What would you do when bail bondsmen break into your home looking for someone who used your address? - Page 3

Tony Z · May 28, 2019, 06:09 AM

Interesting thread, and though I know nothing about law for the bondsman or for the homeowner, there is one thing readily apparent: the bondsmen are loaning/guaranteeing money without doing their due diligence. One would think, that a person that has many thousands of dollars on the line, said person would have checked the accuracy of facts to reach a certain comfort level of accuracy. Afterall, the bondsman are putting a great deal of trust into alleged criminals, so the burden should be on them to have enough comfort in the deal before extending bail.

Jim Watson · May 28, 2019, 10:03 AM

I assume it is a crude version of statistical process control.
They balance out the cost of verifying customer particulars vs paying skip tracers vs losses on bail jumpers not found.

Don P · May 29, 2019, 10:23 AM

I'll ask this of our members that are of the legal profession. Does the paperwork for a fugitives apprehension held by the bounty hunter carry the same weight as an arrest warrant? If not they no have authority to enter the home regardless of what info the have. All I'll add to all those involved is if you are going to be judged by a jury for your actions you must act legally as what a reasonable prudent person would do in the same situation. Just because its your home DOES NOT MAKE IT AN EXECUTION CHAMBER.

zincwarrior · May 29, 2019, 10:34 AM

From Texas, gateway to New Mexico!...

1. It does not.
2. I am not 100% certain but strongly believe an arrest warrant must be served by an actual officer of the court or authorized person (police, sheriff, constable, Texmex cook) and to quote the immortal bard "they aint." To affect entrance into private property I am sure of it.

The above does not apply to people who like sushi. They are viewed as potentiall;y being Californians who have wandered out of the AQZ (Austin Quarantine Zone) and need to be gently shepherded back before they become injured or get taken advantage of by local fauna, particularly gators and jackalopes.

Double Naught Spy · May 29, 2019, 09:31 PM

It was mentioned above how the people at the door "clearly identified" themselves as to who they were and as such suggested the homeowner should just take that at face value.

Well, here are some DEA agents who clearly identified themselves in Houston. They announced that they were DEA. They had "DEA" on their shirts. They said that they had a warrant. However, they weren't DEA. They skedaddled when the homeowner said she was calling the cops.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/men-pose-...de-home-police

zincwarrior · May 30, 2019, 07:59 AM

As a Texan, unless they identified themselves as proper law enforcement, they are just potential home invaders under the law. Like vampires, don't let the wrong one in.

AirForceShooter · May 30, 2019, 08:29 AM

It's Florida kiddies.
Castle law applies.
Someone in your home without your permission and refusing to leave may be shot.
Fear of your life doesn't enter into it.
They're not cops with a search warrant.

I'm kind of amazed the LEO's just stood around watching.

Dog the Bounty Hunter is a cartoon.

AFS

**Spats McGee** · May 30, 2019, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don P

I'll ask this of our members that are of the legal profession. Does the paperwork for a fugitives apprehension held by the bounty hunter carry the same weight as an arrest warrant? If not they no have authority to enter the home regardless of what info the have. All I'll add to all those involved is if you are going to be judged by a jury for your actions you must act legally as what a reasonable prudent person would do in the same situation. Just because its your home DOES NOT MAKE IT AN EXECUTION CHAMBER.

It does not. I won't speak to every jurisdiction in the country, but in my experience, it works something like this:

Defendant is arrested.
Defendant has a bond set.
Defendant gets bondsman to post the bond. As part of the bond agreement, defendant agrees to do a bunch of stuff, like call in regularly and appear in court ordered to do so.
Defendant fails to appear and the court issues a warrant.
Court also starts forfeiture proceedings against the bondsman for the amount of the bond.
Bondsman goes looking for defendant.
Bondsman brings defendant to court. He can then either remain on the bond or ask to be relieved.

I took a look at some bond paperwork in one of my files and it says the "Defendant will appear before the Court designated below at the time indicated and shall at all times render himself amenable to the orders and process of said court in prosecution of said charges and, if convicted, shall render himself in execution thereof. If the Defendant fails to perform any of these conditions, we will pay and forfeit . . . . " It also says that the Defendant will call every Monday between 8a and 8p.

So we have several related, but largely independent processes going on: (1) the court system with its orders to appear and arrest warrants; (2) the contract between the bondsman and the defendant; and (3) the (possible) forfeiture proceeding between the bondsman and the court.

**Aguila Blanca** · May 30, 2019, 11:49 AM

But the paperwork you reviewed is the paperwork between the defendant and the court. What would be more interesting in connection with this discussion would be a sample of a bail bondsman's contract with a defendant.

That said, even the contract between the defendant and the bondsman is irrelevant, because in this case it was not the defendant's home that the bail enforcement agents broke into. As multiple posters have already commented, the defendant has no right to grant the agents permission to enter a property over which the defendant has no ownership or control interest, no matter what his contract with the bail bondsman says.

zukiphile · May 30, 2019, 01:11 PM

Quote:

But the paperwork you reviewed is the paperwork between the defendant and the court.

The language Spats quoted was from the bonding company to the defendant.

I can tell you that although it isn't exactly the same thing in the contracts I've entered with bonding companies when I am a fiduciary, the principle will be very similar -- they have the money, and to have access to the bond, I am going to give them whatever they decide they want from me. The first time I was presented with one of these documents, I asked why anyone would think I am crazy enough to sign something like that. The answer was that I didn't have ten million in cash to post with the clerk.

In the criminal context, the defendant is going to authorize the agents of the bonding company to drag him out of any place at any time if he violates the terms of the bond, i.e. does anything that could cost the company a penny.

**Aguila Blanca** · May 30, 2019, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zukiphile

In the criminal context, the defendant is going to authorize the agents of the bonding company to drag him out of any place at any time if he violates the terms of the bond, i.e. does anything that could cost the company a penny.

Okay, so the defendant authorizes agents of the bonding company to lay hands on him, anywhere and anytime. But that still doesn't confer any right for the bail enforcement agents to enter premises not controlled by the defendant without the property owner's or agent's permission, correct?

zukiphile · May 30, 2019, 01:41 PM

Quote:

But that still doesn't confer any right for the bail enforcement agents to enter premises not controlled by the defendant without the property owner's or agent's permission, correct?

Right, and I write that not as anyone who knows FL law, but as a consequence of some fundamental principles, one of which you have correctly identified as privity.

If all that was needed for you and Spats to break into my house for a look around were for you two to make an agreement between the two of you, don't you think state police would have figured out how to use that as a work around where they lack the grounds for a warrant?

Unlike POs who live in a world in which many of the people against whom they act may have rights, a bondsman is going to be habituated to dealing with subjects who've signed away many of their pertinent rights. Watching the video from the incident, you might think that no one had ever before told these people to get out off the property. It's as if it hadn't occurred to them that other people might have rights.

zincwarrior · May 30, 2019, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

Okay, so the defendant authorizes agents of the bonding company to lay hands on him, anywhere and anytime. But that still doesn't confer any right for the bail enforcement agents to enter premises not controlled by the defendant without the property owner's or agent's permission, correct?

Exactly. Aguila is not a party to the contract.

Further two or three biker types on his doorstep immediately puts Aguila in fear of his life, or at worst sets up an apprehensive environment which can easily lead to that should they attempt to commit the crime of breaking into his house.

It is at this point, that in the Zincwarrior household you have awakened the family demonic wiener dog. The Blood! SO MUCH BLOOOD!

Bill DeShivs · May 30, 2019, 02:06 PM

I had one threaten to kick in my door once. I told him I would cut him in half.
Called Memphis Police and asked what I should do if he attempted the action. Their response was "shoot him."

zincwarrior · May 30, 2019, 02:09 PM

DeShivs must have the mother of all shivs...

Glenn E. Meyer · May 30, 2019, 02:23 PM

Here's an article on shooting through walls without ID. That's not really our scenario. However, the article makes the point of correct ID and a warning protocol. I learned in classes that shouting out that I am armed and will shoot is appropriate at times as compared to waiting in ambush. It does depend.

So, in our scenario and video, if the person in the home had shouted:

The wanted individual is not here.
You have no right to break in.
I will defend myself with firearms if you break in.

-- Would said agents continue to futz with the door? They are in a terrible fatal funnel if they proceed. In FOF, I've 'wiped' out an entry team if they didn't know they were doing. Are these 'agents' authorized to enter using correct pieing tactics and lethal force? They would have to take the first shots.

Double Naught Spy · May 30, 2019, 03:05 PM

Quote:

The wanted individual is not here.

I would not expect the bondsmen to believe the disembodied voice on the other side of the door as to the status of the individual about whom they are searching. They get told that their person isn't there all the time, just like the cops do. In short, people lie to them quite frequently.

Quote:

You have no right to break in.

The bondmen aren't going to take legal advice from a disembodied voice through the door. Again, they get lied to on a regular basis.

Quote:

I will defend myself with firearms if you break in.

Would said agents continue to futz with the door?

That is like asking if a bad guy is going to futz at the door because you warned him. Some would, some would not. It all sort of comes down to whether or not they believe you and believe you are a credible threat. This is maybe the only comment of the three that they might take seriously. Right place or wrong place, the person on the other side of the door may be armed. Of course, they may have their own contingencies for this as well, depending on how many are there. The may make entry elsewhere, the front door only being the point of invited entry and distraction.

zincwarrior · May 30, 2019, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

Here's an article on shooting through walls without ID. That's not really our scenario. However, the article makes the point of correct ID and a warning protocol. I learned in classes that shouting out that I am armed and will shoot is appropriate at times as compared to waiting in ambush. It does depend.

So, in our scenario and video, if the person in the home had shouted:

The wanted individual is not here.
You have no right to break in.
I will defend myself with firearms if you break in.

-- Would said agents continue to futz with the door? They are in a terrible fatal funnel if they proceed. In FOF, I've 'wiped' out an entry team if they didn't know they were doing. Are these 'agents' authorized to enter using correct pieing tactics and lethal force? They would have to take the first shots.

If doing that, have an open call to 911 that can hear it. This will be evidence in your favor should legal issues arise.

(I was taught something similar).

**Aguila Blanca** · May 30, 2019, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy

Quote:

The wanted individual is not here.

I would not expect the bondsmen to believe the disembodied voice on the other side of the door as to the status of the individual about whom they are searching. They get told that their person isn't there all the time, just like the cops do. In short, people lie to them quite frequently.

Quote:

You have no right to break in.

The bondmen aren't going to take legal advice from a disembodied voice through the door. Again, they get lied to on a regular basis.

It's not (or should not be) a question of taking legal advice from a disembodied voice. Someone who is engaging in breaking into other people's houses had jolly well better know what the laws are, know whether or not the person he's after is or isn't inside the premises he wants to enter, and know who owns said premises and whether or not the person he is seeking had any right whatsoever to grant permission to enter those particular premises.

In this incident, it appears the bail enforcement agents seemed to be under the misapprehension that they have a right to enter any premises at all on no other basis than that the subject of the bond wrote an address on a piece of paper. Did they make any attempt to verify the scumbag's legal address? Did they make any attempt to verify ownership or legal tenancy of the house? Did they conduct any surveillance to confirm at least a reasonably high probability that the person they were after might actually be behind the door they were engaged in breaking through?

To my non-lawyer mind, what the bail enforcement agents thought isn't especially important. If the homeowner had opened fire, and if he were subsequently charged for having done so, I believe his defense would be subject to the "hypothetical reasonable man" standard. That is, what would a hypothetical reasonable man do in the same situation?

The situation is that multiple people claiming to be bail enforcement agents are looking for a person you [the occupant] know is not in your house, and you [the occupant] know that you have not signed any bond papers granting the guys at the door permission to enter. Knowing these things, is it reasonable for you to have fear for your safety and to use [lethal] force to defend your castle? If I were on a jury, I would have to answer in the affirmative.

**Spats McGee** · May 30, 2019, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy

I would not expect the bondsmen to believe the disembodied voice on the other side of the door as to the status of the individual about whom they are searching. They get told that their person isn't there all the time, just like the cops do. In short, people lie to them quite frequently. . . . .

This has come up a couple of times in this thread. Let me point out that they also get lied to by the defendants filling out those forms, too.

**Spats McGee** · May 30, 2019, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

. . . . I learned in classes that shouting out that I am armed and will shoot is appropriate at times as compared to waiting in ambush. It does depend.

So, in our scenario and video, if the person in the home had shouted:

The wanted individual is not here.
You have no right to break in.
I will defend myself with firearms if you break in. . . . .

Those would all be very reasonable things to shout. Honestly, I'd want the bondsmen to know that I was there, that I asserted that 'their guy' wasn't, and that I'm armed and prepared to defend my home.

Glenn E. Meyer · May 30, 2019, 04:49 PM

I find it hard to believe that these folks want to engage in a fire fight to get the person. A prepared defender is hard to get out of a house. Quite frequently, a bad person shoots several officers coming through a door. I'm sure they are not really up on entry techniques with heavy armor (with plates), flash bangs, helmets and the like.

If the police are there and hear there will be large fire fight, they would have the responsibility to doubt that action only if the risk of rounds zipping around the neighborhood is taken into accord.

When I was a defender against officers in an exercise, we moved a large desk in front the door. Foolishly, they just came through in a rush, hit the desk and were wiped out, so to speak from semi-auto training guns. That was a lesson for them as they 'had' to clear out us as a nest of terrorists. Some jerk who skipped bail - worth running into AR-15 fire or 12 gauge. Most entries work as they are not seriously defended against. This sort of team doesn't look up to it.

Can bail bonds men or women, set up for long hostage negotiation like siege? The risk to the neighborhood would force law enforcement intervention - which would uncover their mistakes.

If there was a siege, time to get on the phone and social media to all the local news folks telling them that you are being falsely attacked.

Rangerrich99 · May 30, 2019, 05:45 PM

Not going to share my thoughts on what I might do in this sceanrio, other than to say that if someone broke into my home at 3a, they'd first get mauled by nearly 300 lbs. worth of shepard and Rhodesian Ridgeback.

Just to be clear: if such a scenario occurred to me, my best course of action is to first call the police, correct? And to tell the would-be invaders that I'd made that call/was making that call?

5whiskey · May 30, 2019, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Rhodesian Ridgeback

You sir have good taste in the Canine species. What better to protect the home than a dog used to hunt lions!

shafter · May 30, 2019, 08:22 PM

I'd call 911 if there was any question about the legitimacy of the law enforcement outside my house. If it was clear that they were legitimate I would comply with whatever commands they gave me and wouldn't resist. There's always the court option later if they were in the wrong. There's a lot to be said for hardening you're home enough to buy a few minutes to call 911 before things get out of hand.

May 29, 2019, 10:23 AM	#53
Don P Senior Member Join Date: December 17, 2005 Location: Swamp dweller Posts: 6,187	I'll ask this of our members that are of the legal profession. Does the paperwork for a fugitives apprehension held by the bounty hunter carry the same weight as an arrest warrant? If not they no have authority to enter the home regardless of what info the have. All I'll add to all those involved is if you are going to be judged by a jury for your actions you must act legally as what a reasonable prudent person would do in the same situation. Just because its your home DOES NOT MAKE IT AN EXECUTION CHAMBER. __________________ *NRA Life Member, NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA & Steel Challange NROI Range Officer, ICORE Range Officer, ,MAG 40 Graduate* *As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.* Last edited by Don P; May 29, 2019 at 01:44 PM.

May 29, 2019, 09:31 PM	#55
Double Naught Spy Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2001 Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX Posts: 12,717	It was mentioned above how the people at the door "clearly identified" themselves as to who they were and as such suggested the homeowner should just take that at face value. Well, here are some DEA agents who clearly identified themselves in Houston. They announced that they were DEA. They had "DEA" on their shirts. They said that they had a warrant. However, they weren't DEA. They skedaddled when the homeowner said she was calling the cops. https://www.foxnews.com/us/men-pose-...de-home-police __________________ "If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange

May 30, 2019, 08:29 AM	#57
AirForceShooter Senior Member Join Date: December 21, 2005 Location: Sarasota (sort of) Florida Posts: 1,296	It's Florida kiddies. Castle law applies. Someone in your home without your permission and refusing to leave may be shot. Fear of your life doesn't enter into it. They're not cops with a search warrant. I'm kind of amazed the LEO's just stood around watching. Dog the Bounty Hunter is a cartoon. AFS __________________ 'Qui tacet consentit': To remain silent is to consent.

May 30, 2019, 02:06 PM	#64
Bill DeShivs Senior Member Join Date: April 7, 2006 Posts: 10,981	I had one threaten to kick in my door once. I told him I would cut him in half. Called Memphis Police and asked what I should do if he attempted the action. Their response was "shoot him." __________________ Bill DeShivs, Master Cutler www.billdeshivs.com

May 30, 2019, 02:23 PM	#66
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	Here's an article on shooting through walls without ID. That's not really our scenario. However, the article makes the point of correct ID and a warning protocol. I learned in classes that shouting out that I am armed and will shoot is appropriate at times as compared to waiting in ambush. It does depend. So, in our scenario and video, if the person in the home had shouted: The wanted individual is not here. You have no right to break in. I will defend myself with firearms if you break in. -- Would said agents continue to futz with the door? They are in a terrible fatal funnel if they proceed. In FOF, I've 'wiped' out an entry team if they didn't know they were doing. Are these 'agents' authorized to enter using correct pieing tactics and lethal force? They would have to take the first shots. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

May 28, 2019, 06:09 AM	#51
Tony Z Senior Member Join Date: September 29, 2013 Location: North Central Pennsyltucky Posts: 749	Interesting thread, and though I know nothing about law for the bondsman or for the homeowner, there is one thing readily apparent: the bondsmen are loaning/guaranteeing money without doing their due diligence. One would think, that a person that has many thousands of dollars on the line, said person would have checked the accuracy of facts to reach a certain comfort level of accuracy. Afterall, the bondsman are putting a great deal of trust into alleged criminals, so the burden should be on them to have enough comfort in the deal before extending bail.

May 28, 2019, 10:03 AM	#52
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,535	I assume it is a crude version of statistical process control. They balance out the cost of verifying customer particulars vs paying skip tracers vs losses on bail jumpers not found.

May 29, 2019, 10:34 AM	#54
zincwarrior Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2011 Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex Posts: 2,259	From Texas, gateway to New Mexico!... 1. It does not. 2. I am not 100% certain but strongly believe an arrest warrant must be served by an actual officer of the court or authorized person (police, sheriff, constable, Texmex cook) and to quote the immortal bard "they aint." To affect entrance into private property I am sure of it. The above does not apply to people who like sushi. They are viewed as potentiall;y being Californians who have wandered out of the AQZ (Austin Quarantine Zone) and need to be gently shepherded back before they become injured or get taken advantage of by local fauna, particularly gators and jackalopes.

May 30, 2019, 07:59 AM	#56
zincwarrior Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2011 Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex Posts: 2,259	As a Texan, unless they identified themselves as proper law enforcement, they are just potential home invaders under the law. Like vampires, don't let the wrong one in.

May 30, 2019, 11:49 AM	#59
Aguila Blanca Staff Join Date: September 25, 2008 Location: CONUS Posts: 18,459	But the paperwork you reviewed is the paperwork between the defendant and the court. What would be more interesting in connection with this discussion would be a sample of a bail bondsman's contract with a defendant. That said, even the contract between the defendant and the bondsman is irrelevant, because in this case it was not the defendant's home that the bail enforcement agents broke into. As multiple posters have already commented, the defendant has no right to grant the agents permission to enter a property over which the defendant has no ownership or control interest, no matter what his contract with the bail bondsman says.

May 30, 2019, 02:09 PM	#65
zincwarrior Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2011 Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex Posts: 2,259	DeShivs must have the mother of all shivs...

May 30, 2019, 04:49 PM	#72
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	I find it hard to believe that these folks want to engage in a fire fight to get the person. A prepared defender is hard to get out of a house. Quite frequently, a bad person shoots several officers coming through a door. I'm sure they are not really up on entry techniques with heavy armor (with plates), flash bangs, helmets and the like. If the police are there and hear there will be large fire fight, they would have the responsibility to doubt that action only if the risk of rounds zipping around the neighborhood is taken into accord. When I was a defender against officers in an exercise, we moved a large desk in front the door. Foolishly, they just came through in a rush, hit the desk and were wiped out, so to speak from semi-auto training guns. That was a lesson for them as they 'had' to clear out us as a nest of terrorists. Some jerk who skipped bail - worth running into AR-15 fire or 12 gauge. Most entries work as they are not seriously defended against. This sort of team doesn't look up to it. Can bail bonds men or women, set up for long hostage negotiation like siege? The risk to the neighborhood would force law enforcement intervention - which would uncover their mistakes. If there was a siege, time to get on the phone and social media to all the local news folks telling them that you are being falsely attacked. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

May 30, 2019, 05:45 PM	#73
Rangerrich99 Senior Member Join Date: March 20, 2014 Location: Kinda near Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,254	Not going to share my thoughts on what I might do in this sceanrio, other than to say that if someone broke into my home at 3a, they'd first get mauled by nearly 300 lbs. worth of shepard and Rhodesian Ridgeback. Just to be clear: if such a scenario occurred to me, my best course of action is to first call the police, correct? And to tell the would-be invaders that I'd made that call/was making that call?

May 30, 2019, 08:22 PM	#75
shafter Senior Member Join Date: December 23, 2009 Posts: 1,624	I'd call 911 if there was any question about the legitimacy of the law enforcement outside my house. If it was clear that they were legitimate I would comply with whatever commands they gave me and wouldn't resist. There's always the court option later if they were in the wrong. There's a lot to be said for hardening you're home enough to buy a few minutes to call 911 before things get out of hand.