TexasCHLforum.com

chasfm11 wrote:We are, perhaps, in the wrong part of this forum to have this branch of the discussion.

This thread deals with valid 30.06 postings, one specific arrest and it's outcome.

The DA did not prosecute. See this thread for an update viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12754&hilit=bedford&start=105" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NcongruNt wrote:Perhaps I missed it in all the discussion, but I couldn't find it...

Do we know what happened with this, and if this woman was given proper 30.06 notice in writing by her employer as was stated? Is she still being charged?

There hasn't been any news in the media that I can find. The only thing I have read is what is in this forum.

txinvestigator wrote:

WildBill wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:No

Please explain.

Cop makes a contact and ends up arresting for burglary.
He writes, "the two men were crouching by the door. The door had fresh tool marks on it and subject 1 had a crow bar in his hand". Those are facts.
If he simply wrote, " Two suspicious men were trying to break into the building" ; that is a conclusion based on the facts. ;)

I understand that part. I am talking about observations. How can the officer state for a fact that the tool marks were fresh? I know from his experience he can see certain characteristics that would lead him to believe they were fresh. He can observe tool marks that appear to be fresh, but it seems that it is a conclusion, not a fact.

txinvestigator wrote:No

Please explain.

txinvestigator wrote:

KBCraig wrote: Reports contain statements, not "facts". The report might only state what you said: "She was given proper written notice."

Unless the report references a specific sign or "written communication" along with evidence that she was given such notice, we have no way of knowing if such a statement is true or not.

Reports contain facts & statements made by victims, suspects and witnesses.
A fact is something that has occurred or is known to be true. Conclusions are opinions based on facts, and should not be in reports.

I don't know what they teach LEOs about writing reports, but wouldn't it be more correct to say that reports contains "observations and statements" rather than "facts and statements"? Maybe I am nickpicking?

KD5NRH wrote:If you people keep alluding to zombies, in light of recent local events, I'm gonna start a "best ammo for aliens" thread.

KD5NRH - You're going to have to start two threads. If you did a little research you'd find out that zombies are not aliens!!! Everyone knows that shotguns are best for zombies. Now, Pod People are a whole different story.

pt145ss wrote:I was just pointing that on this particular forum it has been argued that only a jury can determine fact. Now it is said that a reports has facts, not yet seen by a jury. Search finders of fact or something like that to see what I am talking about.

If you go back and re-read the threads you will find that most of the discussion is about needing a jury to determine the "fact" of whether a person committed a crime or offense.

It can be a fact that the hospital was posted 30.06. It can be a fact that the person was arrested. It can be a fact that the police have a pistol. But only the jury will determine whether that person is guilty of a crime. Okay? Now back to the thread...

pt145ss wrote:A medical examiner can say something to the like that based on the amount of blood found at the scene that there was enough blood loss to cause death. But that does not mean that someone is dead…it is entirely possible the person is still alive. In the above scenario, a grand jury would make the decision as to whether there is enough evidence to support the claim that someone is dead.

If you have a corpse, any reasonable person would conclude that the person is dead.

pt145ss
I thought facts were not facts until a trier of facts (a jury) says it is a fact. This is at least what has been argued so vigoursly on this forum

Without a jury, it can be established as a fact that there is a dead body. Based on statements and evidence, the jury determines [concludes] if it was murder and if the accused is guilty.

txinvestigator wrote:I just emailed the Chief again asking if he could clarify 30.06 wording, or if she received verbal notice.

Is is proper for the Chief to comment on "an ongoing investigation"? That's what they always say on TV.

Seems like a pretty fair guy.

Yes he does. Fair and open.

I am curious about the notice too, i.e. whether it was a specific notice after someone knew that she was carrying, or as part of an employee orientation or other training.