domestic dispute... actions of police, fair?

[NHBB]

moon... I was merely a witness, I heard a lot of things that no one else heard, and was concerned with justice being served. I didn't just stumble down the street and be a bystander, I had valid info concerning the situation... thanks for clearing up the jargon for me, but a "rubberneck" was not what I was, I had valid info that could concern the outcome of the incident, only no one seemed to really care as the woman is always right in these parts it seems.

 

[realmswalker]

NHBB, me being in law enforcement, I would have done the exact same thing. If I rolled on a scene knowing someone had a gun, even if it was a concerned citizen calling for the welfare of someone else, I would find and remove the gun from the whole equation. You dont know what popped up on his MDT, could have been, "domestic dispute, armed citizens at scene" you never know.

In short, officer safety, officer safety, officer safety, too many cops get shot and killed as it is.

 

[NHBB]

TY.... very much, though I may not agree with the policy, I understand the concern and appreciate the candid response.

 

[Jeff White]

NHBB,
What information did you have that was relevant? Did you witness a doemstic battery or did you just hear yelling, screaming and mutual threats?

At least around here, we're not cincerned with who started an arguement, just with making certain it doesn't escalate into violence. If that means one party or the other has to leave for the night, then we help them with that. If there has been violence and we can't figure out who the aggressor is, we sometimes arrest both parties.

The police aren't marriage counsellors and all they are concerned about is keeping the peace. There may be a referral to a social service agency depending on what's available.

Most departments have it in their SOP to warn the officers of any known weapons at a domestic call. The last thing we ever want to see is half the neighborhood on the scene when we arrive. We usually get all the uninvolved people out of the area first. It's hard enough dealing with the people involved, you don't want to have to watch half the neighborhood, who also may have ties to one side or the other. The officer did right by disarming your brother. Unless there were gunshots coming from inside the first step would be to secure the weapon you know about on the outside. Sometimes people from the neighborhood who insist on involving themselves in the dispute have to be arrested for obstruction of justice. Look at it from our point of view. You arrive on a domestic, outside there are a half a dozen people who are standing around, each with their own opinion of what's going on inside, you've been told by dispatch that some of them are armed. Inside there is a verbal donnybrook going on. What are you going to do first, charge into the house, or make sure there isn't anyone who may have a dog in this fight behind you with a gun?

Jeff

 

[MikeIsaj]

what if it was your own daughter getting her head bounced off the walls by a violent significant other... would you prefer I sit in my house and just call the police and hope she comes out alive and not on a stretcher?

Tell me how standing outside while she gets her head bounced off the wall is any more productive than staying home and calling it in. Do you realise that you could have stopped the whole thing by knocking on the door with the neighbors. If it was a violent assault that threatened another with death or serious bodily harm you would have been justified in intervening.

It sounds to me like the big problem here is that you and your brother were embarrassed by this cop who then did not, in your opinion, give sufficient weight to your input on the incident. I commend you for getting involved. I would suggest that you have this discussion with the police chief, that is only if you are ready to hear the answers.

 

[NHBB]

alas, there was no police chief to consult...

my wife (well, within 2 weeks) informed me that there was a huge glass shatter outside, thought it was on our property...

I went outside, no one to be found. then I hear ("hit me again and I will knock you the F out B*tch!!!!) to which she responded with a few audible hits.

the man ended up far worse than she did, but I went over seeing as they lived adjacent to me to make sure it didnt' get worse... my bro in his mind was making the right move, but messed up as far as what he said. I went home, got rid of my piece, returned... the police showed up shortly after...

I congregated with the rest of the neighbors that gathered, many ready to rush in the house but I told them no, wait for the police... nothing more would i have liked to run in that house and take down the man, but as I have read numerous times, you step in, the messed up woman attacks the protector, hence I waited. the police showed up, didnt care what was going on, disarmed my bro, and then continued on... I wanted to slap sense into my brother given what he said, but it ended ok, I went home to my girl no harm done, and no police wanted to hear the stuff I had heard go down long before they arrived... frustrating,, but I guess this is just the day and age where you are supposed to mind you own business. still irks me, but thats basically what went down. I was flying on red blooded instinct, not trying to be some hero as I keep a low profile, just reacted to what went on in front of me.

 

[NHBB]

hindsight is 20/20..

maybe I could have done some things better, but it all get resolved without anyone getting seriously hurt. what more could you ask for... at that point you are riding off adrenaline.

 

[Kujhac]

"tank, the reason I mentioned it was just under my observation, that she seemed more intent on dealing with the female's statement (lying) than she was gathering the entire details of the scene of the crime. they were both at fault from what I could hear from the situation... and an unbiased LEO would listen to all accounts and move from there. the fact she blew off every witnesses input and relied solely on the input of the supposed battered woman suggested prejudice as far as I was concerned, hence I felt it was worth mentioning."

I agree. Have seen it many times. It sounds like the female LEO was biased in the situation.

Also, your brother should have kept his mouth shut.

It could have been a murder in progress from your description of the sounds
emanating from their residence. Too many this day and age want to stick their heads in the sand and not get "involved".

Kudos to you.

 

[nyresq]

I've been a LEO for 8 years, and the cop was 100% right. If you and your brother had nothing to do with the situation, then you had no reason to be there. The cop pulling up knows there is at least one weapon in close proximity to a possible hostile situation. Step 1 is to eliminate that weapon before going any further. I would never walk past someone with a gun at a scene and leave them standing behind me unless I knew they were an off duty LEO. Sorry, you may have a right to carry a weapon, but not at my crime scene. You did your civic duty and called the police. Good job. but that was the end of your duty, you witnessed no criminal action, and all you knew was, there was two people yelling at each other in the house. The cop will see this when they pull up. there was no need to hang around. Wrong place, wrong time.

Your brother is stupid for telling the world you are armed, and neither one of you had any reason to be there after the call was made. As long as your brother got his gun back he should have no complaints. He was at the scene of a police investigation with a gun. He's not a cop and shouldn't feel "dissed" because he was disarmed.

same way if I get stopped while driving, I'll show my creds to the officer and ask them what they want to do about the weapon I have on my side. I have had police officers ask me where it is and then instruct me not to reach to that side untill after they leave, hey no big deal... I even had one ask me to remove it with my off hand and hand it to them while they verified who I was.
Cop was covering His/her ass, you cannot fault them for that.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I congregated with the rest of the neighbors that gathered, many ready to rush in the house but I told them no, wait for the police... nothing more would i have liked to run in that house and take down the man, but as I have read numerous times, you step in, the messed up woman attacks the protector, hence I waited. the police showed up, didnt care what was going on, disarmed my bro, and then continued on... I wanted to slap sense into my brother given what he said, but it ended ok, I went home to my girl no harm done, and no police wanted to hear the stuff I had heard go down long before they arrived... frustrating,, but I guess this is just the day and age where you are supposed to mind you own business. still irks me, but thats basically what went down. I was flying on red blooded instinct, not trying to be some hero as I keep a low profile, just reacted to what went on in front of me.

In other words you, like all the neighbors, were bystanders. Spectators. Rubberneckers.

You write as if trying to convince us that you DID something to prevent the situation from escalating and that YOU prevented someone from getting killed. I'm sorry, but you didn't. In fact, you just wrote that you talked other neighbors OUT OF intervening, and told them to wait for the police.

a neighbor standing by to make sure nothing horrible went on during the time it took for the LEO's to show up is a rubbernecker?

You heard the sounds of (according to your description) a horrific battle going on, and you DID nothing. That, Sir, is rubbernecking.

 

[TheEgg]

I put myself in the middle of nothing, has it degraded to the point where we should all just ignore blood curdling screams of our neighbors and not go to help if it is immediately necessary?[/QUOTE]

Sadly, yes, I think it has degraded to that point. I would report to the police, but then get out of the way. Neither will I go and try to be a white night -- I have neither the training, the inclination, or desire to be the 'hero.' The last thing I want to do is have any contact with police/courts/government that I can in any way avoid. Nor do I want to put myself or my family in any sort of jeopardy by attempting to push myself into other people's affairs.

The police in this instance treated your brother in a sensible and reasonable way.

 

[kahr40]

Looks like she was securing the rear before dealing with the main problem.

 

[Smurfslayer]

Wth...

Ok, I'll wade in as the devil's advocate.

Domestic calls are highly dynamic, dangerous, and very difficult to predict. One party at least has "called for help" and assistance now legally must be rendered. Chances are very good someone leaves in cuffs depending on dept. SOP, local & state law. WHEN this happens, there is sometimes regret on the part of the complainer, who could direct their pent up anger at "the man". There's almost nothing worse than getting in between two arguing significant others. However.

Significant facts are that dispatch was notified that a person who identified themself and advised that they were armed was calling to report a crime. The officer arriving on the scene immediately identifies two males _NOT_ on the property, or in the yard/curtilage of the actual scene of the reported crime. While it is generally agreed herein that the officer was correct to "secure the scene", I argue this constitutes both a seizure as defined by the courts on 4th amendment grounds, and, an actual custodial arrest. No reasonable person after having a firearm seized and "locked in the trunk" of an officer's vehicle would feel "free to leave". Any suggestion to the contrary ( do a THR search before you pontificate ) would be utterly ridiculous.

"Darn! The MAN just took my gun. Oh well, I'd better go home."

The officer overstepped her bounds and authority in seizing the firearm of a(n otherwise) law abiding citizen who merely got involved to be a responsible person, doing what the law required of him. These persons were standing in a publicly accessible area "going about their lawful business", and were not "at the crime scene" or part of it. Nor were they showing any intent to become part of it.

Now, change the circumstances a little, having our two gents "going about their lawful business" but in the yard, at the door, on the sidewalk of the crime scene - the officer is well within their authority to secure the actual scene.

It is untenable on it's face to imagine that the mere arrival of law enforcement justifies the infringement of constitutional liberties secured by Amendments 2, 4 & 5 of the US Constitution. Even in such a situation as a domestic dispute, the totality of this circumstance did not warrant any kind of seizure given the events described.

FWIW, I was OC at a traffic incident in which the vehicle I was in was rear ended. Virginia State Police showed up. Got our info, observed us exchange info, told us we were done, could be on our way. THEN he asks "Are you LE?" - me: "Nope". Him: "Ok, have a good day Mr. Smurfslayer". me: "Thanks, you too". I know, I know... it defies Brady campaign propaganda, but really, there was no blood in the streets...

 

[nyresq]

"going about their lawful business"

standing in front of the scene is not "going about their lawful business". They had no reason to be there.
Go stand in front of a bank on the sidewalk for a while and see how fast your "lawful business" gets you questioned.

It was also not made clear how close anyone was to the house. My front door is less then six feet from the "public sidewalk". Close enough in my book to detain anyone I find standing there untill I sort out what is going on. And every judge and jury that I've ever seen (except maybe in CA) would back an officer 100%.

Yes, its a public street, but the officer determined it was in proximity to a possible crime and secured it. Thats the responding officers call to make, and contrary to what you think may be a public area, on a moments notice the area and everything in it can become part of the crime scene.

 

[Smurfslayer]

standing in front of the scene is not "going about their lawful business". They had no reason to be there.

Did I wake up in the former Soviet Union? Back that statement up with a statute.

They had every right to be out in public, in a public area so long as they were not on, or actually a part of the crime scene. I conceded that if they were actually on the property, yes, this would be a legitimate 'securing the scene'. I'd do it. 6 feet? Yup. 30 feet? maybe. 50 feet. No way.

Maybe that is ok in NY. It's not in Virginia, so says the Appeals court and supreme court who have fairly consistently held that an unlawful seizure has taken place in similar situations. One such was a person who's (whose?) clothing bulge indicated the presence of a weapon - reversed on appeal.
no other reason to detain. Other cases involved whether or not a reasonable person would feel - 'free to leave', our courts holding that surrounding a person, or people with armed officers is a custodial detention and therefore a seizure. So, you may be correct that a jury and judge may side with the officer, but the judicial branch may ultimately not side with the officer.

NHBB, how about clarifying that aspect of the scenario? How far were you from the caterwauling couple? From the doorway, was the property fenced?

 

[nyresq]

One such was a person who's (whose?) clothing bulge indicated the presence of a weapon - reversed on appeal.

what was reversed on appeal? was the person arrested?
in this case the Officer didn't arrest the brother, but only disarmed him. was he free to leave? That could be argued either way, he wasn't in cuffs or in the back of a car. The officer has every right to secure a scene and that scene can be as large as the officer deems necessary.

You've never seen an entire highway closed to the public for hours and hours for an investigation? And I suppose in VA they would never have a civilian's car held within that scene simply because someone stopped to be a good samaritan and wound up parked in the middle of something? They had nothing to do with it, got there after it happened, but they still had their car held for hours untill the police told them they could take it. were they under arrest? No, and they are free to leave if they are willing to leave their car and get it back later.

NHBB, how about clarifying that aspect of the scenario? How far were you from the caterwauling couple? From the doorway, was the property fenced?

Please elaborate on this, as I can't imagine the officer pulled up to the scene and then proceeded to walk to the neighbors house to look for someone who was armed.

As I stated before, go stand in front of a bank (or a government office building) on a public street for a few hours and let me know how your lawful business works out.

 

[trbon8r]

Sounds like a classic case of "mind your own business". From what I read here neither you or your brother had any business involving yourselves in the situation. Let the police handle it.

I don't blame the cop a bit for her actions in taking a gun away from someone that isn't a trained LE with the potential to complicate the situation. I'm no fan of the donut eaters, but in this case I don't fault them a bit.

 

[newfalguy101]

has it degraded to the point where we should all just ignore blood curdling screams of our neighbors and not go to help if it is immediately necessary? I went on instinct, out of concern for human life, and

NO

but next time just call, give your address and dont be lookie-loos

No reason to go anywhere near the scene unless its in your front yard.

 

[Roadkill]

Voluntarily providing others information that you have a gun is like having a stunningly beautiful girlfriend. At first you enjoy the attention. But when you marry her it stops being fun having everyone chasing after and staring at her.
When you are young you want everyone to look. When you grow up the last thing you want to do is enter an unstable situation and announce that you have a gun. Somebody might make you use it.

rk

 

[Matt G]

Moving to Legal and Political.

 

[gc70]

has it degraded to the point where we should all just ignore blood curdling screams of our neighbors and not go to help if it is immediately necessary?

It seems there were at least three options: (1) ignore the disturbance; (2) call the police, or; (3) charge into the fray to "go to help."

I congregated with the rest of the neighbors that gathered, many ready to rush in the house but I told them no, wait for the police

NHBB favored not rushing into the argument and the concensus seems to be that NHBB's brother did the right thing by calling the police.

I think the officer acted appropriately when she disarmed NHBB's brother. I am not a LEO, but I have watched enough episodes of COPS (and sometimes even stayed in a Holiday Inn Express) to realize that neighbors, friends, and relatives often congregate at the scene of a domestic disturbance and can end up being a bigger problem for the police than the fighting couple. Add the fact that the officer's only knowledge of a deadly weapon related to the disturbance was the 911 call that a bystander was armed and the officer's actions disarming NHBB's brother seem very prudent.

Now, to sort out a few inconsistencies, NHBB seems disturbed because:

I had valid info that could concern the outcome of the incident, only no one seemed to really care as the woman is always right in these parts it seems

I can understand NHBB's perception of bias against the man, since:

the man ended up far worse than she did

What I don't understand is NHBB's subsequent conclusion:

nothing more would i have liked to run in that house and take down the man

This makes it appear that NHBB has the same bais against the man that he complains about the officer showing.