TexasCHLforum.com

G.A. Heath wrote:I am curious as to what legal authority was used to seize the firearms if Giga's belief is correct. I want to believe Giga which is why I still stand by my original advice of contacting the department, get a receipt and police report and go from there. We small town folks don't have departments that can afford Internal Affairs divisions so I never thought of that angle but I would recommend going that route if you can not get the documentation needed to verify the guns were taken properly.

There is a court recognized authority for police to act to to promote the welfare of individuals or community, based on common-law. It is what allows police to take many actions, such as helping lost motorists, that are not criminal investigations. It is actually generally recognized as a responsibility of the police, which is why so many of us (me included) get upset when they see an officer cruise by someone who is broken down on the side of the highway. We expect our police to be helpful. The court ruling in Warren was not to remove or reduce this common-law function. It did not say the police have no duty to protect the community, but that they had no duty to protect any specific individual without some special relationship to that individual. So, the police could take the weapons to prevent the suicide, or they could leave them and not be sued (successfully, the suit could still be filed and cost money to defend against).


On the second side, even small towns will have someone assigned to the IA functions though it may not be a full division like a major agency would have. In Luling, it was the Deputy Chief's job. And that department only had 15 officers. In smaller departments, it does fall on the Chief and may not be as non-political as I had mentioned (after all, he hired them and works with them). But short of absolute corruption in the agency (and it has happened unfortunately), no cop likes a thief in uniform.

Let me pipe up with the one thing everyone has missed so far. If you think HPD officers did something wrong, you will probably get the best response by contacting the HPD Internal Affairs department. They may call it something like Office of Professional Standards or Professional Responsibility or something else like that, but the cops will still call it IA.

The Sheriff and DPS may take the report but would normally just turn it over to HPD anyway since they are the department with primary jurisdiction. Also, when it involves a complaint about the actions of officers, the departments will generally all the other agency's IA and let them investigate it themselves. This is considered professional courtesy amongst the agencies.

And the IA officers will investigate. They have very little use for cops who steal. IA can be fair in some cases, biased in favor of the cops in some cases, and biased against the cops in some cases. I have never seen a case of IA trying to cover up theft by cops (brutality and rudeness are another matter). If there is a report and it doesn't mention the guns, the officers might be allowed to amend it and then will face suspension, if they can justify why they did what they did. But the guns had better have been placed in the property room for them to have any hope. I think IA would agree with me that if the guns were placed in the property room, then the cops were not stealing them, though they may not have done things correctly. But if the guns were not placed in the property room, I see theft charges in someone's future. There can be no excuse for not placing the guns in the property room.

And at the same time, the IA guys will be able to tell you what you have to do to get the guns back. They can explain HPD's procedures if the guns are in the property room. And they can tell you what you will go through if the guns are not there.

So, I recommend HPD IA over the other alternatives. And I hope things work out easily for you on this.