Man shoots at mouse, hits roommate; another roommate arrested for rape [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Man shoots at mouse, hits roommate; another roommate arrested for rape


DonGlock26
12-21-2011, 20:06
Man shoots at mouse, hits roommate; another roommate arrested for rape


http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=18586564&title=man-shoots-at-mouse-hits-roommate-another-roommate-arrested-for-rape


Wow! You just never know. :shocked:

_

4949shooter
12-21-2011, 20:41
Wow. :wow:

Fred Hansen
12-21-2011, 20:52
Nothing an ounce of buttcrack couldn't fix.

DWARREN123
12-21-2011, 21:19
So many people we could do without! :steamed:

Dexters
12-21-2011, 21:32
Did you see the sidebar on the guy who had his life savings stolen from his closet ----------- by his daughter.

Newcop761
12-21-2011, 21:57
The mouse deserves a medal. If these ****** bags have any 9mm left I know what to do with it. :steamed:

CAcop
12-21-2011, 22:15
Sounds like my town.

One lady was taking her garbage out one day, looked over at her neighbor's house and saw him screwing the pooch. Litterally.

golls17
12-21-2011, 22:16
Check out the map on the bottom. Conveniently close to the PD...

MarcDW
12-21-2011, 23:53
Looks like a bunch of real winners! :upeyes:

Cochese
12-22-2011, 01:27
Alcohol was involved in the incident

:yawn:

merlynusn
12-22-2011, 09:15
wow...

Panzergrenadier1979
12-22-2011, 12:32
Thank GAWD the roommate didn't have a 10mm. :supergrin:

DonGlock26
12-23-2011, 07:50
Thank GAWD the roommate didn't have a 10mm. :supergrin:

Bwahahaha!

_

MeefZah
12-23-2011, 09:57
The mouse deserves a medal. If these ****** bags have any 9mm left I know what to do with it. :steamed:

I have this mental image of the mouse sauntering around the house, unscathed, chuckling to itself, after the cops leave with d-bag numbers 1 and 2, and the medics leave with victims 3 and 4.

CJStudent
12-23-2011, 11:45
I have this mental image of the mouse sauntering around the house, unscathed, chuckling to itself, after the cops leave with d-bag numbers 1 and 2, and the medics leave with victims 3 and 4.

I'm glad I'm not the only one, lol.

txleapd
12-24-2011, 10:34
I'm wondering what led them to search the basement closet.

CJStudent
12-24-2011, 10:58
I'm wondering what led them to search the basement closet.

are they gone yet.....are they gone yet......?

:couch:

In all seriousness, maybe searching for where the projectile ended up, or heard something?

txleapd
12-24-2011, 14:47
are they gone yet.....are they gone yet......?

:couch:

In all seriousness, maybe searching for where the projectile ended up, or heard something?

I dunno.... I'm hoping they weren't exceeding the limits of a protective sweep, or had some articulable exigency.

merlynusn
12-24-2011, 17:24
If I'm sweeping a house, I open every door and check every space a human could hide.

mknpwr
12-24-2011, 17:40
If I'm sweeping a house, I open every door and check every space a human could hide.

I use a broom, but that's just me. I don't have the training and backup to clear a house with a gun by myself...

Sent from my rotary dial phone

txleapd
12-24-2011, 17:50
If I'm sweeping a house, I open every door and check every space a human could hide.

What we do, and what SCOTUS allows to be admissible under plain view may not always be the same thing.

To quote Maryland v. Buie, SCOTUS stated incident to an arrest officers can, as a precautionary matter and without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, look in closets and other spaces immediately adjoining the place of arrest from which an attack could be immediately launched." But to justify a broader sweep, there must be articulable facts which, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, would warrant a reasonably prudent officer in believing that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing danger to those on the arrest scene.

It's not even a question about being safe... Evidence be damned. I'm going to secure a crime scene for everyone's safety. But I also know that I chance losing anything I find that could be considered outside the scope of a protective sweep. I'm okay with that, as long all my guys go home at the end of the shift.

In this case, I would hate to see everything suppressed of they went beyond a reasonable scope. Since I don't know what all the facts are in this case, I would like to know what led them to search a basement closet to find the girl.

4949shooter
12-24-2011, 22:26
They may lose the case in court, but at least the child is safe.

It reminds me of the first Dirty Harry movie..."Well I'm all broken up about that man's rights."

txleapd
12-25-2011, 06:20
They may lose the case in court, but at least the child is safe.

It reminds me of the first Dirty Harry movie..."Well I'm all broken up about that man's rights."

I agree. I'm just curious to know if they had something to go on. I hope they did. What's ultimately important is that the officers and the girl are safe. I'd also like to see the guy get what he deserves, without being able to wiggle out of it.

If it were my daughter, the sicko would be begging for a plea deal, to keep away from me.

merlynusn
12-25-2011, 07:55
True. But you have a shooting victim in a house. You don't know if there are other shooting victims and you don't know if the story they told you is true or not. I wouldn't be doing a protective sweep incident to arrest. I'd be doing a search looking for any additional victims or suspects.

txleapd
12-25-2011, 08:39
True. But you have a shooting victim in a house. You don't know if there are other shooting victims and you don't know if the story they told you is true or not. I wouldn't be doing a protective sweep incident to arrest. I'd be doing a search looking for any additional victims or suspects.

I completely understand that. I'm just curious as to how they could articulate looking for additional victims in a basement closet, or suspects in an accidental shooting.

As I said in an earlier post, what SCOTUS allows as admissible under plain view (from a protective sweep in this case) and what we do to ensure the safety of people at the scene, are not always the same thing. And rightfully so. I'm not going to gamble with anyone's safety on one of my scenes, just because I might lose some evidence. Safety is paramount.

I hope in this instance they had some articulable facts to extend a protective sweep, the basement was inclusive, or they could articulate the action under community care taking. I would hate see a child molester get off on a technicality.

txleapd
12-25-2011, 08:41
I just wanted to add... Hell, for all I know the roommates could have given them consent to search the common areas, and the basement closet fell into that.

:dunno:

I'm just curious.

Snowman92D
12-25-2011, 08:44
They may lose the case in court, but at least the child is safe.

It reminds me of the first Dirty Harry movie..."Well I'm all broken up about that man's rights."

Yeah. I'm betting that little girl ain't never gonna be right.

During an ensuing search of the house, officers found a 13-year-old girl hiding in a basement closet, Wyant said. The girl told police she had sneaked out of her house without her father's knowledge to see Kunzler, according to a jail report.

It was not known Wednesday whether any of Kunzler's three housemates were aware of the relationship.

merlynusn
12-25-2011, 11:49
I completely understand that. I'm just curious as to how they could articulate looking for additional victims in a basement closet, or suspects in an accidental shooting.

As I said in an earlier post, what SCOTUS allows as admissible under plain view (from a protective sweep in this case) and what we do to ensure the safety of people at the scene, are not always the same thing. And rightfully so. I'm not going to gamble with anyone's safety on one of my scenes, just because I might lose some evidence. Safety is paramount.

I hope in this instance they had some articulable facts to extend a protective sweep, the basement was inclusive, or they could articulate the action under community care taking. I would hate see a child molester get off on a technicality.

I guess it would depend on when they did the sweep. If I'm the first officer on scene, I don't believe them immediately when they say it's an accidental shooting. I'm going to secure everyone, sweep the residence and then find out what happened.

When we roll up on a shooting. One guy will go to the victim and at least two will continue to sweep the residence to ensure there is only one victim. Same thing with a domestic. If we go to a domestic and the guy answers the door and says everything is good to go, we still ask to see the other party and ensure they aren't injured.

ETA: If they did a "protective" sweep 20-30 minutes later, then the exigency is gone and I think they'd have a problem with it and it wouldn't be admissible. If they did it immediately after entering (or within a minute or two) then they are good in my opinion.

lawman800
12-26-2011, 01:41
There is a gun involved, there is a shooting, alcohol is involved, you get a strange story of someone shooting at a mouse and hitting some guy taking a ****, yeah... I think I am going to secure the whole house and lock it down just to verify instead of taking anyone's statements at face value.

opelwasp
12-26-2011, 22:12
I would just love for SCOTUS to throw out the child molest evidence. That would make a s"!+ storm in the press. I think the public pressure would be enormous. This will be interesting to watch as it pans out.

lawman800
12-26-2011, 22:53
I would just love for SCOTUS to throw out the child molest evidence. That would make a s"!+ storm in the press. I think the public pressure would be enormous. This will be interesting to watch as it pans out.

If it was in the 9th Circuit, you bet those clowns will immediately suppress all evidence and set the scum free.

opelwasp
12-27-2011, 03:44
If it was in the 9th Circuit, you bet those clowns will immediately suppress all evidence and set the scum free.

Yup:faint: