Get back on topic for this subject.talltex wrote:Approximately 75 of Mr. Waller's neighbors held a candlelight vigil at his house this week on the anniversary of his wrongful death. According to the WFAA reporter on the scene, most of his neighbors said they believe the officers involved lied, in their sworn statements, about what really happened to protect themselves, and since they were the only witnesses, they avoided any criminal charges. The FWPD's lack of transparency in the handling of the investigation and the long delay in releasing their findings just further erodes the public's faith and trust in the Police Department.baseballguy2001 wrote:Seems like everybody has calmed a bit ... Does anyone know if internal investigations are ever made public? We had to wait 9 months, and after a grand jury, to hear what the Police found during the Waller case in FTW. Obviously this incident isn't as serious, but the investigation may never be made public. But, is anyone optimistic that we'll know what, if anything, happened here? I don't think we'll find out. The less the public knows, especially in an example like this, the better. That's Government 101.
Search found 6 matches
Return to “Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun”
- Fri May 30, 2014 8:06 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
- Replies: 96
- Views: 16402
Re: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
- Wed May 28, 2014 12:48 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
- Replies: 96
- Views: 16402
Re: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
I say there are three sides to this story; hers, the officer's and the truth. She says she didn't, he says she did, and somewhere in between is the truth. As already stated, if she violated a law, arrest her for the charge and take her gun, but the officer confiscated her gun and didn't charge her with anything, which is totally against the law.EEllis wrote:So you don't think parking behind someone in such a way as to keep them from leaving is the equivalent to blocking them in? Or is it that you don't believe that is what she did? Sure I'm just going off a news story but I don't believe the people would of sat there and waited just because she asked. Reread the statute. "Restrain" means to restrict a person's movements without consent, so as to interfere substantially with the person's liberty, by moving the person from one place to another or by confining the person." Forcing someone to abandon their property to be able to have freedom of movement seems to fit in that definition. Mind you it would be severe overcharging in this case and I don't know that any court would convict but I see no reason it couldn't be charged. Mind you I don't know the case law but the definition seems more than close enough. There is also the fact that there are other charges that also could of been placed on her. Unlawful restraint was just one. Obstructing a highway or other passageway PC 42.03 would also fit and I have no doubt there are more. What allows her to seize and hold someone elses property? If you were walking out a store and the security purposely parked behind you to prevent you from leaving how would you be feeling? Because it's just your car so your free to go.Keith B wrote: That's not her story. She stated she pulled in behind them. Third party, the paper said the officer stated she blocked them in. And, Unlawful Restraint does not constitute movement in a vehicle. It is against the individual person. If she didn't physically restrain them or hold them at gunpoint, then IMO no crime was committed. No matter, she had to have been arrested or he legally should have given her gun back. End of story.
- Wed May 28, 2014 8:50 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
- Replies: 96
- Views: 16402
Re: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
That's not her story. She stated she pulled in behind them. Third party, the paper said the officer stated she blocked them in. And, Unlawful Restraint does not constitute movement in a vehicle. It is against the individual person. If she didn't physically restrain them or hold them at gunpoint, then IMO no crime was committed. No matter, she had to have been arrested or he legally should have given her gun back. End of story.EEllis wrote:They wanted to leave and she wouldn't allow them to do so because she wanted the cops to get there before allowing them to leave. What gives her the right to do so? Why is this even a question. You walk out a store and someone decides to "park"behind you to prevent you from leaving?Keith B wrote:What crime did she commit? She didn't state she blocked them in, just parked behind them. The officer supposedly said she 'attempted' to block them'EEllis wrote:By her own admission she committed a crime. What a court would do is figure out exactly what crime it was and if she needed punishment but it is illegal to do what she did.jmra wrote: The woman committed a crime? I didn't realize you were the judge and jury in this case.
- Tue May 27, 2014 6:19 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
- Replies: 96
- Views: 16402
Re: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
What crime did she commit? She didn't state she blocked them in, just parked behind them. The officer supposedly said she 'attempted' to block them'EEllis wrote:By her own admission she committed a crime. What a court would do is figure out exactly what crime it was and if she needed punishment but it is illegal to do what she did.jmra wrote: The woman committed a crime? I didn't realize you were the judge and jury in this case.
- Tue May 27, 2014 6:17 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
- Replies: 96
- Views: 16402
Re: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
Theft or illegal seizure of property. If she was arrested, the officer had the right to seize the handgun. However, since she was not arrested he had no legal right to retain her property after she was released. No different than saying 'I am gonna take your purse because you are manic and might hit someone with it.'cb1000rider wrote:Based on the facts we have now, what does she sue for? The PD removing her personal property w/o cause? What's that actually worth? You'll come out of pocket on that attorney.Keith B wrote:This is not going to end well for the officer or the city. I smell a good case law suit coming up.
Look at it from the other way. Had the PD not disarmed her and she shot someone later because she was emotional and aggravated, what's that worth?
I agree with you - no cause that I see to take the weapon away... However, I don't think this is going to be a high value civil case.
- Fri May 23, 2014 2:19 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
- Replies: 96
- Views: 16402
Re: Arlington Tx Officer seizes CHL holders gun
This is not going to end well for the officer or the city. I smell a good case law suit coming up.