I guess persistence pays off - firearms possession being re-investigated

[its_kathie]

California

I just had a long conversation with the lieutenant of the city my ex lives in. I have been in communication with him since January. They are re-investigating. A detective is assigned. I was informed that I would get a copy of the report, and I was invited to submit a summary that will be included in the report.

The lieutenant stated that after the new investigation is completed (deadline April 9th) it will be submitted to the DA.

Folks, if the restrained party in your case shows firearms registered in his name (your right to request this information under PC 1106) after the hearing, don't give up, Question Authority, and insist on answers, reasonable answers.

Hold the restrained accountable. If you don't get answers with the PD, go to the DA, go to the court, and go to the DOJ.....he isn't allowed to have firearms here in California (98% of the time). Just go hold him accountable.

 

[speedallurement]

hope that investigation helps out, police will probably make a case, send it to The DA, and if there is enough probable cause the DA will issue a warrant for his arrest. Other wise this case may be bounced back due to not enough probable cause.

Would like to see how this one turns out.

And judges have the authority to cross out the gun ristriction. So 98 percent of people with gun restriction couse of restraining orders is quite lower, if ur talking about domestic violence restraining orders then u might be closer.

 

[its_kathie]

Hi Speed....

The judicial administration do not have the authority to cross-out the firearm regulation. What authority they have is very limited and has to meet certain defined restrictions. Namely two, and under one of those, it must meet psychological evaluation.

What would I like to see from my case - plain and simple, accountability. My ex already stretches the bounds of legalities to the extreme. I won't go into it, but look up pathological, and he's the poster-boy. My part in it...I should have seen the red-flags waving long before I truly noticed. I hope I am a better person now because of this experience. I hope the next time I encounter a red-flag, I'll pick it up and run with it.

 

[CdwJava]

And this sort of buttresses my point from the previous thread ... you brought it to the attention of law enforcement.

As things exist today, there is no mechanism for automatic notification from the court to law enforcement, and in my 16 years I recall only ONE such report coming across our desk ... though it's only in the last 6 that I have been in a position to know whether or not ANY such report came in. Prior to 2001, it's possible the agency I worked at received them I just did not hear about it.

Congratulations on the investigation, and hopefully they can get something done about it. Maybe they can shake something loose from him or get an acknowledgment of non-compliance. Which, I will venture to guess, will then result in a complaint to the DA and then the court and not a field arrest ... unless the firearms are found in his possession.

Good luck.

- Carl

 

[its_kathie]

Lt. C has been very kind to me throughout this since he took over in January. We actually went round and round over issues, not unlike I have here with the "rug". Lt. C has heard from DAs in two counties, Melissa at the DOJ, his chief, and his mayor.....hummm, he also knows I spoke about this in SF to the Governor's DV Task Force of Judicial Administration - I gave you a copy of their recommendation.

I suppose you are right about "buttresses" - if that means diligent persistence. If I can get every women who is entitled to their restrainee's firearm information to get it, and if there is a firearm listed, and if I can encourage them to be persistent, then maybe we can penetrate the system and change it. Maybe we can save lives and tell these abusers they are being watched, behave, or go to jail.

I don't care if I'm a hopeless ****-eyd optimist; I will keep on preserving. Don't get me wrong, this WHOLE experience, from the abuse to the judicial process, has been one of the hardest things, if not THE hardest thing I have ever gone through.

Lt. C wants to submit my summary in his report, and that his investigation will be completed by the 9th. He did say he is meeting with the Deputy DA next week and is going to bring up my case as an example. This is good. Oh, and he did say I can have a copy of the report too! He knows I will go over it with a fine tooth comb - but that should be okay for anyone who submits a report.

The most recent update is that my ex transfered one of the firearms to his parents in February, and the other firearm she submitted a statement the he doesn't know where it is. This draws suspicion because testimony in November shows my ex claimed only one firearm; therefore, there should be no activity of transfer after service and court appearance. BTW, is it common for police officers to have a weapon registered but cannot account for it?

You know, after a thorough job is conducted - god hopefully the DA will be reasonable in their reasoning if they reject this. It's almost like a legislative bill isn't it...constantly changing through the process and at each phase has a chance of getting dropped.

Thanks for your words of encouragement Carl.

 

[garrula lingua]

Kathie, good luck in your endeavors - domestic violence is a vicious crime ... one should feel safe in their own home with their own 'loved ones'.
I believe once a person is physically abusive, they will always be an abuser.

It truly is a heart-breaking crime at many levels.

But, in your postings, you continually refer to 'women' and 'ladies' as the victims.

If I can get every women who is entitled to their restrainee's firearm information to get it, and if there is a firearm listed, and if I can encourage them to be persistent, then maybe we can penetrate the system and change it. Maybe we can save lives and tell these abusers they are being watched, behave, or go to jail.

I have seen many male victims (who are too embarrassed to assist in prosecution) and, there are many female on female cases and male on male cases.
The male-female relationship may still be the norm, but there are many 'non-traditional' relationships out there who experience DV.
It's wrong to presume the woman is always the victim.
Woman own guns, beat up their boyfriends or girlfriends and are quite capable of being abusers.

Also, the relevant Penal Code is 11106 (in effect for more than a year), not 1106:

if the restrained party in your case shows firearms registered in his name (your right to request this information under PC 1106)

All victims of DV should be protected as much as possible - by the victim understanding, with therapy, the problem and learning how to protect his/herself (vics usually return to the abuser), by family, friends, society and by the gov.

Regarding DV, I still regard safety as the most imp consideration for the victim.

DV abusers shouldn't have access to guns, but I don't believe taking their guns away will solve the problem of DV.


I have also seen hundreds of cases of DV 'accusations' which 'bled over' into criminal court from family law court. They are simply ruses to gain custody/divorce power in FL cases.

I wish there were more follow-up by law enforcement against people who falsely report DV, but the fear of discouraging true victims prevents this from happening. Ergo, this problem includes the people who are falsely accused of DV - also victims.

Anyone dealing with DV has to realize the myriad of problems associated with DV (no one has discussed the economic dependence most victims have on their abusers); it's not as simple as taking registered guns away (an FFL license is fairly easy to get - I have five friends who are licensed ... if I were an abuser, how effective would it be to have me present a receipt from a licensed firearms dealer to whom I gave my guns).

The problem is complex and incredibly sad.

I hope courts continue to prosecute and sentence, to the full extent of the law, those guilty of DV.
Hopefully, the strained resources of law enforcement and the courts will not be further taxed (and distracted) by those who are NOT victims, but simply strident users/abusers of the system.

 

[its_kathie]

You brought up some very good points that I also agree with, but first I will address your concern regarding gender and my terminology.

My emphasis is for ANYONE who is abused. I don't care about your gender or sexual orientation. I care about YOU, and trust me, if I was arguing for you, you would get all of my passion no matter if you were a man or a woman, gay or straight. Abuse is abuse, it hurts, not only the body, but the mind too. We all have the same color blood that needs to be protected from abusive acts.

I use the term "women" regarding DV because to date the scales show that women are the largest impacted victims. As a matter of fact, white women to white men are the largest impacted. Since I consider death the final recourse, women are killed at alarming high numbers via domestic violence than any other homicide, and again, white women/white man (victim - offender). The rate is 80% of all female homicides are DV related, and of that number 63% are death by firearm. Homicide is still the lowest percentage of all indexed crimes; however, it is still the highest rated of the 10, for there is no coming back from death.

In the death factor (not other DV incidents), these numbers are the reported numbers where the perpetrator can be identified. African American and Hispanics are low in the scale compared to white women by about 75% measurement. Why? I don't know. It's not that they are being counted - it's pretty difficult to "get rid" of a dead body and go undetected by family, friends, children. So I believe the statistics for the DV homicide is pretty accurate.

As for the DV reporting numbers. I believe these are completely under reported. However, until the scale is balanced and formally recognized, I use the terminology he/she (offender-victim). I have a theory regarding both the African American and Hispanics:

AA - already culturally intimidated by police and the system (just look at the prison rate of sentencing that coming to the criminal justice system for help would be like ask the fox to guard the hen house.

Hispanics - culturally male authority and female compliance within the family unit. DV could be accepted and expected in order for the male to keep the family unit in order. Although Hispanic women do run the household, the male is the head.

Male - fear of shame and humiliation in our cultural that is testosterone city. The "manly-man".

Actually I am working right with an advocacy group for males to encourage reporting and raise statistics to reflect reality. I am also discouraging them from "female" basing while they are advocating. Many male advocacy groups are "beating down the shelter doors" of the political system and demanding their rights by attacking the females right to be protected. I discourage that tactic by trying to remind them we are in the DV arena. Coming in with swords drawn will backfire. I DO very much so encourage reporting and in the mean time private assistance. The number must be brought up. Once they are, the advocates will have a strong argument for some of the billions of distributed dollars and powers that be will have to listen. Hetro-Males already receive "some" funding, but again, increasing the reporting and court filings is the path that shows (via numbers) how the funds are disbursed.

It saddens me when someone says "it's only a piece of paper." Well that is true for the moment and the person, but that number statistically saves so many lives through political power and disbursing of funds.

PC 11106 - I don't understand what you are presenting. If I am speculating and I am wrong, just let me know:

A gun can be retrieved anywhere at any time. Like a burglar, if they want you, they are going to get you. That said, removal of firearms serves two points - defusing the "crime of passion/heat of the moment". Similar to Brady Bill and the 5 day waiting period. It also serves (in theory - if it only was applied) notice to the offender that once in court they are being watched and their actions will be accounted for. Deterrence is the #1 reduction for crime. These individuals have already presented a character to be questioned; defusing them through the judicial system of some their assumed power serves as a strong "bop" on the head. Again, in theory. More research need to be done.

Therefore, for the reasons listed above, I strongly encourage everyone to stand up, be strong, good-god protect yourself, AND contact the authorities - you have to be counted for. Remember though, going to the authorities isn't a piece of cake. One has to buckle up for that ride too. It's not surprising that the reporting rate for DV is only 1/4 of actual the victims. Imagine what it would be if in 1/4 of the hidden 3/4 were reported. Police would have to listen, we would be overwhelming the system.

As for the ones that abuse the system. I can only ride one horse. BUT, my recommendation is to do everything (legally) to expose the one who is falsely accusing. Seldom do I suggest relying on an attorney to find this out with their magic wand. Hire a private investigator, go through paperwork, contact a boss....I don't know, just do it. BUT if you have a RO on you, DON'T do it, for you will be in violation. I'm not going to suggest what you do if you have an RO because I won't condone illegal activity. If you are falsely accused and have an RO, quit whining about it and figure something out to clear yourself.

 

[CdwJava]

I suppose you are right about "buttresses" - if that means diligent persistence. If I can get every women who is entitled to their restrainee's firearm information to get it, and if there is a firearm listed, and if I can encourage them to be persistent, then maybe we can penetrate the system and change it. Maybe we can save lives and tell these abusers they are being watched, behave, or go to jail.

Watching and proving a violation are two different issues.

Oh, and he did say I can have a copy of the report too! He knows I will go over it with a fine tooth comb - but that should be okay for anyone who submits a report.

That's an exception. Generally we don't release the reports to anyone. But, there is no law preventing it, it's just a general rule that we do not do it and the CA Government Code does not require us to turn over these reports.

The defendant does not have the same opportunity to pre-review the report prior to submission and such detailed involvement by the victim could lead to allegations of a lack of neutrality on the matter. Not that they will go anywhere, but such close involvement by the complainant has been known to muddy the issues by providing a perception of bias on the part of the investigating officers.

The most recent update is that my ex transfered one of the firearms to his parents in February, and the other firearm she submitted a statement the he doesn't know where it is. This draws suspicion because testimony in November shows my ex claimed only one firearm; therefore, there should be no activity of transfer after service and court appearance.

That suspicion may not be enough for 12021(g) ... it might be enough to convince a judge to go for the 273.6 or 166(a), however. Without knowing the details, I can't say for sure. But, in many counties - like mine - it is not criminal to have a poor memory or be lacking details. Remember, the burden is on the prosecution to PROVE the violation, not on him to prove his innocence.

BTW, is it common for police officers to have a weapon registered but cannot account for it?

I wouldn't think so. But, the issue rarely comes up. However, since none of us regularly check with the DOJ to see what weapons might be registered to us, it would be impossible to say. I could have a weapon registered to me that I never purchased, and it's also possible that I have a weapon in my possession that was supposed to be registered that never was. That's why I was trying to point out that reliability of the registry - by itself - is questionable. It relies on too many participants to get the info right. However, the registry can be used to support an affidavit for a search warrant in many cases, but I doubt it could effectively prove guilt at trial.

You know, after a thorough job is conducted - god hopefully the DA will be reasonable in their reasoning if they reject this. It's almost like a legislative bill isn't it...constantly changing through the process and at each phase has a chance of getting dropped.

Yep. But no matter what the police do with it, or what they believe the truth of the matter is, their opinion and $3.65 will buy a Venti Mocha at Starbucks. The DA has to be able to go to court and PROVE guilt. So even if the DA believes the guy is violating the order, they might still not file because they lack the proof necessary to show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. No gun will generally equate to reaonable doubt.

One thing I would love to have, but the courts and the DAs guard like a virgin daughter, is a copy of the California Jury Instructions. This document changes the elements that we have to prove in ways that we cannot always comprehend, and this is what DA's often base their decisions to file on.

Thanks for your words of encouragement Carl.

ANd continued good luck.

- Carl

 

[its_kathie]

Well, if the police report is not normally distributed to the victim once it is transfered to the DA, the I consider this a compliment and recognized respect from Lt. C.

I won't be "previewing" the document before submission. I will be adding to it with my supplement. But if there is an error after submission, I will be readily able to correct it or at least rebut it with my reasoning.

CARL: Yep. But no matter what the police do with it, or what they believe the truth of the matter is, their opinion and $3.65 will buy a Venti Mocha at Starbucks.
KATHIE: Thanks for the laugh - I needed it.

I don't like this idea of "secret" jury instruction. What happened to open-court?

 

[CdwJava]

Well, if the police report is not normally distributed to the victim once it is transfered to the DA, the I consider this a compliment and recognized respect from Lt. C.

Typically, it is not. And there are some good - and not-so-good - reasons behind that practice.

I won't be "previewing" the document before submission. I will be adding to it with my supplement. But if there is an error after submission, I will be readily able to correct it or at least rebut it with my reasoning.

That's not as bad as consultation before it is submitted. Though a person's "opinion" is not evidence, and neither is the report. Any omissions or errors in the report can be cleared when/if it goes to trial as everything from the report would have to be testified to for it to have any credence.

I don't like this idea of "secret" jury instruction. What happened to open-court?

The instructions are given when the jury gets the case. However, this is not a readily available document, and many DAs use it to guide whether or not they pursue a case to trial. So, if a specific crime has elements listed in the statutes indicating that the crime consists of A. B, and C, the instructions might require the judge admonish a jury to find A, B, C and now D as well! More than once have I stomped out of the DA's office ready to throttle someone.

- Carl

 

[its_kathie]

CARL: That's not as bad as consultation before it is submitted. Though a person's "opinion" is not evidence, and neither is the report. Any omissions or errors in the report can be cleared when/if it goes to trial as everything from the report would have to be testified to for it to have any credence.
KATHIE: Give me some credit here Carl - what I rebut seldom is submitted in form of opinion or hearsay for that matter. If something is technically skewed or needs to be brought to light, the sooner this information comes forward the better it is for those who are attempting to make an informed decision. Frankly, I get very irritated if I'm spoon-fed information, and that is not a good sign for the one producing the information, that is, if the information is from the same source.

CARL: More than once have I stomped out of the DA's office ready to throttle someone.
KATHIE: What? You? Stomp? Is there a "rug" transformation happening hear?

At any rate, so the DA uses a measurement scale to rate a case? WOW, what if the case didn't meet the measurement, but the DA just had that gut feeling. Are they bound by numbers or can human instinct also apply?

 

[CdwJava]

KATHIE: Give me some credit here Carl - what I rebut seldom is submitted in form of opinion or hearsay for that matter. If something is technically skewed or needs to be brought to light, the sooner this information comes forward the better it is for those who are attempting to make an informed decision. Frankly, I get very irritated if I'm spoon-fed information, and that is not a good sign for the one producing the information, that is, if the information is from the same source.

You might be surprised how much info people give us that really is nothing more than hearsay or supposition. "I know he's guilty because he said he did this and I know he did this because of A, B, and C." We get that all the time.

KATHIE: What? You? Stomp? Is there a "rug" transformation happening hear?

I'm not married to the DA.

At any rate, so the DA uses a measurement scale to rate a case? WOW, what if the case didn't meet the measurement, but the DA just had that gut feeling. Are they bound by numbers or can human instinct also apply?

It's a matter of resources. My DA has nearly double the caseload he handles with almost the same staff and budget he had 16 years ago. He has to cherry pick big time. A "gut" feeling doesn't win a case. I live in a "red" county where they take probable cause and evidence very seriously ... to the extreme if you ask me. The DA is not going to try a case that he can't win. Unfortunately, he also doesn't file a case he can probably bluff a plea deal out of ... that's one reason why many of our DVs get dropped. Well, that and the 3/4 of the victims that recant or later claim they lied to the officer.

- Carl

 

[its_kathie]

CARL: You might be surprised how much info people give us that really is nothing more than hearsay or supposition. "I know he's guilty because he said he did this and I know he did this because of A, B, and C." We get that all the time.

KATHIE: Of this I know, and it is very frustrating. Especially when you can't even reason with them, nor tell them how stupid they are. So, in order to establish credibility, I don't even tread on those grounds. I can't name drop or wave my banner either, for that's totally unethical, and people who do that look like such asses. I just hope the person I am communicating with has an open mind - but THAT is almost too much to ask for when dealing with such authorities that think they know what's going on more than I do, and I'm just a woman.

Don't argue with me on that last statement Carl, you are not a woman, and it happens to us all the time. Although it has been easier throughout the decades, chauvinism is alive and well.

 

[CdwJava]

Garrula, she may have gotten the idea from one of my earlier posts where I wrote that the CALJIC was not a widely distributed document, and for years we (the police) have not generally been able to obtain them. She took that as meaning they were secret, when, in reality, they were just kept close to the vest and not widely distributed as would have been useful in many instances for those of us responsible for building cases would have liked. Multiple trips to the DA would have been saved had we a copy of these.

- Carl

 

[garrula lingua]

Carl, I didn't read all of the posts, just a few.

CALCRIM can be purchased at calbar (California State Bar) website - it's published by CEB (wing of state bar that is Continuing Education of the Bar).
Also, Lexis/Nexis sells them.
They're about 150-200 dollars.

They're publlished annually, and a decent Prosecutor will send her/his older volumes to the law enforcement group they recieve most of their cases from - many cops are better lawyers than some attornies.
They are useful to everyone in law enforcement, to ensure every necessary element of a crime is provable and the requisite intent can be shown.

You can still find CALJIC on E-Bay; many of us old folks still use CALJIC, even tho' CALCRIM is also there. Eventually, the Judges will probably only want CALCRIM as they are updated annually.