to post that information in an open forum, PM me with it. I've got some friends who work on some police departments in Indiana.
Then in post number 61 HMMurdock said;
You have no more rights then the police or any other citizen when it comes to locating someone. You have greater rights to make entry if you know the subject to be there, in that you don't have to wait to get a warrant. But when it comes to locating someone, that's nothing more then leg work and your status as a bounty hunter doesn't give you any greater rights then any other investigator. And your greater rights to enter a residence without a search warrant also comes at a greater cost. If I have enough probable cause to believe that a fugitive is holed up in a residence to convince a judge to give me a warrant for that residence and it turns out the fugitive is not there, then I am covered by the civil torts laws and not liable for damages etc. On the other hand the bounty hunter had better be right, because he can and will be held personally liable for property damage, mental stress and anything else a lawyer can think to add to the suit. Even if he is right and he apprehends the fugitive, he can still be held liable for damages he does to the property or stress he subjects the other occupants of the residence to. There are no laws that restrict the public from resisting a bounty hunter. If one of the many THR members who so gleefully offered to shoot you for your trouble were to actually do that, you have little legal protection. It's a self defense shooting for them, the same as it is if they shot a home invader. And if you shoot them, expect to be charged and most likely convicted of things like home invasion, unlawful use of weapons, aggravated battery, attempted murder, manslaughter......take your pick.
HMMurdock said;
You have now, DMF and myself.
In post number 65 HMMurdock said;
And what government entity issued those badges? Who can a citizen complain to? The truth is those badges are as meaningless as the CCW badges you can buy out of the classifieds in a gun magazine. As a matter of fact, I believe I've seen BAIL ENFORCEMENT AGENT badges in those ads. I would have absolutely no problem arresting and convicting someone for impersonating a police officer in many of the circumstances you've described using your badge. But then again, you as much as admit that your quasi-police attire is a ruse and you depend on people thinking you're the police to keep them from shooting, you said so later in the same post.
Later in post number 68, HMMurdock said;
If you really looked in the US Code, you'd find that murder is a state matter except under very specific circumstances. Since bounty hunters aren't federal agents, your demise will be investigated and handled by the local jurisdiction unless you are killed on federal property.
You've made several assertions that you arrest people. You don't. You seize them (right from the language of the Supreme Court decision you are so fond of waving around). It's the same as the repo man seizing a car that the owner is behind on the payments.
I don't think you're winning any converts with all the chest thumping. Someone whose admitted his only formal training is on the Asp collapsible baton is hardly on the same level of tactical proficiency as a member of LAPDs D Platoon or even a member of a small town part time police tactical unit. The idea that a few of you could get together and pull off successful dynamic entries is laughable. I'm serious as a heart attack when I suggest you look for a different line of work. If the attitude you've dispalyed in this thread carrys over into your operations, it's only a matter of time before you are injured or worse.
Jeff
Moderator hat on: There are some members posting in this thread who need to step away from their keyboard and cool down. There are some comments being made that are just on the line of approved conduct. If you can't say what you want to say without resulting to personal insults or threats, don't say anything. You're fair game to get the thread locked and lose your posting privledges. If the shoe fits...
Member hat back on:
HMMurdock said;
In post number 68 you said:
There a a million or so legal gun owners in Illinois who would disagree with you. While we have to have a FOID card, we have more gun rights then residents of many other states. Outside of a couple municipalities there are no state restrictions on what kind of firearm a person can own except for NFA items. So what was the meaning of your comment? Were you saying that you couldn't enter a third party residence in Illinois because the people can't own guns?
I have the same opinion of bounty hunters as DMF. The last bounty hunter I dealt with was a member if the Aryan Nations and was later arrested and charged with UUW in Skokie during a Neo-Nazi march. Every profession attracts people who have different views, but that image is the one that your profession is going to have a tough time living down, because the majority of the people I've met who called themselves bounty hunters were exactly as DMF described in post number 29:
In post number 48 HMMurdock said;
Bounty hunters, bail enforcement agents, whatever they want to call themselves enforce no laws. They are not sworn by any government entity at any level and charged with the responsibilty to enforce any law. A more correct description of the job is to compare it to the guy who repos cars for the bank. A bounty hunter's sole right to take any action comes totally from the contract that the skip signed with the bondsman. They have no more legal right to arrest someone with a warrent who doesn't have a contract with the bondsman they work for then anyone else. The skip signed an agreement with the bondsman waiving many rights and giving the bondsman the same right to come after his (the skip's) body as the bank has to take your car if you don't make the payments. Bounty hunters enforce a civil contract between the bondsman and the skip. They are in no way, shape or form part of the criminal justice system.
Later in post 48 HMMurdock said;
A navy blue or black windbreaker with BAIL ENFORCEMENT AGENT or BOUNTY HUNTER on it in big white or yellow letters makes someone a professional? Civilians can buy those jackets that say POLICE, FBI, BATF, DRUG TASK FORCE or anything else in both brick and mortar stores and online without any restrictions. Tell me why someone who identifies himself as a bail enforcement agent is supposed to be accepted as a professional. How many hours of certified training in law, use of force and other necessary subjects do you have to successfully complete to be able to work on your job? What state and national standards does this training comply with?
In post number 48 HMMurdock also said;
What police department do you train with? Or are you referring to being on the range with a shooting buddy who happens to be a cop? There is a lot of difference between formally training with an organization and informally shooting or having a BS session with a cop. If you don't want to post that information in an open forum, PM me with it. I've got some friends who work on some police departments in Indiana.
Then in post number 61 HMMurdock said;
You have no more rights then the police or any other citizen when it comes to locating someone. You have greater rights to make entry if you know the subject to be there, in that you don't have to wait to get a warrant. But when it comes to locating someone, that's nothing more then leg work and your status as a bounty hunter doesn't give you any greater rights then any other investigator. And your greater rights to enter a residence without a search warrant also comes at a greater cost. If I have enough probable cause to believe that a fugitive is holed up in a residence to convince a judge to give me a warrant for that residence and it turns out the fugitive is not there, then I am covered by the civil torts laws and not liable for damages etc. On the other hand the bounty hunter had better be right, because he can and will be held personally liable for property damage, mental stress and anything else a lawyer can think to add to the suit. Even if he is right and he apprehends the fugitive, he can still be held liable for damages he does to the property or stress he subjects the other occupants of the residence to. There are no laws that restrict the public from resisting a bounty hunter. If one of the many THR members who so gleefully offered to shoot you for your trouble were to actually do that, you have little legal protection. It's a self defense shooting for them, the same as it is if they shot a home invader. And if you shoot them, expect to be charged and most likely convicted of things like home invasion, unlawful use of weapons, aggravated battery, attempted murder, manslaughter......take your pick.
HMMurdock said;
You have now, DMF and myself.
In post number 65 HMMurdock said;
And what government entity issued those badges? Who can a citizen complain to? The truth is those badges are as meaningless as the CCW badges you can buy out of the classifieds in a gun magazine. As a matter of fact, I believe I've seen BAIL ENFORCEMENT AGENT badges in those ads. I would have absolutely no problem arresting and convicting someone for impersonating a police officer in many of the circumstances you've described using your badge. But then again, you as much as admit that your quasi-police attire is a ruse and you depend on people thinking you're the police to keep them from shooting, you said so later in the same post.
Later in post number 68, HMMurdock said;
If you really looked in the US Code, you'd find that murder is a state matter except under very specific circumstances. Since bounty hunters aren't federal agents, your demise will be investigated and handled by the local jurisdiction unless you are killed on federal property.
You've made several assertions that you arrest people. You don't. You seize them (right from the language of the Supreme Court decision you are so fond of waving around). It's the same as the repo man seizing a car that the owner is behind on the payments.
I don't think you're winning any converts with all the chest thumping. Someone whose admitted his only formal training is on the Asp collapsible baton is hardly on the same level of tactical proficiency as a member of LAPDs D Platoon or even a member of a small town part time police tactical unit. The idea that a few of you could get together and pull off successful dynamic entries is laughable. I'm serious as a heart attack when I suggest you look for a different line of work. If the attitude you've dispalyed in this thread carrys over into your operations, it's only a matter of time before you are injured or worse.
Jeff
beerslurpy
member
It seems that half of you guys are getting pissed off about things that would be bad but arent actually true. Don't you guys get how huge of a sword is hanging over these guys if they mess up?
Lets put it this way- bounty hunters have 2 legal duties with associated penalties and rewards:
1) catch fugitives: punishment on failure- not get paid, have to try again
2) not harm others: punishment on failure- jail, death, enormous legal bills
Ask yourself, "if I were a bounty hunter which of these would be a bigger factor in motivating me to behave one way vs another?" The obvious answer is that screwing up is WAY more dangerous to the bounty hunter than a temporary setback in catching someone. It's an efficient solution to the concerns many here have voiced, in my opinion.
I think the main problem in this thread is that this HMMurdock doesnt express himself well and has come across as something of a mall ninja.
Lets put it this way- bounty hunters have 2 legal duties with associated penalties and rewards:
1) catch fugitives: punishment on failure- not get paid, have to try again
2) not harm others: punishment on failure- jail, death, enormous legal bills
Ask yourself, "if I were a bounty hunter which of these would be a bigger factor in motivating me to behave one way vs another?" The obvious answer is that screwing up is WAY more dangerous to the bounty hunter than a temporary setback in catching someone. It's an efficient solution to the concerns many here have voiced, in my opinion.
I think the main problem in this thread is that this HMMurdock doesnt express himself well and has come across as something of a mall ninja.
Murdock or anyone else:
There has been a lot of discussion about what a bail warrant does or does not authorize. Would it be possible to post (or direct me where to find one) a copy of an actual bail warrant? Feel free to erase any sensitive information.
Also, are bail enforcement agents sued very often in civil court? If so, what are the most common claims?
There has been a lot of discussion about what a bail warrant does or does not authorize. Would it be possible to post (or direct me where to find one) a copy of an actual bail warrant? Feel free to erase any sensitive information.
Also, are bail enforcement agents sued very often in civil court? If so, what are the most common claims?
TallPine
Member
Thanks for straightening that out, Jeff
There wouldn't be anything "gleeful" about it, but if Murdock or anyone else thinks I am opening my door to a bunch of armed (non-LEO) strangers, they better think again
I wouldn't even mention it, except this thread got me to thinking about the felons and parolees who might have my ex-neighbor's house listed as "last known" - his (former) property is behind mine and the driveway goes through my land.
Well again your posts can't even keep up with the reality of the discussion, let alone the legal realities of chasing a fugitive.
Here is what I said about the Supreme Court:
I was discussing your nonsensical and completely untrue claim about refusal to talk with someone alone being PC to believe anything.
However, if you want to talk about the right to search a premises for a fugitive, as I've said repeatedly this only applies to a residence where you have probable cause to believe the fugitive is actually present at the time you do the search, and in some cases for a 3rd party residence it may require a separate search warrant.
Further, you claim:
Well even the fugitive retains some rights, but MORE IMPORTANTLY, 3rd parties have ALL their rights, and you, the bounty hunter, have no special authority to violate their rights. The same is true of cops. So your stories about busting into the homes of other people are legally BS. You are wrong.
I'm done with this thread, as you obviously have no real understanding of the law, and I'm not talking about issues specific to any state, but issues settled in federal court and apply to all. I have neither the time nor the inclination to respond to each and every one of your nonsensical statements about the law.
BTW, I love the "ask your local bondsman" comments. As if I really expect him or her to really know the law.
I have real experience and legal training. I have hunted fugitives as a LEO. I have tried to correct your BS several times. I have seen what you and your kind do in the course of chasing the almighty dollar, which is all you really do. You aren't helping society, and you aren't enforcing the law.
As I said before, IF, you really are conducting business as you say you do in some of these stories, it's only a matter of time before you are either hurt,killed, sued and/or prosecuted.
However, my real opinion is that your stories are BS fantasies of your own imagination, and have no basis in reality.
Aguila Blanca
Member
You carry "identification" and a badge? Wanna know why I am NOT impressed? I have a copy of the NIC Law Enforcement Supply catalog sitting on my desk at this very moment. For the princely sum of $29.95 (plus shipping and handling) I can have my very own "Fugitive Recovery Agent" or "Bail Enforcement Agent" badge. The ID card costs another $4.95. Or, for $79.95 ("A $121.75 value") I can get the complete kit: Folio wallet, T-shirt (can't be a bounty hunter w/o the T-shirt), badge, hat, and ID kit. I don't need any proof of a state license or anything else to buy these goodies.
Sorry, your "identification" isn't backed up by anything, legally. I don't have to look at it, and I don't have to believe it if I see it. It doesn't give you any authority beyond what the laws say to bust into my house.
As you yourself have stated, you have to be SURE your subject is in a house before you can bust in to grab him. That much is correct. But you seem to be saying that I have some sort of duty to answer my door and talk to you. I don't. If I don't want to answer my door when you knock, I am within my legal rights to stay on the sofa and ignore your knock. If I look through the peephole and see some "Fugitive Recovery Agent" badge, I don't have any legal duty to open the door or to talk to you over the intercom. I can (and will) ignore you. If you decide that gives you "probably cause" to bust down the door ... you are putting yourself at extreme risk, both physically and legally.
mons meg
Member
Seems to me that several on this board have an unwaveringly poor opinion of bounty hunters, owing to their poor personal experience with them. These opinions are likely justified.
Also seems to me that if there is a conscientious and "good guy" bounty hunter type, Mr. Murdock is trying to be that, even though he's not an attorney, cop, or judge and sometimes gets the finer points of the law incorrect.
This thread went Low Road pretty darn quick, and I'm surprised it wasn't locked.
Sorry I'm so grumpy, but it's early...
Also seems to me that if there is a conscientious and "good guy" bounty hunter type, Mr. Murdock is trying to be that, even though he's not an attorney, cop, or judge and sometimes gets the finer points of the law incorrect.
This thread went Low Road pretty darn quick, and I'm surprised it wasn't locked.
Sorry I'm so grumpy, but it's early...
Ezekiel
Member
Honestly? What I see here is a knee-jerk reaction, by a bunch of somewhat radicalized gun owners, caused by fear.
Why are they afraid?
Because they are, at heart, FULLY AWARE that a dedicated team could enter their home -- taking/investigating whatever they desire -- long before a homeowner could even consider going for his metallic phallic symbol.
Basically, they know they'll lose. (Hence the "I'll kill you!" prattle.)
Trust me, a homeowner doesn't have a prayer.
This is, of course, why the Bondsman, Bounty Hunter, Parole Officer or Fugitive Agent carries such a burden to be correct in what house he "takes down."
Those who wail are just like Poland in 1938: you couldn't stop the invasion if you wanted to. If you have an issue, don't involve yourself with fugitives. :banghead:
Why are they afraid?
Because they are, at heart, FULLY AWARE that a dedicated team could enter their home -- taking/investigating whatever they desire -- long before a homeowner could even consider going for his metallic phallic symbol.
Basically, they know they'll lose. (Hence the "I'll kill you!" prattle.)
Trust me, a homeowner doesn't have a prayer.
This is, of course, why the Bondsman, Bounty Hunter, Parole Officer or Fugitive Agent carries such a burden to be correct in what house he "takes down."
Those who wail are just like Poland in 1938: you couldn't stop the invasion if you wanted to. If you have an issue, don't involve yourself with fugitives. :banghead:
brerrabbit
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 401
deleted because of my tendency to go low road
Riverrat
Member
NORTH CAROLINA STATUTES:
Free lance bounty hunters banned.
The surety may take the principal into custody at any time or place or by written authority on a certified copy of the undertaking request any judicial officer to arrest the principal
(NCGS Ch 85C-7) ((Insurance) 58-71-25&30, 1-434) or by written authority on a certified copy of the undertaking empower any person over 21 to do so.
Bounty hunters can only work for one bonding company (NCGS 58-71-65)[1996]
Bondsmen and runners cannot enter the homes of third parties to apprehend a fugitive. (State v Mathis, 509 S.E.2nd 155 (N.C. 1998)) UCEA
Free lance bounty hunters banned.
The surety may take the principal into custody at any time or place or by written authority on a certified copy of the undertaking request any judicial officer to arrest the principal
(NCGS Ch 85C-7) ((Insurance) 58-71-25&30, 1-434) or by written authority on a certified copy of the undertaking empower any person over 21 to do so.
Bounty hunters can only work for one bonding company (NCGS 58-71-65)[1996]
Bondsmen and runners cannot enter the homes of third parties to apprehend a fugitive. (State v Mathis, 509 S.E.2nd 155 (N.C. 1998)) UCEA
TallPine
Member
Which is what I was trying to say
Aguila Blanca
Member
Out of curiosity, I just went to the web site Mr. Murdock referred us to, and looked at the requirements for my state. (As an aside, how much credance should we give to a "professional" web site that doesn't know the difference between "affect" and "effect"?)
In my state, it seems Mr. Murdock would not be allowed to carry a handgun without a special license from the State Police, over and above the normal CCW permit he would also need to have. He would need a license from the State Police to act as a fugitive recovery agent in this state, and must take and pass an examination to obtain said license.
And that badge and SWAT team jacket? PROHIBITED in my state.
Looks to me, too, like Taylor vs. Taintor affirms a bounty hunters right to collar a skip. I didn't see anything about granting any right to search my house. Since Mr. Murdock claims Taylor vs. Taintor conveys some such right, perhaps he would be good enough to cite the specific part of the decision that says so.
In my state, it seems Mr. Murdock would not be allowed to carry a handgun without a special license from the State Police, over and above the normal CCW permit he would also need to have. He would need a license from the State Police to act as a fugitive recovery agent in this state, and must take and pass an examination to obtain said license.
And that badge and SWAT team jacket? PROHIBITED in my state.
Looks to me, too, like Taylor vs. Taintor affirms a bounty hunters right to collar a skip. I didn't see anything about granting any right to search my house. Since Mr. Murdock claims Taylor vs. Taintor conveys some such right, perhaps he would be good enough to cite the specific part of the decision that says so.
Once as a construction supervisor, I had to go down to county jail to talk to a worker who'd been arrested, he was due some pay; not enough for bail. I noticed a few bling/rapstar looking guys hovering around the visiting windows. Turns out these were the bondsmen. I arranged a quick interview at the window, the BA wanted to know about possible collateral; and if the guy was local with family, or from out of state. The guy in jail failed on both counts, and the bondsman quickly declined to get involved, even though the guy could post 10% cash. My impression about the bondsman was that he was pure business in a dirty business (like previous ref's to pawnbrokers). Still, "don't hate the playa, hate the game"...
To tie this thread to the recent police shootout in Florida, Angilo Freeland was a bail jumper who the DA declined to chase:
http://www.sptimes.com/2006/09/30/State/Suspect_in_death_of_d.shtml
I know hindsight is 20/20, but arguably, bounty hunters could have served a useful purpose in this case? I would think police would welcome the help, because clearly, they are overburdened. If the BH screws up, he has quite a bit more on the line than do leo's, who often hide behind sovereign immunity when they screw up. I'm quite mystified that the leo's posted so hostile toward the bounty hunter in this thread. I chalk up this hostility to inflated egos. It won't be the first example.
To tie this thread to the recent police shootout in Florida, Angilo Freeland was a bail jumper who the DA declined to chase:
http://www.sptimes.com/2006/09/30/State/Suspect_in_death_of_d.shtml
I know hindsight is 20/20, but arguably, bounty hunters could have served a useful purpose in this case? I would think police would welcome the help, because clearly, they are overburdened. If the BH screws up, he has quite a bit more on the line than do leo's, who often hide behind sovereign immunity when they screw up. I'm quite mystified that the leo's posted so hostile toward the bounty hunter in this thread. I chalk up this hostility to inflated egos. It won't be the first example.
'Card
Member
Thanks, HMMurdock. This has been an interesting thread to read.
You're post count is 137. I hope that means that you know THR well enough by now to know that most of us here are capable of criticizing your profession (if we don't like it) without insulting you personally.
As for the folks promising to shoot anything but a girl scout the second they step on their front porch (and maybe the girl scout if she's brandishing that box of Samoas® in a threatening manner) unfortunately that is pretty standard THR fare.
You're post count is 137. I hope that means that you know THR well enough by now to know that most of us here are capable of criticizing your profession (if we don't like it) without insulting you personally.
As for the folks promising to shoot anything but a girl scout the second they step on their front porch (and maybe the girl scout if she's brandishing that box of Samoas® in a threatening manner) unfortunately that is pretty standard THR fare.
- Status
