Got the cops called on me...again

imported post

357luvr wrote:

I had no idea that I could 'have told the police they were trespassing and ordered them off your property.' I thought that the police had the right to be there and do pretty much anything they wanted. I'll admit that once the handcuffs were slapped on, my thinking went out the window. I knew they were doing me wrong by having me in handcuffs and disarming me without my permission but I didn't want to resist and have them charge me with something.

Click to expand...

IMO, you did the right thing by not physically resisting. In a situation like this physically resisting could get you hurt and potentially cause more problems. Telling the police that they were trespassing and ordering them off of you property might not have changed the situation at all. Although it would have given you a little more ground for taking legal actions later.

All in all, if the police want to abuse their powers they are going to do it. The best thing to do (IMO), is to get through the situation while verbally expressing your discontent. And then take legal action or file a complaint later. This is pretty much what you are doing.

I just want to add that I respect and admire the police and the job that they do. I personally know a lot of good cops. It just really irks me when an officer abuses his power and doesn't respect the constitution that he has sworn to protect. There are a lot of cops out there that bend over backwards not to violate anyones rights, and they are to be commended.

imported post

I forgot about your question about contacting Philip. If you want to you could get the ball rolling, contact the sheriff and see what steps you need to take to file a complaint. But I would give Philip a chance to respond before you file the formal complaint. He should be able to give you some valuable advice.

imported post

When they asked if they could search my house I would have told them "absolutely not."

Click to expand...

I probably would just have said NO. Someone's selective hearing might have just heard me say "absolutely!"

imported post

357luvr wrote:

1. Do you think he (officer Tidman) was out of line by anything he did?
2. Do you think he should have put me in handcuffs?
3. Do you think I deserved to be put in handcuffs?
4. Do you think I should/am justified in filing a complaint?
5. Would filing a complaint do any good?
6. What would you have done in this situation?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Here's my opinion.

1. The officer may have been out of line depending on the amount of force he used and the manner it was used, but this is something that only you and the officers involved would have knowledge of unless it was on video.

2. Unless these officers knew you well enough to know you were not a threat, they were probably justified in handcuffing you and disarming you. Remember, they were responding to a tip that an armed criminal was at your residence. By handcuffing and disarming you they were making sure you were not a threat to them in their investigation and minimizing the number of possible threats in case this "Nate" person WAS in your house.

3. See number 2.Until your situation was cleared they had no idea if you were associated with "Nate". After clearing your situation/residence, a polite apology and a prompt return of your weapon would be in order along with a thanks for your cooperation.

4. That depends on number 1.

5. Possibly, but it depends on your police departments policies regarding these situations and the Chief of Police's interpretation of the situation. It couldn't hurt to file a complaint, but I wouldn't be surprised if nothing came of it.

6. Complied and resolved the situation as smoothly as possible while being as polite as possible to the officers.

I am not a cop, but I understand the need to neutralize possible threats during potentially dangerous situations. Had I been responding to your residence after a tip I felt was worthy of investigating and been met by someone with a gun at the door, I would have been VERY nervous until I had neutralized the situation,preferably by disarming the individual. Handcuffs might have been going a bit too far, but I was not at the scene andit was a judgement call. Just look at it from their point of view, honestly and with no bias, and you may find you would have done something similar.

Just my 2 cents.

imported post

Thanks, gsh341. I worked for a police department for two years while in graduate school. While the classical liberal / southerner in me has some issues with authority, I also made many good friends among the police and came torespect and understandsome things from their perspective.

Cops are allowed to use the same senses and life experience all of us use to determine the degree to which our safety may be about to be compromised. This doesn't mean their hunches are going to always be right. And when they turn out to be wrong, I think cops should explain their purposes and actions more thoroughly, and their needs would be better appreciated if they did so. With that said, police must be able to articulate theirsuspicions and how those suspicions led to actions that any reasonable person would have taken in their shoes.

I am not quite sure how to say this without arousing passions.... but 357 luvr, you have talked aLOT on this board about how much you hate cops. How your dog hates cops with an unrivaled passion. How your family hates cops. How one of the cops in this incident had arrested you before. You "admit" you were "freaking out", so much so that you are "unsure of what exactly took place after (being handcuffed)".
Could some of this anger be obvious enough that anyone who happens to wear a police uniform might reasonably be concerned about their safety? I am not saying it is the case, only that I - a reasonable person - am wondering.

Wearing a gun openly in Virginia is NOT cause in and of itself to be stopped or detained, however briefly. Wearing a gun on your own property is not, either. However, when you combine a gun with any number of other factors that would cause a reasonable person concern, then brief detention and removal of a possible threat usually islegally justified. I don't know if those factors were present in your case, but it sounds as if they might.

I want all police to respect my rights, know the law,and follow the rules as I do. In return, I do feel like I owe them the respect of learning more about this situation before jumping to any conclusions. Looking back through all your posts, I am not ready to condemn the police in this situation without knowing a lot more. I am uneasy for some reason, and if I am wrong, I sincerely apologize, because I do not know you.

I am anxious to hear what others have to say....

imported post

First off, I recieved a response from Philip this morning. Here is his response;

Gary,

The police can do a 'custodial' arrest while detaining someone for
their safety if conditions warrant. That includes putting someone
temporarily in handcuffs.

In my personal opinion, since you were clearly not even the right
color for the person they were looking for, that would seem to me to
be unnecessary.

You could write a letter of complaint to the Chief of Police, and cc
your Board of Supervisors representative.

I am cc'ing our Executive members for any further thoughts on this.

Regards,
Philip

Now as for me disliking cops, I do and I'll admit it. I wouldn't use the word 'hate' to describe my dislike for them and if I have used the word hate in the past then I apologize. My dog is a different story, he DOES hate cops. I guess that my dislike for them comes from my years of being a pothead. I'm clean now and have been for a good period of time but I still dislike LEO's when they show up at my door. Having said that, I DO respect them. I always try to be as polite as possible and show them the highest respect possible.

Looking at the situation from their point of view, I can understand disarming me and I don't have a problem with that. I would have preferred they ask me before disarming me like other cops have done but there's nothing I can do about that now. However, there was no need to put me in handcuffs! That's what I'm pissed off about. I was cooperating with them and being polite as possible. There was just no need what so everto put me in handcuffs. I mean there were three cops there and a dog in one of the cruisers, at least one officer was within three feet of me at all times, and I was cooperating fully. It was obvious that I wasn't going to run or fight. Like I said, I can understand and respect them for disarming me but Ido have a problem with them puttingme in handcuffs. That was unnecessary!

I still plan to file a complaint with the sheriff. First I plan to request a copy of the FOIA/CFS report and then file a complaint. I doubt that it'll do any good, but I feel thatI was violated by being put in handcuffs and plan to file a complaint as soon as possible.

imported post

357luvr wrote:

he was fairly close to me and he happened to notice my handgun on my ankle. He immediately ordered (not ask) me to turn around and was preparing to disarm me (without my permission) ...I told him that I didn't have any other weapons on me but that I did have a Concealed Handgun Permit.

Click to expand...

Remember though, nobody needs a concealed handgun permit to carry a concealed handgun "while in his own place of abode or the curtilage thereof." Va. Code Section 18.2-308(B) at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-308.

imported post

I would hire a lawyer and pursue whatever action that is legally possible to the max.

imported post

357luvr wrote:

The cops (there were 3 of them) were walking up to my door and they asked if a guy named "Nate" was here. I politely told them that I didn't know any Nate and that he certainly didn't live here. By now the cop was only a few feet away from me and he noticed my partically covered G27. He immediatally ordered for me to turn around (in a rather firm voice) and didn't even ask if he could disarm me. As he was beginning to disarm me one of the other cops asks me a question. My dog is still going nuts and I didn't hear him so I **SLIGHTLY** turned to ask him to repeat the question. The first cop, an officer Tidman (who was probably 25-27) immediately grabs the back of my shirt and starts yelling at me "DO NOT MOVE, DO NOT MOVE!!!" The other cop told the officer Tidman to take me off the porch away from the dog. I could tell from his voice that he was the 'good cop.'

So we get off the porch and walk far enough away that the dog calms down a bit. Officer Tidman is still holding on tightly to the back of my shirt. The 'good cop' asks if I have any other weapons on me and I reply that I didn't but that I did have a Concealed Handgun Permit. Officer Tidman then proceeds to put me in HANDCUFFS!!!

Click to expand...

Seems to me that being handcuffed = custodial arrest. Unlawfully placing you in custodial arrest to seizing personal property to run serial numbers is an invasion of your privacy. Too bad you did not declare to the officers that they were tresspassing and order them to leave - then remained silent but refused consent to searchy the house or anthing else. This is really bad policing too - seizing your gun under these to run serial numbers without probable casue would normally result in any suppression of evidence held against you. This pro-constitutional view of law was announced by the Virginia Supreme Court in Moore v. Commonwealth (Va. 2006) at [url]http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opnscvwp/1052619.pdf[/url]

NOTE: I'm taking you fact pattern at face value of course to make these comments.

imported post

Hiring a lawyer is out of the question, I don't have any money. At least not enough for a lawyer. The best I can hope for is to file an official complaint and hope/pray that this officer Tidman at the very least gets repremanded. As far as declaring to the officers that they were trespassing, again, I didn't realize that I could do that. However, I'll keep this in mind if anything like this ever comes up again.

imported post

I just recieved a reply from Jim Snyder. I assume that he's someone that Philip contacted in regards to my problem. Here is his response;

I think one of our Executive Members (a former police officer) said it
best:

If police ask if they can search your house, you, your car, your
dog house or anything it's because they don't have probable cause.
Your answer is always NO. ALWAYS!

I know you were stressed out at the time, but remember the above.
Hopefully, you'll never have to employ it. ALWAYS say "NO!" If they
have probable cause, they'll go ahead and search and won't need your
OK. But you'll have gone on record as refusing it.


I'll make sure to always remember this advice!

imported post

357luvr wrote:

I just recieved a reply from Jim Snyder. I assume that he's someone that Philip contacted in regards to my problem.

Click to expand...

Jim Snyder is the Vice President of the VCDL.

I wanted to do a quick followup to gsh341and SicSemperTyrannis. I agree with most of what both of you have said, but I wanted to claify some of my points.

gsh341, in response to #2, I agree that if the police were "responding to a tip that an armed criminal was at your residence," then they would have had the necessary reasonable suspicion to act as they did. However, I still take issue that the police every really believed that the suspect was at 357luvr's house. The main reason being that even after the police had received consent to search 357's house, they did notsearch the house! I have talked to a lot of police officer and sat in on a lot of court cases, and officers always tell me the same thing; if they get consent, they search! Now I guess you could argue that the police were just incompetent, however I believe that would only strengthen my argument.

SicSemperTyrannis, I agree with your statement that the"...police must be able to articulate theirsuspicions and how those suspicions led to actions that any reasonable person would have taken in their shoes." This only leads me to wonder what, if any, articulate suspicion they had. Here are the facts (according to 357luvr): Three officers showed up at a house "looking" for a robbery suspect; one of the officer believes that 357luvrlives there with only his mother; the officers believe that the suspect they are looking for is a different color than that of 357luvr; and when given consent to search the house for the suspect, the officers refuse.

It sounds like to me the officers were not able to articulate anything.

Let me add that my previous statements were made on the assumption that 357luvr's statements were based on the true and complete facts of the case at hand. Currently I have no reason to believe otherwise, so I will continue with my prior assumption.

imported post

Has anyone checked the local blotter to see if there was actually a robbery at that time? If not, it might strengthen your case.

imported post

Tex1n,

I can see your case for the search and the detainment, but that is where the situation gets fuzzy. Unless you were there or hearing both sides of the situation it is really hard to make the call on this.

As for 357luvr's response to what happened, pursue all legal avenues you deem appropriate, but don't be surprisedif nothing comes of it.

imported post

gsh341 wrote:

Tex1n,

I can see your case for the search and the detainment, but that is where the situation gets fuzzy. Unless you were there or hearing both sides of the situation it is really hard to make the call on this.

Click to expand...

I agree completely. 357luvr was asking for our opinions based on his facts, and that's what I gave him. If the facts change, then so would my opinion. I didn't really seetheneed to play the "well we don't really know what happened" card. But I understand exactly where you are coming from.

imported post

I agree, NEVER consent to a search, even if you have nothing to hide. You wouldn't want a dishonest LEO to plant evidence.

We'll never know, but it would be interesting to see if it had been your mother answering the door if they would have treated her the same way.

File a complaint. You did nothing wrong and you were treated roughly by the police. Let them explain the justification for it.

imported post

I contacted the sheriffs office today and asked for a Call For Service report and a list of their regulations pertaining to handcuffing someone. The lady in the records department acted like she didn't know what a 'Call For Service report' was. However, she did say that an officer would call me tomorrow morning regarding the regulations of handcuffing someone.

After I get a CFS report, I do plan on filing a complaint. I doubt it will do any good and I'll probably have to worry about the officer Tidman giving me a hard time for speeding or whatever if he ever happens to see me on the road. But as long as I keep my nose clean, there's nothing he can do I guess.

Can someone give me a way to describe to the officer that calls me tomorrow (if he does) what I'm looking for? I don't want to file a complaint right away. I want to get all the evidence and facts that I can and then file the complaint.

thanks

imported post

357luver...at the following link, you can view the request that was sent to the Staunton authorities early in the year pertaining to a situation out there. The author clearly states what it is he is looking for in the opening of the letter and again after he explains what happened to him and his acquiantances(found after Staunton's response).

http://bighammer.net/images/Stuanton_VA_FOIA_response_071506.pdf



Its hard to say whether there was even a "Call for Service" made that pertains to your situation since you or anyone else has yet to confirm that the local robbery ever took place.

imported post

I've been looking at the news and I've yet to see anything pertaining to the store being robbed. Tomorrow I'll ask for any records, dispatch records, incident reports, notes, and emails pertaining to the visit. I'll also ask for any and all procedures and regulations pertaining to handcuffing someone.

imported post

I contacted the local sheriffs office again today after they didn't call me back. They said that I would have to put in a FOIA request in writing. I'd like you all to look over my request before I send it. Please look over my request and let me know how I did. Here it is.

This is a request for records pursuant to article 1, section 12 of the Virginia Constitution, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution,the Virginia Freedom of Information Act at Va. Code 2.2 -3700 etseq., and the common law of Virginia.

On the morning of 12/01/06,three Orange County officers including an officer Tidman arrived at my home at approximately 10:15AM. Officer Tidman informed me that they were looking for a black male named "Nate" who had presumably robbed a local store. After noticing that I was armed, officer Tidman disarmed me and handcuffed me. After a short interrogation I was given back my handgun and released.

I request copies of any and all records pertaining to all aspects of this incident including either a recording or transcript of the dispatch records which initiated the officers to respond, any and all incident reports, notes, E-mails and transcripts of any discussion pertaining to this incident.

Ifurther request any and all procedures and regulations regarding handcuffing someone on their own private property.

Response via email / electronic format is preferred and appreciated if it is practical. I thank you in advance for your response to this request within the 5 day statutory requirement

Best regards,
Gary Wyant