Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop

Expand Messages
  • sherlockhomz@aol.com
    Methinks there just might be a tad more to the story. I ll bet the obstruction was a nice way of reminding your friend that he might have beat them in round
    Message 1 of 20 , Jan 27, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Methinks there just might be a tad more to the story. I'll bet the
      obstruction was a nice way of reminding your friend that he might have beat them in
      round one.

      Martin Lichtig
      NYS Licensed Private Investigator #11000051467/NYC Licensed Process Server
      #0965095
      Certified Member NYSPPA
      3874 Valleyview St.
      Mohegan Lake, NY 10547
      914-528-1875
      Serving Westchester & Putnam Counties Zip Codes 105XX, 106XX 107XX 108XX
      and 914 & 845 Area Codes



      **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
      http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • suesarkis@aol.com
      In a message dated 1/27/2008 2:43:22 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, milgrp2001@aol.com writes: Tell him to stay away from that beach. Brad - I m sorry but what
      Message 2 of 20 , Jan 27, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 1/27/2008 2:43:22 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
        milgrp2001@... writes:

        Tell him to stay away from that beach.



        Brad -

        I'm sorry but what part of the Constitution am I forgetting? Why should a
        free person not be entitled to walk wherever he so chooses?

        I privately suggested to Stan that he have his friend go have a courteous,
        heart-to-heart talk with the watch commander.

        The LEO should truly be upset with the false accuser, if that is how it came
        down, but that is not how it usually works. Regardless, this man has his
        rights and asking him to hide because the LEO is an Adam Henry is not what I
        consider the American way.



        Sincerely yours,
        Sue
        ________________________
        Sue Sarkis
        Sarkis Detective Agency

        (est. 1976)
        PI 6564
        _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

        1346 Ethel Street
        Glendale, CA 91207-1826
        818-242-2505
        818-242-9824 FAX

        "one Nation under God"

        If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
        a military veteran !



        **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
        http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Stan
        It happened @ Durand Eastman off of lake Ontario, Rochester, NY.....He was a Monroe county deputy Sherrif...... Vicki Siedow
        Message 3 of 20 , Jan 27, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          It happened @ Durand Eastman off of lake Ontario, Rochester, NY.....He was a Monroe county deputy Sherrif......

          Vicki Siedow <SiedowAndAssociates@...> wrote: It would be helpful to know which beach, etc.

          Vicki Siedow
          Siedow & Associates Investigations
          & Legal Support Services
          2629 Foothill Blvd. #262
          La Crescenta, CA 91214
          Los Angeles County
          CA PI License # 22852
          800.448.6431 toll free
          818.242.0130 local
          818.688.3295 fax
          <http://siedow.lawandorder.com/> http://Siedow.LawAndOrder.com
          <mailto:Siedow@...> Siedow@...
          Member NCISS, IWWA
          Certified Identity Theft Risk Management Specialist
          Need economical legal help?
          Concerned about Identity Theft?
          Check the links on my site, or contact me directly.

          From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
          On Behalf Of stan1k1
          Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 9:01 PM
          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop

          Hi Group, Can someone help please, a friend of mine was arrested for
          stealing a purse out of a car at the beach, after being in handcuffs
          for three and 1/2 hours, they dropped the charges, He sates that he was
          falsley accused anyways, thats why they dropped the charges, So about a
          week later he drives past the beach again, and the arresting officer
          recognized him going by, and turned around and gave him a traffic
          ticket for obstructed view of review mirror. and the cop said, I told
          you(him) not to come around this area, and if I see you again, I'll
          arrest you and take you to jail, now what authority does the officer
          have in this matter to tell him not to come here....?, the guy was not
          found guilty of anything, and did not commit any crime....he likes to
          go to the beach, any info on this matter will be taken seriously,
          Thanks......

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






          ---------------------------------
          Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • btzinvestigations@adelphia.net
          Just because he wasn t charged at that time doesn t mean he won t be in the future. There are lots of reasons why he could have been let go. Why would it
          Message 4 of 20 , Jan 27, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Just because he wasn't charged at that time doesn't mean he won't be in the future. There are lots of reasons why he could have been let go. Why would it matter which beach it was?
            --
            ROBERT TERRELL
            BTZ Investigations
            Ca. License PI24510
            1119 South Mission Rd. Suite 181
            Fallbrook, Ca. 92028
            Phone: 760-723-0338 /Cell: 760-212-5677
            Fax: 760-731-2929


            ---- Stan <stan1k1@...> wrote:
            It happened @ Durand Eastman off of lake Ontario, Rochester, NY.....He was a Monroe county deputy Sherrif......

            Vicki Siedow <SiedowAndAssociates@...> wrote: It would be helpful to know which beach, etc.

            Vicki Siedow
            Siedow & Associates Investigations
            & Legal Support Services
            2629 Foothill Blvd. #262
            La Crescenta, CA 91214
            Los Angeles County
            CA PI License # 22852
            800.448.6431 toll free
            818.242.0130 local
            818.688.3295 fax
            <http://siedow.lawandorder.com/> http://Siedow.LawAndOrder.com
            <mailto:Siedow@...> Siedow@...
            Member NCISS, IWWA
            Certified Identity Theft Risk Management Specialist
            Need economical legal help?
            Concerned about Identity Theft?
            Check the links on my site, or contact me directly.

            From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
            On Behalf Of stan1k1
            Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 9:01 PM
            To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop

            Hi Group, Can someone help please, a friend of mine was arrested for
            stealing a purse out of a car at the beach, after being in handcuffs
            for three and 1/2 hours, they dropped the charges, He sates that he was
            falsley accused anyways, thats why they dropped the charges, So about a
            week later he drives past the beach again, and the arresting officer
            recognized him going by, and turned around and gave him a traffic
            ticket for obstructed view of review mirror. and the cop said, I told
            you(him) not to come around this area, and if I see you again, I'll
            arrest you and take you to jail, now what authority does the officer
            have in this matter to tell him not to come here....?, the guy was not
            found guilty of anything, and did not commit any crime....he likes to
            go to the beach, any info on this matter will be taken seriously,
            Thanks......

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






            ---------------------------------
            Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • karousel
            Without knowing all the facts - my reply is based solely on the information given below. If he was arrested, it should have been because law enforcement had
            Message 5 of 20 , Jan 27, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Without knowing all the facts - my reply is based solely on the information given below.

              If he was arrested, it should have been because law enforcement had probable cause - reason to believe he had done the crime. Was he arrested because the complainant named him as the thief?

              The charges were dropped - who dropped the charges? The police or the complainant?

              Perhaps this individual has a good false arrest case against the police. Perhaps malicious prosecution against the complainant. This could be a case of harassment by the police. Again - the entire story needs to be known.

              The police officer does not have the authority to tell the man not to come to the area again.

              The man needs to speak to an attorney.

              wjf





              From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
              On Behalf Of stan1k1
              Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 9:01 PM
              To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop

              Hi Group, Can someone help please, a friend of mine was arrested for
              stealing a purse out of a car at the beach, after being in handcuffs
              for three and 1/2 hours, they dropped the charges, He sates that he was
              falsley accused anyways, thats why they dropped the charges, So about a
              week later he drives past the beach again, and the arresting officer
              recognized him going by, and turned around and gave him a traffic
              ticket for obstructed view of review mirror. and the cop said, I told
              you(him) not to come around this area, and if I see you again, I'll
              arrest you and take you to jail, now what authority does the officer
              have in this matter to tell him not to come here....?, the guy was not
              found guilty of anything, and did not commit any crime....he likes to
              go to the beach, any info on this matter will be taken seriously,
              Thanks......
              .


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • suesarkis@aol.com
              Unless he was handcuffed by the fastest gun west of the Pecos, I doubt if he was ever actually booked which means, at least here in CA, that he wasn t
              Message 6 of 20 , Jan 27, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Unless he was handcuffed by the fastest gun west of the Pecos, I doubt if he
                was ever actually booked which means, at least here in CA, that he wasn't
                arrested. If the cuffs were removed within 3.5 hours, I would venture to guess
                it was a "detention only". In CA that is known as an 849.5 release for the
                Penal Code that covers it. With that said, there were no charges to drop but
                rather nothing to follow up on at that time.

                It doesn't matter what beach it was and it is frustrating to know that any
                LEO thinks he has the right to tell any person "don't come back".

                ss

                * * * * * *






                Without knowing all the facts - my reply is based solely on the information
                given below.

                If he was arrested, it should have been because law enforcement had probable
                cause - reason to believe he had done the crime. Was he arrested because the
                complainant named him as the thief?

                The charges were dropped - who dropped the charges? The police or the
                complainant?

                Perhaps this individual has a good false arrest case against the police.
                Perhaps malicious prosecution against the complainant. This could be a case of
                harassment by the police. Again - the entire story needs to be known.

                The police officer does not have the authority to tell the man not to come
                to the area again.

                The man needs to speak to an attorney.

                wjf

                From: _infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_ (mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com)
                [mailto:_infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_
                (mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com) ]
                On Behalf Of stan1k1
                Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 9:01 PM
                To: _infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_ (mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com)
                Subject: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop

                Hi Group, Can someone help please, a friend of mine was arrested for
                stealing a purse out of a car at the beach, after being in handcuffs
                for three and 1/2 hours, they dropped the charges, He sates that he was
                falsley accused anyways, that's why they dropped the charges, So about a
                week later he drives past the beach again, and the arresting officer
                recognized him going by, and turned around and gave him a traffic
                ticket for obstructed view of review mirror. and the cop said, I told
                you(him) not to come around this area, and if I see you again, I'll
                arrest you and take you to jail, now what authority does the officer
                have in this matter to tell him not to come here....?, the guy was not
                found guilty of anything, and did not commit any crime....he likes to
                go to the beach, any info on this matter will be taken seriously,
                Thanks......







                **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
                http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Thomas Eskridge
                Not correct Sue. If he was handcuffed for a substantial period of time, or handcuffed and transported to another location, he was in fact under arrest. 849 PC
                Message 7 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Not correct Sue.



                  If he was handcuffed for a substantial period of time, or handcuffed and
                  transported to another location, he was in fact under arrest. 849 PC deals
                  with the aftermath of an arrest. If no charges are filed, after an arrest,
                  then for further historical records, the arrest is considered a detention
                  only. This does not negate the fact that the person was in fact arrested.



                  I also have some trouble believing that the field investigation of this
                  matter would have taken 3 ½ hours. But if it did, sitting in the backseat of
                  a police car (an assumption), handcuffed for 3 ½ hours, would likely be
                  considered an arrest.



                  My above opinion is based on 28 ½ years of California law enforcement
                  experience



                  It doesn't matter what beach it was and it is frustrating to know that any
                  LEO thinks he has the right to tell any person "don't come back".





                  It’s also frustrating to know that you would be frustrated by an anonymous
                  poster claiming a set of facts that have not been vetted in the least.







                  Tom Eskridge

                  Chief Operations Officer

                  High Tech Crime Institute Inc

                  Excellence Through Integrity and Commitment

                  Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business (SDVOB)

                  Licensed Private Investigations Agency

                  Direct Office Number 727-210-4618 or 813-854-2223

                  Toll Free 866-279-6295

                  Fax 866-864-7559

                  13400 Wright Cir



                  Tampa, Florida 33626



                  www.gohtci.com

                  www.forensicstore.com



                  _____

                  From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
                  On Behalf Of suesarkis@...
                  Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:06 PM
                  To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop





                  Unless he was handcuffed by the fastest gun west of the Pecos, I doubt if he

                  was ever actually booked which means, at least here in CA, that he wasn't
                  arrested. If the cuffs were removed within 3.5 hours, I would venture to
                  guess
                  it was a "detention only". In CA that is known as an 849.5 release for the
                  Penal Code that covers it. With that said, there were no charges to drop but

                  rather nothing to follow up on at that time.

                  It doesn't matter what beach it was and it is frustrating to know that any
                  LEO thinks he has the right to tell any person "don't come back".

                  ss

                  * * * * * *






                  Without knowing all the facts - my reply is based solely on the information
                  given below.

                  If he was arrested, it should have been because law enforcement had probable

                  cause - reason to believe he had done the crime. Was he arrested because the

                  complainant named him as the thief?

                  The charges were dropped - who dropped the charges? The police or the
                  complainant?

                  Perhaps this individual has a good false arrest case against the police.
                  Perhaps malicious prosecution against the complainant. This could be a case
                  of
                  harassment by the police. Again - the entire story needs to be known.

                  The police officer does not have the authority to tell the man not to come
                  to the area again.

                  The man needs to speak to an attorney.

                  wjf

                  From: _infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_ (mailto:infoguys-list@
                  <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com)
                  [mailto:_infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_
                  (mailto:infoguys-list@ <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>
                  yahoogroups.com) ]
                  On Behalf Of stan1k1
                  Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 9:01 PM
                  To: _infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_ (mailto:infoguys-list@
                  <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com)
                  Subject: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop

                  Hi Group, Can someone help please, a friend of mine was arrested for
                  stealing a purse out of a car at the beach, after being in handcuffs
                  for three and 1/2 hours, they dropped the charges, He sates that he was
                  falsley accused anyways, that's why they dropped the charges, So about a
                  week later he drives past the beach again, and the arresting officer
                  recognized him going by, and turned around and gave him a traffic
                  ticket for obstructed view of review mirror. and the cop said, I told
                  you(him) not to come around this area, and if I see you again, I'll
                  arrest you and take you to jail, now what authority does the officer
                  have in this matter to tell him not to come here....?, the guy was not
                  found guilty of anything, and did not commit any crime....he likes to
                  go to the beach, any info on this matter will be taken seriously,
                  Thanks......

                  **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
                  http://body.
                  <http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489>
                  aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • John Roberson
                  The accepted legal definition of arrest is when the officer would not simply let the person walk away. In this case the officer would not have let the
                  Message 8 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The accepted legal definition of arrest is when the officer would not simply
                    let the person walk away. In this case the officer would not have let the
                    gentleman simply walk away, then he was under arrest no matter whether he
                    was handcuffed or how long the officer kept him there.

                    John Roberson Investigations
                    Atlanta, GA 1-800-325-0914
                    706-301-5687 john.jri@...
                    Georgia PI license # PDC 000680

                    On Jan 28, 2008 8:15 AM, Thomas Eskridge <TOM@...> wrote:

                    > Not correct Sue.
                    >
                    > If he was handcuffed for a substantial period of time, or handcuffed and
                    > transported to another location, he was in fact under arrest. 849 PC deals
                    > with the aftermath of an arrest. If no charges are filed, after an arrest,
                    > then for further historical records, the arrest is considered a detention
                    > only. This does not negate the fact that the person was in fact arrested.
                    >
                    > I also have some trouble believing that the field investigation of this
                    > matter would have taken 3 ½ hours. But if it did, sitting in the backseat
                    > of
                    > a police car (an assumption), handcuffed for 3 ½ hours, would likely be
                    > considered an arrest.
                    >
                    > My above opinion is based on 28 ½ years of California law enforcement
                    > experience
                    >
                    > It doesn't matter what beach it was and it is frustrating to know that any
                    >
                    > LEO thinks he has the right to tell any person "don't come back".
                    >
                    > It's also frustrating to know that you would be frustrated by an anonymous
                    > poster claiming a set of facts that have not been vetted in the least.
                    >
                    > Tom Eskridge
                    >
                    > Chief Operations Officer
                    >
                    > High Tech Crime Institute Inc
                    >
                    > Excellence Through Integrity and Commitment
                    >
                    > Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business (SDVOB)
                    >
                    > Licensed Private Investigations Agency
                    >
                    > Direct Office Number 727-210-4618 or 813-854-2223
                    >
                    > Toll Free 866-279-6295
                    >
                    > Fax 866-864-7559
                    >
                    > 13400 Wright Cir
                    >
                    > Tampa, Florida 33626
                    >
                    > www.gohtci.com
                    >
                    > www.forensicstore.com
                    >
                    > _____
                    >
                    > From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com <infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>[mailto:
                    > infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com <infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>]
                    > On Behalf Of suesarkis@... <suesarkis%40aol.com>
                    > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2008 10:06 PM
                    > To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com <infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>
                    > Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop
                    >
                    > Unless he was handcuffed by the fastest gun west of the Pecos, I doubt if
                    > he
                    >
                    > was ever actually booked which means, at least here in CA, that he wasn't
                    > arrested. If the cuffs were removed within 3.5 hours, I would venture to
                    > guess
                    > it was a "detention only". In CA that is known as an 849.5 release for the
                    >
                    > Penal Code that covers it. With that said, there were no charges to drop
                    > but
                    >
                    > rather nothing to follow up on at that time.
                    >
                    > It doesn't matter what beach it was and it is frustrating to know that any
                    >
                    > LEO thinks he has the right to tell any person "don't come back".
                    >
                    > ss
                    >
                    > * * * * * *
                    >
                    > Without knowing all the facts - my reply is based solely on the
                    > information
                    > given below.
                    >
                    > If he was arrested, it should have been because law enforcement had
                    > probable
                    >
                    > cause - reason to believe he had done the crime. Was he arrested because
                    > the
                    >
                    > complainant named him as the thief?
                    >
                    > The charges were dropped - who dropped the charges? The police or the
                    > complainant?
                    >
                    > Perhaps this individual has a good false arrest case against the police.
                    > Perhaps malicious prosecution against the complainant. This could be a
                    > case
                    > of
                    > harassment by the police. Again - the entire story needs to be known.
                    >
                    > The police officer does not have the authority to tell the man not to come
                    >
                    > to the area again.
                    >
                    > The man needs to speak to an attorney.
                    >
                    > wjf
                    >
                    > From: _infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_ (mailto:infoguys-list@
                    > <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com)
                    > [mailto:_infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_
                    > (mailto:infoguys-list@ <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com>
                    > yahoogroups.com) ]
                    > On Behalf Of stan1k1
                    > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 9:01 PM
                    > To: _infoguys-list@infoguys-lisinf_ (mailto:infoguys-list@
                    > <mailto:infoguys-list%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com)
                    > Subject: [infoguys-list] Over zealous cop
                    >
                    > Hi Group, Can someone help please, a friend of mine was arrested for
                    > stealing a purse out of a car at the beach, after being in handcuffs
                    > for three and 1/2 hours, they dropped the charges, He sates that he was
                    > falsley accused anyways, that's why they dropped the charges, So about a
                    > week later he drives past the beach again, and the arresting officer
                    > recognized him going by, and turned around and gave him a traffic
                    > ticket for obstructed view of review mirror. and the cop said, I told
                    > you(him) not to come around this area, and if I see you again, I'll
                    > arrest you and take you to jail, now what authority does the officer
                    > have in this matter to tell him not to come here....?, the guy was not
                    > found guilty of anything, and did not commit any crime....he likes to
                    > go to the beach, any info on this matter will be taken seriously,
                    > Thanks......
                    >
                    > **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
                    > http://body.
                    > <http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489>
                    > aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >



                    --


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Ricky Gurley
                    ... I have to go with Sue on this (as much as it hurts to). LOL. Let me explain why after I address Mr. Eskridge s last statement. Often times on these
                    Message 9 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Eskridge" <TOM@...> wrote:

                      > It's also frustrating to know that you would be frustrated by an anonymous
                      > poster claiming a set of facts that have not been vetted in the least.


                      I have to go with Sue on this (as much as it "hurts" to). LOL. Let me explain
                      why after I address Mr. Eskridge's last statement.

                      Often times on these groups we have people seeking advice. Without a doubt
                      these people will sometimes embellish their statements, or just simply give
                      their statement in a light that is most favorable to them. However, this does
                      not preclude us from giving our advice in the form of an opinion. We have a
                      set of statements to base our opinions on, and it is within that framework
                      that we try to give our opinions. If the person giving their statement is not
                      completely honest with us, then our opinion might not work so well for
                      them. But that would be completely their own fault. Not ours for trying to
                      help. So, without opening up an investigation, adding data to my case
                      management system, making calls to New York, opening a file on the "falsely
                      accused of purse snatching, beach wanderer", I will give my opinion based
                      on one small part of the poster's statement.

                      I know that there are in fact circumstances in which a person can be told to
                      leave an area by Law Enforcement; vagrancy might be one such
                      circumstance, being in a high crime area when you are clearly "out of place"
                      might be another.

                      Barring those circumstances, we all have a right to wander about as we
                      please in a public place. That is why it is called a PUBLIC place. It IS in fact
                      about the constitution. It is about a person's constitutional right to move
                      about freely in a public place. And it is also about common sense, the
                      common sense the Law Enforcement Officer should have exercised before he
                      told this man not to come back to a public place. Had it been me, I would
                      have forced an arrest, and took it to court. I would have made a Judge rule
                      on the issue (and I am sure under these circumstances the ruling would
                      have been favorable to me), and I would have went right back to that place
                      with a huge grin on my face for that Officer. Had the Officer wanted to be
                      kind enough to repeat the same incident again, I would have felt very
                      fortunate to have him help me build a harassment case against his
                      department, that I might actually be able to profit from. And I would have to credit
                      him with being bold enough to put his job on the line in helping me to build that
                      case...

                      I believe this man had a right to stay on the beach, and come back if so chose
                      to, because if I understand this whole debate correctly, he did not commit a
                      crime. Since the charges were dropped, he was as innocent as anyone else
                      walking around on the beach that day. Based on what I have read, he was
                      not being a "menace", he was not being obnoxious and lound (disturbing the
                      peace), and he was not harassing or bothering anyone else. I can make this
                      assumption based on the dropped charges, for I am sure if there were any
                      way that these charges could have been made by the Officer that made this
                      arrest, they would have been made.

                      So, can anyone here tell me why this man should have to inconvenience
                      himself in the least with a phonecall to the Offier's supervisor, or a meeting
                      with the Officer's supervisor, or trying to inquire as to why this incident
                      occurred, just to protect the rights that he has and that this Officer should
                      have been observing and protecting to begin with?


                      Rick.



                      RMRI, Inc.
                      rmriinc@...
                    • Bob Hrodey
                      ... Rhetorical question or not, Rick, the reason he needs to pursue it (assuming the facts are on his side and we certainly don t know that) is that if HE
                      Message 10 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ricky Gurley wrote:

                        > So, can anyone here tell me why this man should have to inconvenience
                        > himself in the least with a phonecall to the Offier's supervisor, or a meeting
                        > with the Officer's supervisor, or trying to inquire as to why this incident
                        > occurred, just to protect the rights that he has and that this Officer should
                        > have been observing and protecting to begin with?
                        >
                        Rhetorical question or not, Rick, the reason he needs to pursue it
                        (assuming the facts are on his side and we certainly don't know that) is
                        that if HE doesn't challenge it, who will? If he accedes to the demands
                        of the officer that he "get out of Dodge" he has, in effect, agreed with
                        the officer that he has that authority and reinforces the officer's
                        delusion that this is right and proper.

                        I'm not taking a position in this argument other than to say that if the
                        officer IS wrong, he needs to be called on it so that, hopefully, it
                        doesn't continue.

                        A problem that is ignored is never corrected.


                        --


                        Enjoy,

                        Bob
                        ______________________________________________________________________________

                        Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
                        Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA, NAPPS
                        Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, & P.A.W.L.I.
                        Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice 337-4638 Fax
                        email: inquiry@... or rth@...
                        Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063
                      • suesarkis@aol.com
                        Tom - Yes, you are correct. Any detention such as described is an arrest. I actually meant booking . Over the past 35 years of dealing with both criminal
                        Message 11 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Tom -

                          Yes, you are correct. Any detention such as described is an arrest. I
                          actually meant "booking".

                          Over the past 35 years of dealing with both criminal defense and bail bonds
                          I have seen quite a few cases where a person was cuffed in excess of 3 1/2
                          hrs without ever being booked in and in many cases, not even taken to the
                          station. However, the circumstances were always something rather unusual such as
                          delayed field identifications due to the victim being in E.R., officer
                          involved shootings while suspect in transport, extremely important "hot pursuits"
                          while in transport, and the like.

                          As far as vetting a clearly stated question is concerned, maybe some have
                          the time to waste but I don't. I checked out Stan and that was enough for me.
                          He presented an inquiry and I answered it. If the response does not equate
                          to the facts, than the enquirer is at fault not those responding.

                          Rick, I believe that the least intrusive approach is going to the W/C. Yes,
                          he can force an arrest or many other dumb things but the path of least
                          resistance, in my opinion, is going directly to his supervisor as a citizen and
                          discuss the matter intelligently and, if still necessary, file an official
                          citizen's complaint.

                          There is no harassment, at least not yet.



                          Sincerely yours,
                          Sue
                          ________________________
                          Sue Sarkis
                          Sarkis Detective Agency

                          (est. 1976)
                          PI 6564
                          _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

                          1346 Ethel Street
                          Glendale, CA 91207-1826
                          818-242-2505
                          818-242-9824 FAX

                          "one Nation under God"

                          If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
                          a military veteran !



                          **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
                          http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • dcpoly1@cs.com
                          Being retired Lae Enforcement I can give you some insight. Regarding this arrest at the beach. The victim in this case may have declined to prosecute after
                          Message 12 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Being retired Lae Enforcement I can give you some insight.

                            Regarding this arrest at the beach. The victim in this case may have declined
                            to prosecute after your friend was taken into custody by law enforcement. Or
                            they may not have been able to locate the victim. Additionally, It may have
                            taken some time to Locate the victim or the owner of the vehicle or the
                            property stolen. The owner of the vehicle may not have been the owner of the
                            property tah was stolen. In that case you may have two victims. Your friend could
                            have been let go for many reasons. Your friend may have been told not to come
                            back because the officer knew he was a burglar/ thief. and even thought he did
                            not have enough to hold him on at this particular time he did not want him in
                            his area. The ticket was a warning to him advising him that if he continued to
                            come back into the area he would be heading for trouble.

                            Tactics like this are used all the time by police to keep crime down in
                            certain areas. Examples would be prostitutes hanging around certain areas, drug
                            hang outs or known drug users, buyers, pick pockets located and identified in
                            certain areas such as resorts, juveniles hanging around in certain areas
                            blocking businesses , known burglars are stopped and given tickets just to let them
                            know the police are there. Tactics like this help to keep the crime rate down
                            in that area and drives the unwanted elements away.

                            Hope this helps.

                            Denny Connors MSCJ
                            Retired Major Case Detective.
                            Orlando, FL


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Ricky Gurley
                            ... and ... You are like a bad wife, Sue. The more you get beat, the less you learn.... Of course you would expect me not to be offended after calling my
                            Message 13 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, suesarkis@... wrote:


                              > Rick, I believe that the least intrusive approach is going to the W/C. Yes,
                              > he can force an arrest or many other dumb things but the path of least
                              > resistance, in my opinion, is going directly to his supervisor as a citizen
                              and
                              > discuss the matter intelligently and, if still necessary, file an official
                              > citizen's complaint.

                              You are like a bad wife, Sue. The more you get beat, the less you learn....


                              Of course you would expect me not to be offended after calling my
                              approach "dumb": "Rick, I believe that the least intrusive approach is going to
                              the W/C. Yes, he can force an arrest or many other dumb things"

                              It is how I would do thuis, because in my mind that permanently fixes the
                              problem. And I don't want to take an approach that would more than likely
                              get me "pooh poohed", by going to the Watch Commander that will side with
                              the Officer unless the Officer did something "glaringly stupid"..

                              As far as your statement: " There is no harassment, at least not yet."; goes...

                              Read my post THOROUGHLY. Read the paragraph below THOROUGHLY:

                              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              "I would have made a Judge rule on the issue (and I am sure under these
                              circumstances the ruling would have been favorable to me), and I would
                              have went right back to that place with a huge grin on my face for that
                              Officer. Had the Officer wanted to be kind enough to repeat the same
                              incident again, I would have felt very fortunate to have him help me build a
                              harassment case against his department, that I might actually be able to
                              profit from. And I would have to credit him with being bold enough to put
                              his job on the line in helping me to build that case... "
                              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                              And you should come away with the notion that I was indicating that after
                              the second time it happened, and after a Judge made a favorable ruling for
                              me on this issue, I would start to try to build a harassment case based on a
                              pattern of behaviour by this Officer and his department...



                              Rick.



                              RMRI, Inc.
                              rmriinc@...
                            • suesarkis@aol.com
                              In a message dated 1/28/2008 2:17:33 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, rmriinc@grouply.com writes: As far as your statement: There is no harassment, at least not
                              Message 14 of 20 , Jan 28, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                In a message dated 1/28/2008 2:17:33 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
                                rmriinc@... writes:

                                As far as your statement: " There is no harassment, at least not yet.";
                                goes...


                                Rick-

                                I wasn't referring to your comment at all. There was a previous poster in
                                particular who thought it might be harassment. Since Stan never made mention
                                of unlawful arrest, etc. but rather seemed more concerned about the post
                                incident commentary, I am opining on the side that PC existed. Therefore, the
                                subsequent comment, in my opinion, would not mount to a hill of beans in a
                                harassment complaint although it might be regarded by most of us as inappropriate.

                                Your other comment is quite funny considering the facts.



                                Sincerely yours,
                                Sue
                                ________________________
                                Sue Sarkis
                                Sarkis Detective Agency

                                (est. 1976)
                                PI 6564
                                _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

                                1346 Ethel Street
                                Glendale, CA 91207-1826
                                818-242-2505
                                818-242-9824 FAX

                                "one Nation under God"

                                If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
                                a military veteran !



                                **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
                                http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Billy Dykes
                                The guy was under arrest, plain and simple. Would a reasonable person, put in the same position that he was in, believe that they couldn t leave at any time? I
                                Message 15 of 20 , Jan 29, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  The guy was under arrest, plain and simple. Would a reasonable person,
                                  put in the same position that he was in, believe that they couldn't
                                  leave at any time? I think the handcuffs show that to be true.

                                  But, there are THREE sides to every story. The cops, his and the
                                  truth. I'm not saying either party is lying, per se. But everybody
                                  shades their stories to fit their purpose, even the police.

                                  Smart thing to do it this situation is to be a realist. Cop's "got his
                                  number" and doesn't want him around. There's probably other
                                  beaches in the area, patronize one of them for a while. He may find
                                  that he's got a new favorite spot. He doesn't want to be a jackass and
                                  get into a pissing contest with the cop. He'll never win!


                                  Billy


                                  -------------
                                  Billy Dykes Investigations
                                  2360 Hwy 144
                                  Calhoun LA 71225
                                  888-325-5971 tel & fax
                                  billydykespi@...
                                  http://www.louisianaprivateinvestigator.com/
                                  LA PI Lic# 5772-060404-LA
                                  Member: LPIA NAIS
                                • Salvatore F. Alioto
                                  Group, A person may be detained by the police under certain circumstances and not be under arrest. When an officer is conducting a reasonable suspicion field
                                  Message 16 of 20 , Jan 29, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Group,

                                    A person may be detained by the police under certain circumstances and
                                    not be under arrest. When an officer is conducting a "reasonable
                                    suspicion" field investigation to determine whether a crime has been
                                    committed he may detain suspects for a period of time needed to
                                    determine whether probable cause exists. The officer may also handcuff
                                    the suspects based on several factors including, but not limited to:
                                    nature of the suspected crime, time of day (night), whether he/she is
                                    alone at the time of detention. Once the field investigation is
                                    completed the officer can arrest the suspect(s) for whom probable cause
                                    exist and release those for which no probable cause exists. Three and a
                                    half hours, although on the long end of the spectrum, may not be
                                    unreasonable to unravel what occurred with the purse. We can't know, we
                                    were not there. Let's not Monday morning QB.

                                    Salvatore F. Alioto

                                    Owner/Operator Able Shamus Investigations

                                    Retired Sergeant NY City Police Department



                                    Licensed by the NY State Department of State

                                    Private Investigation License # 11000101082

                                    Armed Security License # 10010514064

                                    Notary Public Commission # 01AL6083412



                                    Proudly Serving the NY State Hudson Valley / NY City Metro / Long Island
                                    Area

                                    Phone # (845) 656-4027

                                    Website - http://sfapi.tripod.com/ <http://sfapi.tripod.com/>



                                    Notice of Confidentiality

                                    The content of this e-mail and any documents, files, photos or previous
                                    e-mails attached to it are confidential and may contain legally
                                    priviledged information. If you are not the person(s) authorized to
                                    receive this transmission please notify the sender as soon as possible
                                    and kindly delete this e-mail from your computer.


                                    --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, "John Roberson" <john.jri@...>
                                    wrote:
                                    >
                                    > The accepted legal definition of arrest is when the officer would not
                                    simply
                                    > let the person walk away. In this case the officer would not have let
                                    the
                                    > gentleman simply walk away, then he was under arrest no matter whether
                                    he
                                    > was handcuffed or how long the officer kept him there.
                                    >
                                    > John Roberson Investigations
                                    > Atlanta, GA 1-800-325-0914
                                    > 706-301-5687 john.jri@...
                                    > Georgia PI license # PDC 000680
                                    >




                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Yellow Dog
                                    Billy Dykes got it right, simply go somewhere else. The whole damn thing sounds shady anyway. ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    Message 17 of 20 , Jan 30, 2008
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Billy Dykes got it right, simply go somewhere else. The whole damn
                                      thing sounds shady anyway.


                                      On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:58 AM, Billy Dykes wrote:

                                      > The guy was under arrest, plain and simple. Would a reasonable person,
                                      > put in the same position that he was in, believe that they couldn't
                                      > leave at any time? I think the handcuffs show that to be true.
                                      >
                                      > But, there are THREE sides to every story. The cops, his and the
                                      > truth. I'm not saying either party is lying, per se. But everybody
                                      > shades their stories to fit their purpose, even the police.
                                      >
                                      > Smart thing to do it this situation is to be a realist. Cop's "got his
                                      > number" and doesn't want him around. There's probably other
                                      > beaches in the area, patronize one of them for a while. He may find
                                      > that he's got a new favorite spot. He doesn't want to be a jackass and
                                      > get into a pissing contest with the cop. He'll never win!
                                      >
                                      > Billy
                                      >
                                      > -------------
                                      > Billy Dykes Investigations
                                      > 2360 Hwy 144
                                      > Calhoun LA 71225
                                      > 888-325-5971 tel & fax
                                      > billydykespi@...
                                      > http://www.louisianaprivateinvestigator.com/
                                      > LA PI Lic# 5772-060404-LA
                                      > Member: LPIA NAIS
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >

                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.