The officers were well within their rights to intervene after he became irate and grab his gun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
You were there?
The officers were well within their rights to intervene after he became irate and grab his gun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
You were there?
Define irate
I still don't know that the ERPO was filed by the sister.
The officers were there to serve a valid court order. Failing to comply with that order is a criminal offense. During service of the order, the respondents actions easily met probable cause that the respondent was not going to comply. The officers, now dealing with a criminal offense in their presence, do not require a warrant to enter the residence to stop that criminal offense. Further searching after the arrest is made would require the warrant.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-aa-shooting-20181105-story.html
Police had come to the house Sunday night to speak with Willis, a longtime resident of the neighborhood, said Michele Willis, who was on the scene Monday morning and identified herself as his niece. She attributed that visit by police to “family being family” but declined to elaborate.
She said one of her aunts requested the protective order to temporarily remove Willis’ guns.
Nope, not true. A person can deny the ERPO and then the police must get a warrant. He was outside of his home when he was served the ERPO. He denied them access to his firearms. I'm pretty sure the law says that a warrant must then be served and an arrest will be made. They cannot enter into the house without a warrant for his arrest.
Request that the police obtain the ERPO or did she go to the court to file the ERPO? That has never been determined.
HoCo is to arrest for failing to comply and obtain a search order. My reading is a warrant for arrest is not needed because a crime has been committed right then and there but a warrant for the search is needed.Nope, not true. A person can deny the ERPO and then the police must get a warrant. He was outside of his home when he was served the ERPO. He denied them access to his firearms. I'm pretty sure the law says that a warrant must then be served and an arrest will be made. They cannot enter into the house without a warrant for his arrest.
At any rate to that first encounter with the LEO's, she followed on and her decided actions led to the later inadvertent/AND totally unnecessary death of her brother.
I have often wondered how she feels now and to this very day; as to how things turned out.
How does the rest of the family feel?
.
The officers were there to serve a valid court order. Failing to comply with that order is a criminal offense. During service of the order, the respondents actions easily met probable cause that the respondent was not going to comply. The officers, now dealing with a criminal offense in their presence, do not require a warrant to enter the residence to stop that criminal offense. Further searching after the arrest is made would require the warrant.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I still don't know that the ERPO was filed by the sister. A police officer can act on his own from information received by the sister. The officer can then apply for the ERPO without anything more than a report from the sister that he owns a firearm and the actions of the man when he interacted with the police earlier in the day.
The sister may have started this circus, but we haven't actually heard that she swore out the ERPO on her brother. At least I don't believe so.
I think this is the "end around" portion to the law. If the police can file the ERPO, then what's to stop them from doing it every time they get a call about a civil disturbance?
As been reported in national news, a magistrate/judge will almost always sign off on these orders because they don't want to be involved in the story if that person did in fact cause a problem. So, it's almost automatic that these orders will be granted.
Scary thought...
to do it they would have asked if he had any guns... probably the first thing they asked when she filed the complaint. Yeah, I got into an argument with my brother.
Office: oh, ok. does he have guns?
Funny how that may be the immediate first thing he may have said to her.
Nope, not true. A person can deny the ERPO and then the police must get a warrant. He was outside of his home when he was served the ERPO. He denied them access to his firearms. I'm pretty sure the law says that a warrant must then be served and an arrest will be made. They cannot enter into the house without a warrant for his arrest.
So you were there? You saw the whole thing?
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-aa-shooting-20181105-story.html
Police had come to the house Sunday night to speak with Willis, a longtime resident of the neighborhood, said Michele Willis, who was on the scene Monday morning and identified herself as his niece. She attributed that visit by police to “family being family” but declined to elaborate.
She said one of her aunts requested the protective order to temporarily remove Willis’ guns.
sounds like it happened the way I assumed.
You are beyond wrong with your understanding of the laws of arrest.
If the police have probable cause he has access to firearms (he answered the door holding one) and they refuse to turn the gun over an arrest can be made without a warrant. To get said firearm which was inside the house you'd need lawful consent, a search warrant, or one of the few exemptions to the 4th amendment. If it was on his person or out in plain view the seizure of the firearm could legally take place without a search or arrest warrant. This is a non issue since he went back in to get said gun according to the police.
If he would have walked outside and refused to turn the gun over he would be arrested on the spot and likely a search warrant or consent from another legal residence would have been obtained. It is not a conversation to have since he went back to the gun and decided to engage the police with it.
The police would not have to leave the guy there with his guns to obtain a warrant to arrest him. The crime (failing to comply with the court order to surrender firearms) is committed in their presence and he can be arrested on scene without a warrant.