Interesting Police Tactic

[robertg]

I had an interesting event happen to me last spring I thought I’d share.

I live out in the country where everybody has at least 5 acres and there are no streetlights, so it’s pretty dark and quiet at night. This was a real dark and moonless night; I was having trouble sleeping and was up about 1:00 AM in the morning just watching TV without any lights on. From my living room I can see straight down my driveway to the small country road about 100 yards away. Very few cars go down to road at night so you tend to look at them when they do, it just catches your eye. I saw a car stop in front of my place, turn his lights off, and back into my driveway. Then he just stopped there, no interior lights came on. If he came up my driveway on foot I have security lights that are positioned to come on about 50 feet from my house and shop, but they didn’t come on. I’m wondering why someone would just sit in his car in my driveway, what the **** is going on?
So I figure I’m going to go on a recon mission, I can move around in the dark, I know how to avoid my own security lights. My first thought was my shotgun, but maybe a little too much weapon. Next was my 9MM with the Surefire light on it, but then if you point the light at them, you are of course pointing the weapon at them, again, maybe too aggressive. It could be just some kids making out or something, I don’t want to be the nut guy with a gun. So I took a regular flashlight and my carry weapon (Glock 36), holding it in my hand, but in my coat pocket. I sneak down to the car, I get about ten feet away from it before I notice that it’s a Clackamas County Sheriffs car, but nobody is in it. Where did he go? I waited there about 15 minutes and then I noticed a flashlight way over on my neighbor’s property, it was the officer coming back to his car.
When he got there I turned on my flashlight and asked what he was doing, cause I wasn’t that thrilled with people sneaking around in the dark out here. Turns out he went to talk to the neighbor’s kid about some bar fight he was in and didn’t just want to drive up the driveway to the house. So this is better? Seems like there are so many more things that could go wrong doing what he did. I just don’t get it. Anyway, just thought I’d let other people know that this is one of their tactics, not a very good one though.

Read More

 

[cetme]

i dont have any tolerance for trespassers,police or not .my attitude is stop the bubblgumed police from trespassing,report his actions and file a criminal tresspass in his behalf.(providing your property has a no trespassing sign)someone needs to stop the invasion of our,your privacy.its a 5000.00 fine last i heard,potential jail too.

 

[TANSTAAFL]

cetme, I think you'd best study up, yes that reading thing, on the subject of curtilage law.

I could go on in length about your terrible understanding of trespassing law simply from your ill-formed post; rather, I'll just give you a link and hope you'll take a half-hour of your day to gain a true understanding of the subject instead of that unintelligent drivel you posted above.

Curtilage: the expectation of privacy in the yard | FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin,The | Find Articles at BNET
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/08/12/08-30385.pdf

C'mon, I know posting on the Internet is easy, but you need to put some effort into it.

 

[cetme]

im just speaking of REAL experience.2 different people have merely stepped on my neighbors property,1 was chasing his dog.my neighbor has a no trespassing sign "trespassers will be prosecuted."guess what happened in a REAL courthouse...these people, 2 different times and dates went to court got fined $5000 each for tresspassing,and were lucky the judge didnt give them jail time.i was there and i saw it,it REALLY happened otherwise my friend thats my understanding of the law in this situation.if you have the EXTRA time maybe stop by the clackamas county courthouse and find out for yourself

 

[Trlsmn]

TANSTAAFL since you are calling cetme out please show me definitive curtilage formula/calculations and how robertg's driveway doesn't fall under curtilage but as an open field.

 

[toolfan]

The ROW probably extends into the driveway about a car length, so the cop car probably wasn't even on private property...

 

[cetme]

that old song too much time on my hands by styx sticks in my head!

 

[novamind]

Wow, this whole thing started off sounding like the opening to a sci-fi movie. I would expect this action from jonny law in a rural situation at nite, especialy as a solo responder.

 

[WhyteCheddar]

Strategy makes perfect sense to me. If he needed to talk to a subject that he thought might scoot out the back door if he saw a patrol car coming up the drive. Park elsewhere and walk up.
Just a thought but the Cop just might of been doing his job following up on a crime or something.
Isnt it nice that you could sorta lend a hand by letting him use that little part of your driveway for a few minutes in the middle of the night?
I would of gone to check on it too but would of been more than happy to have him there.

 

[cetme]

my only real problem with the cop on the property was the time of day it was.

 

[TANSTAAFL]

Trlsmn, read the second link about a dissenting judge's opinion on the recent ruling about attaching GPS devices to people's cars in their driveway. 9th Circuit (what 99% of this forum falls under) says most people's driveways are not. An upsetting decision I hope is changed by the Supreme court.

Curtilage doesn't have a distance or a list of included items, it's case by case. Above I say most of us because as the judge stated it, if you have secured private property with a fence, private security and CCTVs your driveway falls inside your curtilage. However, for the majority of us the driveway is fair game.

 

[SleepynSeattle]

The point of this story isn't really about the law. It's about the "laws" use of personal property to accomplish their job or goal. The police do NOT have the right to "use" personal property for official purposes. The argument is whether or not this is lawfully considered personal property. I do not believe that this SHOULD be the argument. What difference does it really make? The fact is that the LEO's tactics caused a private citizen to be concerned that his home was possibly in danger, and perhaps his personal safety, or that of his family. This is why we have laws in the first place, to ensure the safety of the citizenry.
If while supporting the law, an officer of the law simultaneously breaks the SPIRIT of the law.....than his individual actions can, and will be considered by the private citizen to be supportive of immoral, illegal, criminal, and or anti-social behaviors.
THIS type of activity, and behavior, has become the "norm" for LEO officers all across this country. The attitude which supports it, is the problem. The entire system is now supportive of this attitude, if not the individual actions. Before we, as a Country, can claim that we are still a FREE PEOPLE, we must have individual FREEDOM. The cost of individual freedom, is occasional lawlessness. Our system no longer advocates, or supports individual freedom at the cost of occasional lawlessness. Our freedom is only as important, as the individual circumstance permits for the safety of the law enforcement officers involved in the situation.
When did the safety of the general public, and ALL individuals represented by that idea......become second to that of the enforcers of the law????

A perfect example of this would be at your typical traffic stop. Why is it that when your personal vehicle (IE: personal property) is pulled over for an "accused" traffic violation, that the law enforcement officer engaged in the traffic stop, has the right to blatantly break the law by threatening your life? The officer approaches you with one hand on his weapon. If the situation were reversed, and the standard citizen were to approach a police officer, with his hand on a gun, there is a better than even chance that the police officer would "see" this action as "brandishing", and as a threat to their personal safety. The police officer would then act in their own personal interest and at LEAST draw their own weapon. This behavior is a perfect example of this attitude. Being a police officer is a dangerous job. I postulate that there is an excellent chance that the dangers involved have greatly increased over time due to the behavior's of the police, and the government which they represent.

 

[oregonshooter]

Before we, as a Country, can claim that we are still a FREE PEOPLE, we must have individual FREEDOM. The cost of individual freedom, is occasional lawlessness. Our system no longer advocates, or supports individual freedom at the cost of occasional lawlessness.

Bingo! So now you know what kind of Country you live in. See anything changing in the near future? Nope, live with it.

The way I was taught in ROLEA is that "if a UPS driver has access, it's public domain" as far as vehicle trespassing. Unless they pass a gate they are not trespassing. Ever wonder why people have gates on their road entrance but no fence? There you have it.

 

[SleepynSeattle]

Bingo! So now you know what kind of Country you live in. See anything changing in the near future? Nope, live with it.

The way I was taught in ROLEA is that "if a UPS driver has access, it's public domain" as far as vehicle trespassing. Unless they pass a gate they are not trespassing. Ever wonder why people have gates on their road entrance but no fence? There you have it.

Please define "living with it".

Gates are not necessary in that, or most other circumstances. The principle involves information, not physical barriers. If a sign is posted in a legal manor, which indicates that the property beyond is indeed private, than it is at the very least a barrier which represents a socially motivated need to refrain from entering that space without express permission. Laws which enforce such behavioral limits, are more often than not unnecessary in any society which adheres to the respects of individual rights.
That same idea, or principle, can.....and should be adhered to by officers who represent the law of the land. If they do NOT realize that they are entering private property at an intersection, than they have simply made a mistake. I however, cannot remember the last time I drove onto personal property and failed to realize that I had left a publicly maintained thoroughfare, and entered onto private land. The principle is what should protect the personal private property rights....not physical barriers, nor even posted signs should be necessary. I would also suppose that any patrol officer should certainly be familiar with the public streets of his patrol area, and that if any investigating officer is required to travel near private property, he should be accompanied by such a "normal" patrol officer. If I, as a simple, private citizen, make a mistake and break the law, I will have to pay for that mistake which has made me (in the eyes of the law) at least temporarily a "criminal". In this day and age of vast array's of communication abilities, it is a simple matter to announce one's wish to invade private properties... and receive either permission, denial, or in the case of law enforcement, a COURT ordered writ to do so. ANYTHING else is legally trespassing, and should be, in the case of law enforcement considered "criminal trespassing with intent to either kidnap......or illegally search and seize private property".


The police forces in our nation were developed to protect "the people", and the peoples "rights". They are there to enforce the laws which protect the people and their rights. They are, and should not BE....ABOVE THE LAWS which they enforce. If anything, the police should be held to a much higher standard of "lawful cooperation". Instead, the police in general, support, and enforce the interests of the STATE, and not the people.
I will not "live with it", and cohabit peacefully in a society which allows this to happen on a regular basis. I will respond with physically peaceful, and law-abiding, but ANGRY demonstrations of my personal disgust at this behavior and attitude. SCREAM IT TO THE MOUNTAINS, SO THAT THE WRONGED MAY BE RIGHTED!! SHOUT IT TO THE POLITICIANS SO THAT THEY MAY KNOW OUR OPINIONS!! Do not wait for someone to come to your door with a politically motivated opinion poll which supports a particular agenda.
Waiting, and standing in line to vote for the lessor of two evils is not the answer. ALL politicians are crooked. All politicians lie, and cheat. It is the nature of politics. Make the politicians, the people who support our rights, and legislate our communities pay attention to what "WE THE PEOPLE" want, and expect from them. Make the police forces which serve US know what is acceptable and what is not. Let them ALL know that there are consequences for failure, and that those consequences should be considered something worse than failing to be re-elected the following term of office. Failure to uphold the law, should be every bit as offensive in our society as Failure to Heed the Law. If ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it, than the idea of a public official, representative, or civil employee, who is by TRADE necessarily aware of the laws and still breaks them, should be (at least) THAT much more offensive, and punishable!!

 

[8ball]

I'm glad Robert 'covered up' - sneaking up on a police car at night carrying a shotgun or your 9mm with weapon light could have ended up very badly.

 

[dave]

I too was impressed with Roberts thoughtful judgement on weapons selection. He decided to go passive and it was the correct decision. The fact that he quickly sorted that out in his mind without over reacting and having an unneccesary incident speaks well of him. Too many times has something of this nature gone over the top by gun owners not using good judgement.

 

[nextbest]

I too was impressed with Roberts thoughtful judgement on weapons selection. He decided to go passive and it was the correct decision. The fact that he quickly sorted that out in his mind without over reacting and having an unneccesary incident speaks well of him. Too many times has something of this nature gone over the top by gun owners not using good judgement.

+1

 

[robertg]

I'm all for the police doing their job, but his tactic of walking around in the dark out here could cause a problem. Where he was parked was mostly off my property, but blocking my driveway. My point is that it was dangerous to him and me, it would have been a lot better to just take a chance of this guy running and drive up to his house.
I really don't like being freaked out in the middle of the night. My house has been robbed twice in the last 10 years (during the day) and about a month prior to this my neighbor called me late at night saying that he saw someone walk off my property onto the road as he was driving by. Don't know what the deal was with that. Also a stolen car was driven into a ditch last winter and they tried to steal my truck, all they ended up doing was to ruin my ignition switch. So you can see why I'm a little paranoid. At least this incident turned out OK, but I had time to think it thru before I did anything. I just wanted to let others know that the police do this kind of stuff.

 

[oregonshooter]

SleepynSeattle,

I agree with you on every point. What I don't agree with is your thought process that complaining is going to make a difference in their behavior. That is why you will learn to "live with it", because at the end of the day.... we are servants to our govt. not the other way around as it was intended and we "live with it" everyday in every manner of what we do.

If venting makes you feel better then by all means vent. If writing an email to .gov makes you feel better, than type away.

For me, it makes me feel worse to do something that history shows is ineffective and knowing that it is... I learn to live with it.

God, grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change;
Courage to change the things I can;
And wisdom to know the difference.

 

[oregonshooter]

robertg,

It's a common (actually mandated in some departments) tactic to NOT stop in front of a suspects house. Tactically it makes sense and 99% of the world is not going to know it even happened at 1:00AM let alone become concerned enough to go investigate with a gun, which is a dumb action IMO.

You had a layer of protection between you and the house (lights) and could survey from the house (cover) but chose to wander down to the "suspected" BG's car.... what tactical advantage did you think you were gaining? What was your plan if it was a hit on your house?