OC overreaction in James City County shopping center 3-30-2011?

http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-j...ng-gun-near-new-town-20110330,0,1948413.story

James City County police were summoned to the New Town shopping plaza at the 5100 block of Main Street after a business reported a man may have been walking around brandishing a firearm.

Click to expand...

They found... NOTHING.

Chances are that the idiot who called 911 used the term, "brandishing", as a synonym for "carrying". This is one of those days in which I have just had too much morons. Still, if people didn't do stupidities, I'd be out of a job.

... locked their doors.

Click to expand...

Really? Pathetic. Wonder if the POLICE would honor a FOIA on the incident?

Repeater said:

Really? Pathetic. Wonder if the POLICE would honor a FOIA on the incident?

Click to expand...

We'll know in 4 working days.

As User said "too many Morons" I had had it by 9:30Am. Lots of stupid in the burbs.

Why would they write a report on nothing?

xdm guy said:

Why would they write a report on nothing?

Click to expand...

Don't know. I want the 911 call.

§ 18.2-461. Falsely summoning or giving false reports to law-enforcement officials.

"It shall be unlawful for any person (i) to knowingly give a false report as to the commission of any crime to any law-enforcement official with intent to mislead, or (ii) without just cause and with intent to interfere with the operations of any law-enforcement official, to call or summon any law-enforcement official by telephone or other means, including engagement or activation of an automatic emergency alarm. Violation of the provisions of this section shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor."

xdm guy said:

Why would they write a report on nothing?

Click to expand...

I don't know about the police, but in the fire department we have to do a minimal report even on unfounded calls.

user said:

"It shall be unlawful for any person (i) to knowingly give a false report as to the commission of any crime to any law-enforcement official with intent to mislead, or (ii) without just cause and with intent to interfere with the operations of any law-enforcement official, to call or summon any law-enforcement official by telephone or other means, including engagement or activation of an automatic emergency alarm. Violation of the provisions of this section shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor."

Click to expand...

As they say, "stoopid ain't illegal"... sounds like this person won't have too much trouble pulling off stupid in front of a judge, even if it gets that far...

TFred

TFred said:

As they say, "stoopid ain't illegal"... sounds like this person won't have too much trouble pulling off stupid in front of a judge, even if it gets that far...

TFred

Click to expand...

Would not hurt to have a number of cases go that far.

Also being stoopid should occasionally get somebody's hand slapped - others might profit from the public hand floggings.

So if you happened to be OCing in that area minding your own business when Joe Schmoe got all concered and called the cops would the cops then have a reason to detain you and get all your info? Of course the cops "think" you were brandishing but in reality you were just Ocing normally.

Mtam said:

So if you happened to be OCing in that area minding your own business when Joe Schmoe got all concered and called the cops would the cops then have a reason to detain you and get all your info? Of course the cops "think" you were brandishing but in reality you were just Ocing normally.

Click to expand...

If the police have a reasonable witness say you brandished your firearm, and they gain probable cause through that witness, they can arrest you for brandishing. Brandishing is one of the few misdemeanor exceptions in VA where the police can arrest you without the crime occuring in their presence, you would most likely be given a summons to court.

It would be much harder to prove in court.

Jon34511 said:

If the police have a reasonable witness say you brandished your firearm, and they gain probable cause through that witness, they can arrest you for brandishing. Brandishing is one of the few misdemeanor exceptions in VA where the police can arrest you without the crime occuring in their presence, you would most likely be given a summons to court.

It would be much harder to prove in court.

Click to expand...

Really? How does that work? Cite on the bolded above please.

Officer has no 1st hand knowledge, accepts the hearsay word of another, no legal paperwork, just a little bird told him and he cuffs and stuffs you? I think not - particularly in that context.

Actually many arrests occur w/o the offense happening in front of the officer - warrant is issued, officer comes knocking at your door w/warrant and you go down that yellow brick lane.

When Liberal/Democrat/Statist 911 Callers intentionally misrepresent an OCer's actions, are they not filing a false report?

Why don't they ever get on trouble for inciting?


--Moderator Edited--
Something bad was said about a protected class.

Grapeshot said:

Really? How does that work? Cite on the bolded above please.

Officer has no 1st hand knowledge, accepts the hearsay word of another, no legal paperwork, just a little bird told him and he cuffs and stuffs you? I think not - particularly in that context.

Actually many arrests occur w/o the offense happening in front of the officer - warrant is issued, officer comes knocking at your door w/warrant and you go down that yellow brick lane.

Click to expand...

Actually, Jon34511 is correct. See the exceptions listed in Subsection G of Section 19.2-81:

Such officers may also arrest without a warrant for an alleged misdemeanor not committed in their presence involving (i) shoplifting in violation of § 18.2-96 or 18.2-103 or a similar local ordinance, (ii) carrying a weapon on school property in violation of § 18.2-308.1, (iii) assault and battery, (iv) brandishing a firearm in violation of § 18.2-282, or (v) destruction of property in violation of § 18.2-137, when such property is located on premises used for business or commercial purposes, or a similar local ordinance, when any such arrest is based on probable cause upon reasonable complaint of the person who observed the alleged offense. The arresting officer may issue a summons to any person arrested under this section for a misdemeanor violation involving shoplifting.

Click to expand...

And please don't forget, the LEO has immunity from any damages -- like death -- cause by the arrest, even if the arrest is false.

Grapeshot said:

Really? How does that work? Cite on the bolded above please.

Officer has no 1st hand knowledge, accepts the hearsay word of another, no legal paperwork, just a little bird told him and he cuffs and stuffs you? I think not - particularly in that context.

Actually many arrests occur w/o the offense happening in front of the officer - warrant is issued, officer comes knocking at your door w/warrant and you go down that yellow brick lane.

Click to expand...

There are 5 misdemanor exceptions in VA.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+19.2-81

. Such officers may also arrest without a warrant for an alleged misdemeanor not committed in their presence involving (i) shoplifting in violation of § 18.2-96 or 18.2-103 or a similar local ordinance, (ii) carrying a weapon on school property in violation of § 18.2-308.1, (iii) assault and battery, (iv) brandishing a firearm in violation of § 18.2-282, or (v) destruction of property in violation of § 18.2-137, when such property is located on premises used for business or commercial purposes, or a similar local ordinance, when any such arrest is based on probable cause upon reasonable complaint of the person who observed the alleged offense. The arresting officer may issue a summons to any person arrested under this section for a misdemeanor violation involving shoplifting.

If any officer gains probable cause through the words of a credible (or seemingly credible) witness, they can make the arrest on the individual without ever witnessing the crime. Like I stated before, this would not involve "stuffing and cuffing" but would most likely be a summons (VA late states an officer must issue a citation in lieu of a physical arrest for all misdemeanors except in certain situations), with the witness being subpoeaned so they can testify to a judge.

I'm a little late to the party, repeater beat me to the punch.

Thank you Repeater and Jon34511 both.

I am always desirous of learning - even if I do NOT like the answer :banghead:

In this case, I admit, I really do not like the answer!

Definitely will save that cite.

Grapeshot said:

Officer has no 1st hand knowledge, accepts the hearsay word of another, no legal paperwork, just a little bird told him and he cuffs and stuffs you? I think not - particularly in that context.

Click to expand...

So apparently, that's exactly how it works...

Gun-hating liar makes a call, off you go, no questions asked.

Ok, here's my insight on the matter since I have dealt with many situations involving "brandishing" (it's in quotations because most people don't understand the concept, although most on this site do). 9-1-1 gets calls all the time with people calling in saying they got "robbed" when in reality they get their car was broken into the night before which is incorrect. There is a lot of conflicting statements made by citizens to the police. Trust me (or don't), the police understand that some complainants 1: don't know laws, 2: might not have a proper mental capacity/intelligence, 3: lie, 4. embellish. It's called investigating the matter fully to make sure the outcome is just and legal. If not, then the LEO/agency/state will be held liable (laws in place already for that).

If a complainant claims someone "brandished" a firearm, there are a few things that will occur. The officers will meet with the complainant and get their side of the story and hopefully meet with the "suspect" and get their side. Given most circumstances, the suspect will legally be stopped (terry stopped/detained) and disarmed during the duration of the investigation. The officers will need probable cause to make the warrantless arrest (misdemeanor brandishing exception was already mentioned above). Now, brandishing is a misdemeanor, and misdemeanors in VA are released on a summons. However, there are exceptions to releasing on a summons (criteria and/or crimes). Brandishing is easily articulated as one of those crimes. 19.2-74 states that you can make a custodial arrest for a misdemeanor (with probable cause and that falls into the legal requirements of an arrest) if you believe the person is a danger to others. So if someone just brandished a firearm, it's simple to reasonable state they are dangerous to another person and therefore you will be taken forthwith to jail/magistrate after making a custodial arrest. The gun is evidence and will legally be seized. If the investigation appears that the complainant was wrong and no crime was committed, the "suspect" will immediately be allowed to leave.

From personal experience, if both the suspect and complainant have very conflicting statements and officers are comfortable making an arrest... usually the officers will... 1: Detain the "suspect". 2. Take the complainant to the magistrates office to speak with a magistrate and swear out the warrant themselves. 3: If the magistrate issues a warrant, the officers will then arrest the "suspect". If not, the suspect will be immediately released, and the firearm returned. Remember, in VA, any citizen can petition a magistrate for a warrant, not just LEOs.

This is just my insight, I know I am disliked but I figured some still would find a LEOs POV interesting on the subject. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with how things work that I mentioned above, I am merely bringing it to light. Also keep in mind, there are many instances where people legitimately brandish guns at others in a threatening manner. At times, brandishing calls will evolve into situations where people (citizens or responding LEOs) are shot/killed.

Also, found this earlier, and thought you all might think it's interesting.. http://www.wpxi.com/news/27425029/detail.html

"Brandishing", "robbed", "using drugs", "driving under the influence", and few other terms are thrown out there when people really want the police to respond. The initial complaint may be loud music but because that isn't a high priority call in and of itself, the caller throws in terms like "underage drinking" and "smoking narcotics" to make it sound more important. In reality the group of underage teenagers smoking marijuana listening to loud punk rock is a group of middle age guys listening to The Eagles, smoking Marlboro's and drinking Budweiser. Enter the "huh?" factor.

Then there is a great deal lost in translation. Caller ----> 911 Operator ----> Dispatcher ----> Police Units. The police arrive on a scene that does not match the description of what was given out over the radio or MDT. That goes back to the "huh?" factor.

The news got a hold of this so I will assume that it was conveyed to the officers in the manner that someone was brandishing a firearm. Police scanner 101.