Cops come on a domestic disturbance call - your thoughts

[sreiter]

Sheriffs are called because neighbors believe they hear a argument

Both parties come outside the residence and tells sheriffs no argument occurred.

1. Do the sheriffs still have a right to enter your home without a warrant? Or can you "lock them out"?

2. On a DV call, they are supposed to remove weapons from the home. If you have no weapons in the house, but say they are in a [public] storage facility, is that considered "your home" , as in "do you have any weapons in the house"

[hoffmang]

You're solidly into the land of the 4A we used to have. If both parties are actually fine and outside, then no - no entering the house without a warrant or something else that gives them PC (very limited in the home context.)

No actual DV, no violating 2A allowed. Lock your door and make them break it open. Splintered doors create excellent records.

And no, they can't see the storage unit without a warrant. If they have a problem with that they can talk to your lawyer [Adam/Don/Jason depending on Geo].

-Gene

[SanPedroShooter]

What about just turning off all the lights and not answering the door? Wouldnt it be better to avoid all contact if possible? If they get a call to a house and no one seems home, would they just go away after walking around the perimeter and looking in the windows? It seems like once you get outside and in contact, you're "in the net". Things can easily go downhill from there...

The very few dealings I've had with the PD/Sherif at my residence were conducted through a shut and locked door, or by me stepping out and having someone lock the door behind me. It just seemed safer that way.

And I will add that the LAPD and the LASD were very professional and helpful and were not responding to my house specifically, but I locked the door all the same... I feel it helps to set boundaries right from the start, that and a respectful attitude goes a long way.

[hoffmang]

Originally Posted by SanPedroShooter

What about just turning off all the lights and not answering the door? Wouldnt it be better to avoid all contact if possible?

They now have PC to come in under the community care taking exception.

-Gene

[Carnivore]

Originally Posted by SanPedroShooter

What about just turning off all the lights and not answering the door? Wouldnt it be better to avoid all contact if possible? If they get a call to a house and no one seems home, would they just go away after walking around the perimeter and looking in the windows? It seems like once you get outside and in contact, you're "in the net". Things can easily go downhill from there...

The very few dealings I've had with the PD/Sherif at my residence were conducted through a shut and locked door, or by me stepping out and having someone lock the door behind me. It just seemed safer that way.

And I will add that the LAPD and the LASD were very professional and helpful and were not responding to my house specifically, but I locked the door all the same... I feel it helps to set boundaries right from the start, that and a respectful attitude goes a long way.

Yes and no, if they see you turn out the light, no they won't leave. If they hear you then no. If they see nothing and hear nothing then nothing is in fact going on. They will talk to the reporting person that called and that person may say "they are in there" but unless they know you are home not much they can do. If they KNOW you are home that is another issue. Remember "Splintered doors create excellent records"

[RangemasterP226]

Wow, some really comments here really ignorant of the law and police procedure. If the police show up to your house on a DV call and you don't answer or don't allow them in, they can force there way in for a warrantless welfare check of anyone who may be inside injuried or dead. Would you want it any other way if it was your daughter who just got the **** beaten out of her and her boyfriend told the cops to pound sand?

[E Pluribus Unum]

Originally Posted by hoffmang

They now have PC to come in under the community care taking exception.

-Gene

As far as searching for weapons for for "safe keeping", the "victim" should only be able to give consent to search areas that are common, correct??

If there were a bedroom she did not have access to, or a safe she did not have the combo to, they would be unable to search for weapons, correct??

Assuming, of course, the person arrested claims there are no weapons....

[tyrist]

Originally Posted by RangemasterP226

Wow, some really comments here really ignorant of the law and police procedure. If the police show up to your house on a DV call and you don't answer or don't allow them in, they can force there way in for a warrantless welfare check of anyone who may be inside injuried or dead. Would you want it any other way if it was your daughter who just got the **** beaten out of her and her boyfriend told the cops to pound sand?

Or the daughter was murdered by her live in boyfriend who has now fled the scene. OH nobody appears to be home guess we should just continue patrol and wait for the call about a strong smell from the house.

[E Pluribus Unum]

Originally Posted by RangemasterP226

Wow, some really comments here really ignorant of the law and police procedure. If the police show up to your house on a DV call and you don't answer or don't allow them in, they can force there way in for a warrantless welfare check of anyone who may be inside injuried or dead. Would you want it any other way if it was your daughter who just got the **** beaten out of her and her boyfriend told the cops to pound sand?

What's to stop the police from "anonymously" calling in a DV call?? The court's definition of "exigent circumstances" is a joke.

A cop must witness a misdemeanor to make an arrest, but he does not have to witness a scream or yell to enter in DV calls?

In past relationships, my ex's and I have gotten in some loud shouting matches. Shouting alone should not be PC to enter.


You are also failing to aknowlege that every single day men are arrested for DV without ANY evidence against them except for the testimony of a scorned woman. Sometimes they are arrested without any testimony at all.

The plain and simple fact is that if there is a DV callout, 95% of the time, SOMEONE is going to jail.

[RangemasterP226]

Originally Posted by E Pluribus Unum

What's to stop the police from "anonymously" calling in a DV call?? The court's definition of "exigent circumstances" is a joke.

A cop must witness a misdemeanor to make an arrest, but he does not have to witness a scream or yell to enter in DV calls?

In past relationships, my ex's and I have gotten in some loud shouting matches. Shouting alone should not be PC to enter.


You are also failing to aknowlege that every single day men are arrested for DV without ANY evidence against them except for the testimony of a scorned woman. Sometimes they are arrested without any testimony at all.

The plain and simple fact is that if there is a DV callout, 95% of the time, SOMEONE is going to jail.

I have seen the man get screwed during the legal process, so you are right in that respect BUT, if during one of your loud shouting matches you refuse to come to the door or refuse to let the officers see the female half, then they can come in, how can it be any other way?? And once inside, anything seen in plain sight thats illegal can be dealt with justifiably. Its not perfect, but we must default to protecting the victim.

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by hoffmang

You're solidly into the land of the 4A we used to have. If both parties are actually fine and outside, then no - no entering the house without a warrant or something else that gives them PC (very limited in the home context.)

No actual DV, no violating 2A allowed. Lock your door and make them break it open. Splintered doors create excellent records.

And no, they can't see the storage unit without a warrant. If they have a problem with that they can talk to your lawyer [Adam/Don/Jason depending on Geo].

-Gene

Gene,

You logic is quite good. The right of entry is predicated on jeopardy to one of the parties. If there is no jeopardy, then the right to enter pretty much evaporates, but the argument only works if it's known that the two parties outside were the only parties to the disturbance.

I've handled a couple of hundred of these type calls over the past 30 years, the call details are rarely known to the officers with that level of certainty. We do have a duty to any third (or fourth, or fifth) parties that may be present at the location to ensure they are safe prior to leaving the scene.

[hoffmang]

Originally Posted by RickD427

You logic is quite good. The right of entry is predicated on jeopardy to one of the parties. If there is no jeopardy, then the right to enter pretty much evaporates, but the argument only works if it's known that the two parties outside were the only parties to the disturbance.

Correct, but forcing you to force the door requires you to have pretty good articulable suspicion that there is someone else inside before you do it.

This parallels an issue a lot of people don't think about. The real reason everyone should require a warrant is so that law enforcement's theory about why they were there is recorded. It rules out so much in a case down the road.

-Gene

[Falconis]

So the lesson here is, if the woman is pissed at you, stay out drinking till after she falls asleep.

[Southwest Chuck]

Originally Posted by sreiter

Sheriffs are called because neighbors believe they hear a argument

Both parties come outside the residence and tells sheriffs no argument occurred.

1. Do the sheriffs still have a right to enter your home without a warrant? Or can you "lock them out"?

2. On a DV call, they are supposed to remove weapons from the home. If you have no weapons in the house, but say they are in a [public] storage facility, is that considered "your home" , as in "do you have any weapons in the house"

Just pray you're not living in Indiana at the time!
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=432517

[tyrist]

Originally Posted by Falconis

So the lesson here is, if the woman is pissed at you, stay out drinking till after she falls asleep.

The real lesson is keep your woman happy. Happy wife happy life.

[hoffmang]

Originally Posted by tyrist

The real lesson is keep your woman happy. Happy wife happy life.

QFT.

-Gene

[anthonyca]

Originally Posted by tyrist

The real lesson is keep your woman happy. Happy wife happy life.

I just watched The Hang Over for the first time. There is no way I could be that whipped dude or the guy from Saving Silverman. What a way we have to live now days.

[anthonyca]

Originally Posted by SanPedroShooter

What about just turning off all the lights and not answering the door? Wouldnt it be better to avoid all contact if possible? If they get a call to a house and no one seems home, would they just go away after walking around the perimeter and looking in the windows? It seems like once you get outside and in contact, you're "in the net". Things can easily go downhill from there...

The very few dealings I've had with the PD/Sherif at my residence were conducted through a shut and locked door, or by me stepping out and having someone lock the door behind me. It just seemed safer that way.

And I will add that the LAPD and the LASD were very professional and helpful and were not responding to my house specifically, but I locked the door all the same... I feel it helps to set boundaries right from the start, that and a respectful attitude goes a long way.

Let us know how that goes.

I have been through so many women after learning the hard way where a crazy broad can land you. If there is ANY sign that a woman I am dating has a propensity to escalate disagreements to shouting of if she shows any signs of physical aggression I GTFO fast. I have left a girl in a restaurant and found a way home.

I always try to find out if she has a history of DV or being a DV "victim". I GTFO in that situation also. Needless to say I am single.

If you find your self in this kind of relationship you can kiss your rights goodbye.

[Falconis]

Originally Posted by tyrist

The real lesson is keep your woman happy. Happy wife happy life.

yeah but sometimes that's just not gonna happen. There's confrontation, avoidance, and tactical retreat. maybe it's just me.

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by hoffmang

You're solidly into the land of the 4A we used to have. If both parties are actually fine and outside, then no - no entering the house without a warrant or something else that gives them PC (very limited in the home context.)

No actual DV, no violating 2A allowed. Lock your door and make them break it open. Splintered doors create excellent records.

And no, they can't see the storage unit without a warrant. If they have a problem with that they can talk to your lawyer [Adam/Don/Jason depending on Geo].

-Gene

thanks.... even though i just donated...solid advice calls for yet another donation

They specifically had the male in the situation step out of the house when he opened the door, instruct him to leave the door open, pretty much blocked him from closing the door, and entered under the pretext of making sure no one else was in the house.

Oh, and SOP, but hands behind the back, escorted 20 yards away from the house as they held his fingers...cuff-less-ly cuffed if you will.

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by SanPedroShooter

What about just turning off all the lights and not answering the door? Wouldnt it be better to avoid all contact if possible? If they get a call to a house and no one seems home, would they just go away after walking around the perimeter and looking in the windows? It seems like once you get outside and in contact, you're "in the net". Things can easily go downhill from there...

The very few dealings I've had with the PD/Sherif at my residence were conducted through a shut and locked door, or by me stepping out and having someone lock the door behind me. It just seemed safer that way.

And I will add that the LAPD and the LASD were very professional and helpful and were not responding to my house specifically, but I locked the door all the same... I feel it helps to set boundaries right from the start, that and a respectful attitude goes a long way.

thats hard when the door was answered with a "who is it"...(no peep hole)...

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by RangemasterP226

Wow, some really comments here really ignorant of the law and police procedure. If the police show up to your house on a DV call and you don't answer or don't allow them in, they can force there way in for a warrantless welfare check of anyone who may be inside injuried or dead. Would you want it any other way if it was your daughter who just got the **** beaten out of her and her boyfriend told the cops to pound sand?

Hypothetically, if to people are have a heated debate at a somewhat elevated level, and a neighbor whom the person has had trouble with before decided to call in "people having a argument" , does that raise to the level of DV?

No one crying, screaming (from being beating), how does that raise to a DV call, as opposed to a domestic disturbance, or even just disturbing the peace?

Even from the call, unless the caller said "it sounds like someone being beaten, things breaking, someone letting out blood curdling screams, how is DV assumed?

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by RickD427

Gene,

You logic is quite good. The right of entry is predicated on jeopardy to one of the parties. If there is no jeopardy, then the right to enter pretty much evaporates, but the argument only works if it's known that the two parties outside were the only parties to the disturbance.

I've handled a couple of hundred of these type calls over the past 30 years, the call details are rarely known to the officers with that level of certainty. We do have a duty to any third (or fourth, or fifth) parties that may be present at the location to ensure they are safe prior to leaving the scene.

this is what the person in question told me

[Falconis]

Assumptions are always made. But I think the cop still has a duty to investigate what is actually happening. If it comes down to kicking in a door under exigent circumstances so be it.

It's obvious some people here don't believe in exigency under any circumstances. I just wonder what line those people draw between "over reactive cop" and "a do nothing cop".

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by Southwest Chuck

Just pray you're not living in Indiana at the time!
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=432517

thats what got me thinking about making this post

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by Falconis

yeah but sometimes that's just not gonna happen. There's confrontation, avoidance, and tactical retreat. maybe it's just me.

what happens when you can't?

didn't a guy not too long ago post that he was trying to get out of his house, and his G/F or wife was blocking his way and wouldnt let him out.

i dont remember if he nudged her aside so he could pass or whatever, but the cops show up, and somehow the story came out and the cops hand cuff her..he said he wasn't pressing charges, but they took her anyway..

[hoffmang]

Originally Posted by sreiter

didn't a guy not too long ago post that he was trying to get out of his house, and his G/F or wife was blocking his way and wouldnt let him out.

There is such a thing as a male victim of DV. If something like this happens, first to call 911 sadly often wins.

-Gene

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by Falconis

Assumptions are always made. But I think the cop still has a duty to investigate what is actually happening. If it comes down to kicking in a door under exigent circumstances so be it.

It's obvious some people here don't believe in exigency under any circumstances. I just wonder what line those people draw between "over reactive cop" and "a do nothing cop".

i think at the point where a reasonable person would say "this circumstance doesn't fit with blacks definition of exigent, and this is clearly a violation of the 4a, and the cops are using it as a excuse" at best. Somewhere along the lines of "I can hear this guy racking his shotgun and saying prepare to die"

However, in the indiana thread, a person makes a great point when he said "if this ruling is consistent with CURRENT 4a ruling/interpretation, then there was a time in our history, when illegal entry being ok was NOT consistent with 4a interpretation. Which means the courts have, overtime, let the BOR become toilet paper, and we are become more and more under the thumb of totalitarian rule.

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by hoffmang

There is such a thing as a male victim of DV. If something like this happens, first to call 911 sadly often wins.

-Gene

So true and so sad. If it were me, I just couldnt make the call. To my own determent i'm sure..something about "not being a rat" from my days in jersey. you just never called the cops, no matter what..funny thing is my brother retired as a sgt. 25 years in.

[Falconis]

I said it before and I'll say it again. Mistakes are made all the time and cop work isn't exactly lab work. That's what the civil court system is for. Obviously many here disagree with that and for those of you that have a need to incur funeral costs and others to incur funeral costs, I'm sorry. I truly am.

But when exigency does exist, door are gonna get cracked.

[sreiter]

Originally Posted by Falconis

I said it before and I'll say it again. Mistakes are made all the time and cop work isn't exactly lab work. That's what the civil court system is for. Obviously many here disagree with that and for those of you that have a need to incur funeral costs and others to incur funeral costs, I'm sorry. I truly am.

But when exigency does exist, door are gonna get cracked.

As was stated elsewhere. What if you don't have the means to outspend the GOV. for justice, and the ACLU isn't coming to your rescue?

Civil court is only for those rich enough to afford justice.

And although ciche' i do believe in dieing for what you believe in, and i'd rather die on my feet then live on my knee's.

Did the jews in nazi germany have redress in the courts? They stood idly by when the brown shirt starting cutting off their beards, they dug their own graves, knowing they were doing so. they stood on the bank of the grave, knowing they were about to get shot in the back of their heads.....

yeah, sorry, i wouldn't have sat idly by

[Falconis]

melodramatic, but you do have redress. and no civil court is not only for the rich and I have seen the poor take their cases there without the ACLU.

[InGrAM]

Originally Posted by sreiter

So true and so sad. If it were me, I just couldnt make the call. To my own determent i'm sure..something about "not being a rat" from my days in jersey. you just never called the cops, no matter what..funny thing is my brother retired as a sgt. 25 years in.

This made me LMAO. No offense man. Just thought it was funny.

I don't think any man would feel OK with calling the cops on his woman. Even if she was hitting him with intent to harm. It is simply emasculating.

[TRICKSTER]

Originally Posted by hoffmang

There is such a thing as a male victim of DV. If something like this happens, first to call 911 sadly often wins.

-Gene

The last DV I handled, the female half went to jail. Several witnesses stated that she was the aggressor and that the male half was just trying to stop her from hitting him. She couldn't believe that she was going to jail because
"the last two times this happened, you guys arrested him, you can't take me to jail".

[planedude86]

Originally Posted by RangemasterP226

Wow, some really comments here really ignorant of the law and police procedure. If the police show up to your house on a DV call and you don't answer or don't allow them in, they can force there way in for a warrantless welfare check of anyone who may be inside injuried or dead. Would you want it any other way if it was your daughter who just got the **** beaten out of her and her boyfriend told the cops to pound sand?

In this response, you state that an officer has blanket authority to conduct a forced entry for a welfare check when the parties involved either refuse entry or do not answer the door. To clarify, is this your belief?

[E Pluribus Unum]

Originally Posted by RangemasterP226

I have seen the man get screwed during the legal process, so you are right in that respect BUT, if during one of your loud shouting matches you refuse to come to the door or refuse to let the officers see the female half, then they can come in, how can it be any other way??

Easy.... no evidence of a crime??? No PC for entry... plain and simple...


Though inconvenient, the accused have rights. One cannot invalidate the constitution because it is inconvenient. The 4th amendment says what it says.... if you don't like what it says... then change it. Don't judiciously pick away at it until it says what you think it should say....

[SanPedroShooter]

I didnt think that one all the way through... There would be know way to know your neighbor called, hence no time "hide". If you had a loud argument with your wife, and the cops where called by a third party, you'd answer the door just like any other time someone knocked.

I recall some years ago my dad and my teenage sister where driving in the car on the freeway. There where having a heated argument about my sisters expenditure for the senior prom. He was refusing to pay so much money and she was extremely pissed Anyway, they where yelling at each other etc... and some helpful citizen follwed them for a while and called the police.

Now I will admit, my dad has temper, I have the same one, "the Colonel" my grandfather had it too, so some mild mannered person may have had cause for concern. But that said, my sister is no pushover when she wants something from my dad. But I can say that my father would never lay a hand on a women, especially not my teenage sister, no matter what a ***** she is being. So here they are driving down the road, basically having a screaming match. Someone in a car saw them, tailled my dad for a while and called 911.

As it turns out, during the time it took for the police to show, they hade made it up, gotten home and my dad says he was going to get in the shower. He hears a knock at the door and goes to answer it, sans shirt (now my father is a resaonably big man, much bigger than I am). There's a female cop there demanding to see my sister. "Produce her"! the cop says. My dad gets the distinct impression that this cop does not like him. She is giving him the kind of look reserved for men who beat on there teenage daughters...

So hears my dad, shirtless, confronted by this representitive of the law demanding to phyisicaly see my sister. He says, "what do you want her for", having no idea he had been tailed by a concerned citizen. She says, "we have a report of domestic violence."

At this point, he thinks this cop must be at the wrong house or something, so he goes to get my sister and brings her outside (I will add that this entire time the cop did not demand entry) The cop, being very concerned and sympathetic, starts asking questions.

My sister and dad are trying to explain that they had been having an argument in the car and they hade made up and every thing was fine. The cop, not being 100% convinced, pulls my sister aside and says in a low voice, "you can tell me, just tell me if he hit/abused you and we'll take you somewhere safe (and take him somewhere not so safe I assume)"

So the whole thing hangs in the balance, the money, the prom, the argument and she has complete power for a second. The sun still shines, the earth still spins, but time has slowed to that one microsecond when she makes up her mind to say, "yes or no"....


Of course she says, "no officer, it was just an argument, but thank you for your concern."
Well, there's not much the cop can do at that point, so she gives my dad a dirty look and leaves.

So thats it. Ambigous domestic violence calls, where there's no evidence of violence, can give a woman immense power to decide a mans fate. Of course I heard all this second hand and after the fact, but I have it on authority, from the horses mouth, that for one split second, my sister felt like letting the police take him down...

This was in Washington state not California, so YMMV

[ALSystems]

Originally Posted by sreiter

Civil court is only for those rich enough to afford justice.

Ageed.

From personal experience, you can be sued over almost anything which will cost many thousands of dollars to defend. Even if the whole purpose of the lawsuit is to harass you and hurt you financially, it won't matter to the judge. Don't expect the ACLU or court appointed attornies to save you in a civil lawsuit. They won't.

That sounds like justice for the rich to me. I rather have a new car than waste money in a useless civil lawsuit.

[2Bear]

Originally Posted by ALSystems

That sounds like justice for the rich to me.

Expect to see many more violent episodes ending in suicide or death-by-cop as frustrated, unemployed and disenfranchised Americans give up on life and country.

[Pixs]

First hand experience with a crazy woman; police have way too much power and need to be curbed.