When You’re Falsely Accused of a Gun Crime – 12 Things You Need to Know

[Fred Fuller]

From the OP -

Steven and Michelle were stunned and terrified when the neighbor’s son, who had also been a guest at the dinner party (and was an active Navy Seal), returned later in the evening threatening Steven and demanding an apology. Thinking, Okay, I’ll go over and apologize and be done with it, Steven went next door to try to smooth things over.

Later that night the Gesses were shocked when law enforcement officers arrived at their home in the middle of the night to arrest Steven and search their home. As it turned out, Michelle reports, the son of the offended guest had falsely accused Steven of threatening him with a gun.

It wasn't the neighbor's wife who made the accusation - it was the son. For whatever the misunderstanding was with the wife, Gesse had apologized.

 

[klcmschlesinger]

I have read all of this and this is scary as hell. I would have to admit to be one of the idiots that would think this won't happen to me, but now my mind is working overtime.
My wife and I moved out of town basically because I don't like most people and can't stand neighbors. We have neighbors out here but they have all moved to this area for the same reasons I did and there are literally acres of land between each neighbor. We are cordial but do not socialize. I have only a couple of friends and they all share my interests. Those that don't share my interests i don't have time for.
No one at work knows what I do in my personal time, don't know my hobbies, how many kids I have or even my wife's name. Not their business. My wife says I have the making of a hermit, but according to this story, I think my way is safest.

 

[Skribs]

Be the first to call 911. The person to call 911 is always going to be considered the victim, regardless of the circumstances. If you find yourself in any sort of threatening situation, whether it’s with a family member, friend, coworker, or complete stranger, don’t hesitate. Be the first to call 911. While it may not seem “right” or “fair,” the first person to call 911 is going to be regarded as the victim, regardless of the facts or the truth.

The problem with this is that you may think something is water-under-the-bridge or something like that, not even worth going to the cops over, and then it gets blown way out of proportion by the accuser. The story in the OP is testament to that: this was someone who got offended, and then someone else demanded an apology for that someone, and the accused appologized. That would seem to be the end of it.

While it does say that the accuser had threatened the man, if I were in his position, I would have assumed the apology (which is what the accuser was after in the first place) would have been sufficient and that the problem would go away. How can I call 911 first if I'm going to get falsely accused, with no warning before-hand that the accuser is going to call 911 on me?

 

[Purgatory]

Alcohol and drug counseling, anger management, etc. are very, very often required of those simply accused of a crime that has absolutely nothing to do with any of those things.

As a police officer sitting in a courtroom waiting on my cases, even I was often stunned to hear about the things being required of people that had nothing to do with their cases whatsoever.

There is a lot of good advice in that article. The sad fact is that, based upon many years of law enforcement experience, I believe every word of it.

Can't tell you how many debates/arguments I've had with people, even 'groups' of people, about all of this information to absolutely no avail.

Always nice when an officer, or otherwise 'insider' to the legal system, can corroborate.

1. You are 'always' guilty 'til proven innocent. I'm not even sure it has 'ever' been the other way around.

2. Courts/Judges will often, if not always, stick you with as many extra tack-ons as they can possibly get away with. No matter what your charge, you can be stuck with countless hours of community service, many weeks of: anger control, chemical dependency, alcohol awareness, etc, etc. Why? Because you are ordered to pay for each and every week of these classes and it's just another way for the city to make money off of you.

it's just one more stone to bury you under is all. If you slip on an alcohol test, they can fine and incarerate you till trial.
Our legal system is modeled on "if we catch you bending over, we'll <deleted> ya"

This is also very true.

The legal system is now, and always has been, a big mess and a huge nightmare for anyone who is lucky enough to get "ram-rodded through the court system" as Massad Ayoob, himself, once stated.

I've often wondered, while carrying a firearm, who I am more concerned about having a run-in with: Criminals or Law Enforcement.

Bottom line: If you don't know someone who has been through all of this, or been through it yourself, you will never believe it is actually a reality. Yet, it happens every single day.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Cameras, people, cameras. They're so small and inexpensive these days, there's no reason not to have video & audio of any encounter.

I have an 8 camera DVR system that was just over $400, and I upgraded the HDD to a 2 TB for $100, which will hold 46 days of footage from all 8 cameras. It serves as a burglar deterrent, could provide evidence if a burglar went ahead anyway, and offers irrefutable proof of my innocence if anyone were to accuse me of a crime like that in this story.

I also have dash cams in the car, keychain cameras, and, of course, a cell phone that does A/V recording. No, I'm not paranoid. I don't record every waking second of my life. But I have the means to record any event at a moment's notice, and there will almost always be an indication that you should start a log with your digital witness.

I was falsy accused of domestic violence once, and a mere audio recording exonerated me and got her in hot water for false reporting. I didn't know she'd make such an accusation, but I did know she may be capable of such things by how she'd acted and little things she'd said in the past, so I covered my butt. When the police arrived after her phone call, they heard the audio, and instead of me being cuffed, she was told she had a few minutes to gather her things and get out, and that if she ever made another false accuastion, she'd be the one going to jail.

She did continue badmouthing me about town for a short time, but ceased under threat of civil suit for slander.

 

[DammitBoy]

Had a college roommate whose girlfriend, after a bad breakup, decided to falsely accuse him of domestic violence.

He went through hell trying to get his rights back for doing nothing. I totally believe the OP.

 

[heeler]

From my own experience and a few others here as well obviously,I can say it's hard as hell trying to defend yourself from a malicious lie.
I truely wished I knew the whole story but I have no intentions of buying a book to do so.

 

[hq]

Some people have wondered why my house and front yard is packed with digital security cameras that record both video and audio 24/7 and have plenty of backlog and my phone is set up to record all phonecalls. They should read this thread to understand.

I've been thinking about installing a similar system with a shorter backlog to my car as well. Hard evidence against false accusations is a cheap insurance against costly legal battle.

I've seen a bit too much to be naive about inherent "goodness" of the police and juridical system. This seems to be a global phenomenon.

 

[Averageman]

I had a Soldier who worked for me that I had known to be a good man of integrity.
He was accused of Spousal Abuse not by his Wife, but by his neighbors.
The MP's when called showed up and the door, forced there way in to his quarters and hauled him to the Station wrapped in a towel. His wife did not speak much English and was in shock and was confused as to what had happened to her husband.
Had it not been for a very understanding Chain of Commandand an intepter and wittnesses as to the character of this Staff Sergeant and his Wife, he would have probobly lost his career and may well have served time.
All on the word of a busybody next door.

 

[wideym]

Some times people take offence or freak out while eaves dropping on conversations, like one I had with a co-worker in the Air Nat. Guard. We were talking about going out in a couple of days to target shoot and I commented on how I would have to do a round count to see if I had enough ammo to make it worth my while.

Ten minutes later after leaving the Admin offices, I see APs running toward the building a they asked me if I know who was inside yelling about that he's going to shoot everybody. Turns out they were talking about me and I ended up being booted out with a general discharge when I wouldn't kowtow to their demands that I plead guilty and demanded a lawyer when they threatened felony charges.

Things worked out since I just went back in the Army a few years later.

 

[HorseSoldier]

legally, how do the courts justify forcing the accused to go through such measures without a guilty verdict?

The courts can and do stipulate conditions of release that are intended to shield victims (i.e. "no contact with X"), prevent bad behavior that might lead to further incidents (i.e. "will not consume alcohol or illegal substances") or possibly both (i.e. "will avoid location Y"). They can also a third party custodian to supervise the conduct of someone out on bail awaiting trial -- literally a court appointed baby sitter for a grown adult. The underlying legal logic is basically that being released on bail and own recognizance or under someone else's supervision is absolutely not a right, it is a privellege, and while you are considered innocent until proven guilty, the state has the right to incarcerate you until you get your day in court -- and often does.

Most of the time, these restrictions make completely reasonable sense -- i.e. if the guy in this story is alleged to have threatened deadly force against a guy after an evening's drinking, the court is obviously going to stipulate no alcohol (since it helped precipitate the problem) and no contact with the victim. It is, however, a system that has the potential for bizarre judicial activism and that happens, too.

 

[JustinJ]

Be the first to call 911. The person to call 911 is always going to be considered the victim, regardless of the circumstances. If you find yourself in any sort of threatening situation, whether it’s with a family member, friend, coworker, or complete stranger, don’t hesitate. Be the first to call 911. While it may not seem “right” or “fair,” the first person to call 911 is going to be regarded as the victim, regardless of the facts or the truth.

To report what? If the other party has not committed a crime what will you call about? This also leads me to believe there is far more to this story. If he simply argued with the son what is he going to tell 911?

 

[Matthew Temkin]

I worked as a court officer in the NYC criminal/supreme court system for over 20 years and can attest to how unfair it all can be.
There was a time when domestic violence was not really taken seriously by the courts, with several tragic outcomes of victims being murdered after obtaining an order of protection.
Now the pendulum has sung too far the other way, where the mere accusation leads to a horrible burden on the accused.
Not to mention false accusations by wives/girlfriends who are seeking child custody, a favorable divorce or a financial payout.
You should already have a criminal defense lawyer in mind, as well as legal insurance, if available.
At least the man in the OP was acquitted of all charges--and spared the outrage of being jailed for a crime that he did not commit.

 

[Skribs]

To report what? If the other party has not committed a crime what will you call about? This also leads me to believe there is far more to this story. If he simply argued with the son what is he going to tell 911?

Yep! There are a lot of times on the ST&T forum where you're suggested to call 911, and I'm thinking "after the fact, it might be a lot more clear whether or not you should have called 911."

 

[Fred Fuller]

From the OP (again) -

Be the first to call 911. The person to call 911 is always going to be considered the victim, regardless of the circumstances. If you find yourself in any sort of threatening situation, whether it’s with a family member, friend, coworker, or complete stranger, don’t hesitate. Be the first to call 911. While it may not seem “right” or “fair,” the first person to call 911 is going to be regarded as the victim, regardless of the facts or the truth.

Let's try not to split too many legalistic hairs over the definition of a "threatening situation," please... could we consider it to be like one judicial definition of pornography - "I know it when I see it," and allow that it has different meanings for different observers?

 

[DammitBoy]

If he simply argued with the son what is he going to tell 911?

"Hello 911? My next-door neighbors son just threatened me at my front door."

 

[Certaindeaf]

"Hello 911? My next-door neighbors son just threatened me at my front door."

What? If I'm following this correctly that would be a lie.

 

[JustinJ]

Be the first to call 911. The person to call 911 is always going to be considered the victim, regardless of the circumstances. If you find yourself in any sort of threatening situation, whether it’s with a family member, friend, coworker, or complete stranger, don’t hesitate. Be the first to call 911. While it may not seem “right” or “fair,” the first person to call 911 is going to be regarded as the victim, regardless of the facts or the truth.

Let's try not to split too many legalistic hairs over the definition of a "threatening situation," please... could we consider it to be like one judicial definition of pornography - "I know it when I see it," and allow that it has different meanings for different observers?

Regarding the story how does this apply? If the son actually did threaten him or committed some other illegal act i find it incredibly unlikely this would be left out of the story.

"Hello, 911, i just got in an argument with my neighbor. He didn't actually threaten me but i just wanted to file a report anyways." That does not seem like a good way to establish one's credibility.

What? If I'm following this correctly that would be a lie.

Exactly.

 

[Fred Fuller]

There won't always be something that pushes past the tipping point of yelling to the authorities that there's trouble brewing, is the point to that paragraph as far as I can tell. But if there IS something that reaches that point, be the first to call.

That's my interpretation anyway, not everyone will agree with it. And calling 9-1-1 and crying 'wolf' isn't going to endear anyone to the folks who answer those calls, so judicious application is called for.

 

[Skribs]

Fred, I can understand calling 911 first if you know there's going to be a need to call 911. But in this story it doesn't apply.

 

[Fred Fuller]

No, there was no apparent tipoff in this story that a call to 9-1-1 might be needed. Doesn't mean there won't ever be an indicator or a series of indicators sufficient to make one wonder "Should I call 9-1-1?" Their advice seems to me to be, if you have to wonder, the answer is probably yes.

 

[DammitBoy]

Steven and Michelle were stunned and terrified when the neighbor’s son, who had also been a guest at the dinner party (and was an active Navy Seal), returned later in the evening threatening Steven and demanding an apology.

"Hello 911? My neighbor's son just threatened me at my front door"

Did you guys even read the article?

 

[Skribs]

Yes I did, DammitBoy. The problem is that when the man in the article gave the apology, at that point it seemed like the problem would blow over. The neighbor's son had demanded an apology, they gave it, and that seemed to be the end of it until the cops showed up.

 

[DammitBoy]

Sorry skribs, what was wrong was when threatened and terrified by the son's actions - they should have called the cops.

 

[newbuckeye]

My x wife did almost this exact same thing to me. One phone call to allege the most horrific abuse on my kids, and my life as I thought I knew it was over. Thankfully, when we got to court for the restraining order, the judge recognized that the testimony my x was giving was being recited as if she had memorized it, not lived it. Only a few friends had the courage to not only stand up and tell the truth, but they also testified for me. It's a sad and all too common occurrence in our America.