News story- Police respond to man playing with crossbow in his backyard

[youngunz4life]

1)

It doesn't matter where you live, who you are, or what you look like, the police are bound by the constitution and should be obligated to act in a professional manner.

good point- wish it was true more Pichon


2)

Hypothetical situation, but I'm curious. Conn. Trooper, if you were called to a drug manufacturing property and had to seize the building to protect evidence, during your sweep, how would you handle it if you saw money printing equipment/some other type of evidence of another crime? Would you ignore the 'other' evidence, until a warrant was issued, or directly after the sweep, get a warrant for ALL types of evidence seen?
And, wouldn't seeing another type of evidence other than what was being swept for, and acting on it, be something amounting to evidence from an illegal search?
Reason I ask this is that my local deputies several years ago busted a man for drugs with a drug warrant. Found his home full to the ceiling with stolen items, but did nothing about it. And, when I asked why not, they said merely that they were in there on a drug warrant.
sixgun

sixgun, conn trooper is right- if something is in plain view than it is fair game and always fair game even if the search warrant is specifically for something else. that deputy deserves a cigar and had maybe just gotten out of the academy. kidding - but those deputies did the right thing which isn't always the case obviously. they might easily get away with it too when it is an illegal search if the evidence isn't supressed, you don't have a lot of money for a lawyer, are from a bad area, etc etc etc)

if a cop finds a Huge bundle of cocaine, ecstasy pills, joints, etc in a small sock drawer in a bedroom next to the room where the computer is where the warrant is specifically for(specifically for files, downloads literally on the computer). That evidence can be supressed(again, with a lawyer that actually gives a d*&n.

[Conn. Trooper]

that deputy deserves a cigar and had maybe just gotten out of the academy. kidding - but those deputies did the right thing which isn't always the case obviously. they might easily get away with it too when it is an illegal search if the evidence isn't supressed, you don't have a lot of money for a lawyer, are from a bad area, etc etc etc)

if a cop finds a Huge bundle of cocaine, ecstasy pills, joints, etc in a small sock drawer in a bedroom next to the room where the computer is where the warrant is specifically for(specifically for files, downloads literally on the computer). That evidence can be supressed(again, with a lawyer that actually gives a d*&n.


Um, no they didn't do the right thing. If they lawfully saw stolen goods, while executing a valid search warrant, then they should have gotten a new warrant and seized those items and returned them to the rightful owner.

If they found them in an unlawful manner, shame on them. Warrants are very specific as to where you can search and enter. If they were legally executing a warrant and the items were in plain view where they were lawfully serving the warrant, it's fair game. Maybe I am reading this situation wrong.

[youngunz4life]

you didnt read it wrong. my bad. I jumped the gun with the fact that the deputies used caution instead of being rash, yet I over-read some of the content while noticing that. seeing drugs in plain view though is different than seeing stolen items. depending on how obvious it was that the items were stolen. if the stolen items are in plain view they are fair game

as for my 2nd quoted paragraph above: I stand by that. drugs hidden in a desk drawer in a different room during a computer files warrant would be evidence from an illegal search and could be supressed.

[sixgun67]

The reason I was able to talk to one of the deputies was because some of those stolen goods that they saw, were mine. Long story, for another day. And, I never got them back. Officers wanted the man and didn't care about anything else. They'd been trying to lock him up for years.
sixgun

[Don P]

Warrants are very specific as to where you can search and enter. If they were legally executing a warrant and the items were in plain view where they were lawfully serving the warrant, it's fair game. Maybe I am reading this situation wrong.

Conn. Trooper, question, with the above statement made. When you sweep are you sweeping in total. Intire house, all rooms, do you open closet doors, perhaps a large trunk?

The reason I ask if the sweep is performed as I stated would the warrant have to match what YOU sweep?

[Conn. Trooper]

Securing a scene would be checking every place a person could be. Reasonably be. Large trunk, I guess maybe. Closet? Sure. You are securing the scene for people, not looking for evidence.

[Don P]

Thanks Conn. Trooper for your honest response.

[Gbro]

Conn.tropper,

This is some of the video from the female in the house.

!. We have very few facts about what went down prior to the 10-88 call other than some blood and broken property, and bleeding LEO's

2. Shooting a weapon in a public place like in this incident is criminal. Sorry I have no sympathy for someone that ignorant. and his wife/Lawyer should have counciled him better.

3. There is nothing wrong with the LEO,s asking permition to enter and nothing wrong with the resident refusing.

4. At this stage of the incident the weapon (bow & Arrows) will need to be seized as evidence and going on a donut break would have been bad form.
So they were waiting for a warrant.
They didn't do a safety sweep but seemed to have it in mind but apparently decided to wait.

The whole situation went South and that happens for all too many reasons but 1st of all because someone was doing something wrong/stupid-wrong.
And we do not have access to the information the LEO's would have as to the history of this residence to help them in making decisions.

I for one thank Conn. Trooper for his insights especially when they were more hypothetical of the given situation.

Greg

[Don P]

After viewing the video I shall refrain from giving my opinion because doing so shall keep me a member of TFL.
To all have a wonderful day.

[Al Norris]

Would someone care to summarize all the points of the OP?

I'm asking, because this thread really hasn't looked at what the law is about, in the context of the OP, nor is there any real mention of a civil rights issue.

So please, somebody summarize the facts and issues.

[gc70]

• A man was shooting a crossbow in the yard at his in-town residence and neighbors call the police to report the illegal activity.
• The man returns the crossbow to the residence, then goes back outside.
• The police arrive and begin questioning the man, who refuses to provide identification and attempts to leave and go inside the residence.
• The police struggle with the man on the porch of the residence and both officers are injured (cuts during struggle), resulting in the man being arrested and taken to jail.
• The man's wife has a video camera and asks other officers what happened.
• A sergeant arrived and said he needed to come in the residence to take a statement from the wife; she refuses entry to the residence without a search warrant.
• The wife acknowledged the man had been shooting a crossbow outside, but the crossbow was later brought in the residence and put away.
• The wife answered that there were no guns in the residence, but the crossbow was in the residence.
• The wife answered that none of the disturbance took place in the residence.
• The sergeant said the police will seize the residence and the wife and her child will have to leave the residence while the police apply for a search warrant.

The issues presented were:

• The wife refused warrantless entry to the residence and the police responded by saying they were 'seizing' the residence and the wife had to leave until the police could obtain a search warrant.
• What is the value of refusing consent to search without a warrant if the police can arbitrarily seize (and presumably 'sweep') the residence while attempting to obtain a warrant?
• What authority do police have to control the [non-]scene (inside the residence) of an investigation?

[TJH3781]

The residence became part of the crime scene once the cross bow was moved there. In order to protect the evidence, she would be denied access until a warrant is obtained. If she had not said anything, there would be no probable cause for the warrant. Succinctly, mouth in motion before brain in gear.

[youngunz4life]

TJH, you brought up a good point. She did a lot of talking! Many of the LE realized pretty quick it was like a broken record and they didn't want to cross that bridge(especially with the camera), but she did a lot of talking when they kept pressing on.

[Gbro]

Link to part 1 video.
Al Norris

Would someone care to summarize all the points of the OP?I'm asking, because this thread really hasn't looked at what the law is about, in the context of the OP,

The OP asks

In the second part of the video, the officer tells the wife that if she won't consent to a search then they will seize the house until they can get a warrant. Is that legal?

Post #19 By Conn. Trooper
Usually we will sweep the residence for any people that can be destroying evidence. Once everybody is out they can wait at the scene, in their car (if it's not part of the search) or wherever. Once the warrant is in hand we can enter and search, or if the warrant is denied, we don't search.

I think Conn Trooper covered this very well. This would be securing.

There may be a little terminology issue here and the word secure could have been used in place of seize.
But then I do not think it is a crime for a LEO to falsely say something even though It would be for a citizen.

And I have found nothing but scuttlebutt as to this being a "Cross Bow". That is why I only refereed to the weapon as a Bow & Arrows" (and this is from the news media).

[gc70]

And I have found nothing but scuttlebutt as to this being a "Cross Bow". That is why I only refereed to the weapon as a Bow & Arrows" (and this is from the news media).

Lincoln JournalStar article, December 21, 2010:

"One man is in custody after police say he got into a scuffle with two officers who were investigating a report that he was illegally shooting a crossbow in city limits."

[gc70]

Sometimes surprising things in plain sight constitute evidence during a search.

Lincoln JournalStar article, December 29, 2010:

"Police also cited Grana and Shaw on suspicion of misdemeanor child abuse. A 4-year-old girl was home at the time of the incident, Flood said, and the house was heated only by two space heaters. The only food inside, she said, was an uncooked bowl of rice, dried beans and leftover chicken bones."

[jimbob86]

"Police also cited Grana and Shaw on suspicion of misdemeanor child abuse. A 4-year-old girl was home at the time of the incident, Flood said, and the house was heated only by two space heaters. The only food inside, she said, was an uncooked bowl of rice, dried beans and leftover chicken bones."

Not suprising at all. Lincoln has enough laws that Chief "OnlyOne" Cassidy's boys can find something to charge just about anyone with something.... so now, not grocery shopping is a misdemeanor.

[Gbro]

gc70;

Lincoln JournalStar article, December 21, 2010:

Again scuttlebutt!
Another reporter flapping his/her jaw.

[gc70]

Originally Posted by Gbro

Again scuttlebutt!
Another reporter flapping his/her jaw.

A newspaper reporting a police spokesman's statement is scuttlebutt?

Feel free to share how you are channeling 'the truth' about this incident.

[youngunz4life]

Honestly, it doesn't appear that the Officers did anything wrong. Bottom line- if he gave up his ID and denied it there might've been nothing else to do but either site him or verbally warn him. When you're guilty of something, sometimes its just hard for people to say: "Thats my story and I am sticking to it".

Of course there is no denying that a history with police and/or especially the same police dept can make things escalate real quick. I always liked how Certain officers could come into a very high, emotional situation very low key and then the perp and officer can balance+meet in the middle. It is actually a very effective approach. It doesn't look like it happened here, but you can't fault the officers. Looks like they just gave him the battery on a police officer instead of the bow unless that was a seperate citation and non-criminal. I sort of feel bad for the guy because he stepped in it pretty good. I wonder how old he was? You just can't fight police, but maybe he can plea saying he was running and injuries were accident.

[markj]

Quote:
"Police also cited Grana and Shaw on suspicion of misdemeanor child abuse. A 4-year-old girl was home at the time of the incident, Flood said, and the house was heated only by two space heaters. The only food inside, she said, was an uncooked bowl of rice, dried beans and leftover chicken bones."

Not suprising at all. Lincoln has enough laws that Chief "OnlyOne" Cassidy's boys can find something to charge just about anyone with something.... so now, not grocery shopping is a misdemeanor.

??? it takes more food than that to take care of a child and only 2 space heaters? it is winter here and was cold in nov.

Sorry but I find the guy guilty of being a ..... well you get the picture.

The only food inside, she said, was an uncooked bowl of rice, dried beans and leftover chicken bones

Would you feed this to a 4 year old kid? As a father I can say I sure wouldnt.

[Gbro]

Feel free to share how you are channeling 'the truth' about this incident.

1st of all I could care less what kind of Bow he was shooting in his residential neiborhood.
I just get a jolt out of folks that grab on to any scuttlbutte the news media puts out their and take it for the truth.
The truth is the law was violated and an emerency call was made for assistance when things went south.
But to make a comment on your link of truth,

The italics are mine.

[QUOTEOne man is in custody after police say he got into a scuffle with two officers who were investigating a report that he was illegally shooting a crossbow in city limits.

"This is direct or I could call it 3rd degree Scuttlebutt"

Lincoln Police Capt. Jim Davidsaver said one officer was taken by ambulance to a local hospital with a non-life threatening injury following the incident at Center Court Mobile Home Park, 3500 N. 39th St. Circle. The other officer was being treated for a minor injury as well.

This is a reporter relaying what they believe they heard from Capt. Jim, however you don't see it in Quotes

Lincoln Police Capt. David Beggs said the officer who was taken by ambulance to a hospital was......

More of the same, lets just call this 1st Degree Scuttlebutt[/U].

[B.N.Real]

I live in the same place that the police officers I expect to protect me from crime live in.

That makes a decision pretty easy for me.

I don't view it as an affront to my Constitutional rights to simply work through a situation with common decency and respect towards those officers.

I view it as a victory over the person that called the law in the first place to have the officers leave empty handed and peacefully without arresting anyone.

You want to face off with the police that's up to you.

I will tell them or bring charges against them or sue them if they ever give me reason too as that is my right but I havent been that lucky,I guess.

I've been blessed to deal with police that are decent people just trying to do a job and do it well.

The government has'nt tried to bum rush my house and I have'nt given them any reason to.

Alot of the unreasonable response from the police comes from the manner the information was given to them about the situation they are responding too.

If that information is incomplete or dead wrong,they could be walking into a nightmare.

But that's o.k.,they are the police after all,right?

[Fox1]

Lincoln JournalStar article, December 29, 2010:

"Police also cited Grana and Shaw on suspicion of misdemeanor child abuse. A 4-year-old girl was home at the time of the incident, Flood said, and the house was heated only by two space heaters. The only food inside, she said, was an uncooked bowl of rice, dried beans and leftover chicken bones."

Why would this be "evidence" of child abuse?

"Yes, Your Honor, that is a correct account of the amount of food in our home. We eat out a lot."

[hogdogs]

We were headed to the store when the STORM TROOPERS arrived and FUBAR'd our plans!

I reckon I am a bad dad as we only use the one "space heater" located in the living room which burns wood.

I have also lived in homes with no heat... Space heaters and blankets broke the chill during the cold snaps.

Brent