TexasCHLforum.com

EEllis wrote:

SewTexas wrote:
I was trying to point out the ridiculousness of the entire thing, those officers KNEW they couldn't arrest the kid! they left without him, and only the mom, she had to get someone else to spend the night at the house with him...and you know what??? I honestly thought until this conversation....that an officer had to bring the arrest warrant with him. And I probably would have been arrested just like the momma.

I don't think that the officer did know. Look there was obviously PC and rape of a 5yo is a big charge that you don't want to screw up. It's hard to see the cop going there and saying they had papers when they didn't. Maybe the DA said "I'll take this to the Judge and it should be ready when you get there" and the Cop failed to double check. Much more likely and while may or may not be against policy if the officer believed the order was good then he didn't break the law.

LEO's put yourself in her position just a minute, God forbid...your son has been accused of something, someone has told her they are calling the cops on him, you know that much. You maybe blame yourself, you probably don't believe any of it. You just know you've got to protect him now and make sure everything happens like it should.

Then she should of been calling a lawyer or the DA not getting herself arrested

It doesn't matter one wit that she can't be prosecuted...she's got an arrest on her record! You know as well as I do that is a question on a background check, it will impact her getting a job, weather she wants to work with children or as a checker at Walmart. That cop blew it. My question would be, it's a small town, does he know the accuser, or does he have a problem with "innocent until proven guilty"?

No it won't. It wasn't a valid arrest and shouldn't be on any record and won't make any difference to anyone.

EEllis wrote:

SewTexas wrote:
so in other words....

the LEO arrested Mom for asking for a warrant, that wasn't ready and apparently wouldn't be ready because he was going in under the Family Code so that was something else entirely, and really didn't need "LEO" exactly anyway? have I got that right?

Oh, and keep in mind, the whole "rape charge" thing was mentioned in ONE comment....let's not ruin the kid based on that, he might have done something wrong, but who knows what exactly. I've seen men have their reputation ruined based on less.

Huh? What question are you trying to ask or do you just want to try and make it as confusing as possible? It really doesn't seem that complicated. Adults get warrants juvs get directives to apprehend. Warrants normally come from criminal court and directive to apprehend from family court. Both have to signed by a judge and have an affidavit swearing to the probable cause that exists for detaining the individual. Obviously at some point paperwork on the kid was sent to the court and the officer must have thought a directive to apprehend was approved. Why I don't know. Maybe someone told him incorrectly, maybe he just didn't check, perhaps the judge went home early, who knows. So an officer went out to arrest the defendant, a 11yo boy, on a very serious charge . By the way this town only has 10 ft officers. On going to the defendants house the mother, who had known that the police were coming for her boy and why they were doing so, refused to cooperate with the officer, demanding to see the "arrest warrant" before she would give custody of the defendant to the officer. We have no idea how long or what efforts the officer made to try and make the women understand the situation but the woman was stopping and interfering with an arrest and demanding something the officers are not required to provide. She wasn't asking she was stating that she would only comply with the law after she saw a warrant. You don't get to do that. Now someone screwed up big time. I don't know where the blame belongs. The police officer, someone else in the PD, The court, the clerk, the ADA, but there certainly was a screw up. There wasn't a signed order at the time the officer first went to arrest the defendant. Because of that the mother gets a break. She can't be prosecuted for her actions. The order was signed the next day and her kid was then arrested.


As an aside the court can appoint or assign persons other that law enforcement to execute warrants and directives to apprehend it they decide to do so but I see no evidence of that occurring in this case.

EEllis wrote:I never snapped to the fact that the kid would be arrested under the family code not criminal. Let's see what the FC says.

52.02(b). A person taking a child into custody shall promptly give notice of his action and a
statement of the reason for taking the child into custody, to:
(1) the child's parent, guardian, or custodian; and
(2) the office or official designated by the juvenile court

Seems consistent.
They have to say why but don't have to show anything.