Page 3 of 3
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:03 pm
by Bob Landry
Ego...
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:06 pm
by gigag04
KD5NRH wrote:Keith B wrote:I believe urinating in public would fall under disorderly conduct:
Doubtful, unless he was facing the officer; "exposed" would generally require someone actually seeing the genitals, not just seeing something that implies their presence.
Most likely the only violation initially was Dallas city ordinance:
SEC. 31-18. URINATING OR DEFECATING IN PUBLIC.
(a) A person commits an offense if he urinates or defecates:
(1) in or on a public street, alley, sidewalk, yard, park, building, structure, plaza, public or utility right-of-way, or other public place; or
(2) in public view.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under this section if the person was in a restroom. (Ord. 14971)
(Now there's an odd use of defense to prosecution where an exception would be more appropriate.)
Winner. Can't get to DOC with urinating. This is usually for Mooning/Flashing is how you see it enforced.
I still don't think we know what's really going on in the story. While the media's version may say "He was peeing and the cop said stop and then pulled his gun" I would wager that there were a few dots left unconnected....
As far as the use of force continuum...you cannot draw your weapon for simple verbal non-compliance. Well I supposed you can, but you'd be violating some policy somewhere.
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:19 pm
by chartreuse
casingpoint wrote:The suspect in this case could have justifiably used deadly force in defense of himself against the out-of-uniform cop.
On the other hand, one would hope that nobody with a CHL would be carrying while drunk and urinating in public...
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:42 pm
by nitrogen
gregthehand wrote:I'm on my phone so please forgive any gramatical errors.
He wasn't drawing for the class c he was drawing because of the non compliance.
In other words, he drew his weapon because the drunk didn't respect his authority.
I am very curious what most police procedure says on matters like this. I am betting it does not allow this, nor should it.
I also wonder why an off-duty cop felt the need to interfere when nobody was being hurt. I also wonder what most dept. policy says about this.
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:05 pm
by 5thGenTexan
gregthehand wrote:I'm on my phone so please forgive any gramatical errors.
He wasn't drawing for the class c he was drawing because of the non compliance.
As to someone else commenting about someone with a CHL getting in trouble. Well a CHL holder would have no duty nor right to detain this guy since it's only a class C but a peace officer would.
Once again just because the initial contact was over a class c does not mean that a show deadly force could not be used. That's like saying that if an officer on a traffic stop sees furtive movement from a driver they can't draw down on them. When a suspect is being non compliant an officer has to do what is necessary to take control of the situation and ensure officer safety.
Oh by the way. "I didn't hear the guy say he was a cop" or excuses to that affect or incredibly over used by people who break the law and then ignore a cop.
Greg I can think of several officers that I know that would have written him for PI, and anything else they could to make his life miserable, the guy should feel lucky the officer didn't charge him with public exposure.
Taking a leak in the yard or around the front of a house is a REAL pet peeve of mine, It just so happened the idiot across the street would have 5 or 6 guys over in the front yard drinking and draining between the Holly bushes in the front of his house . I guess that's normal in his culture, but not for North Central Texas.
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:32 pm
by 5thGenTexan
nitrogen wrote:gregthehand wrote:I'm on my phone so please forgive any gramatical errors.
He wasn't drawing for the class c he was drawing because of the non compliance.
In other words, he drew his weapon because the drunk didn't respect his authority.
I am very curious what most police procedure says on matters like this. I am betting it does not allow this, nor should it.
I also wonder why an off-duty cop felt the need to interfere when nobody was being hurt. I also wonder what most dept. policy says about this.
Nitrogen - Just like with a kid you let the small stuff go where do you put your foot down when he is totally uncontrollable? Oh yeah spray painted graffiti all over your brand new $45,000 King Ranch pick-up no one was hurt... Burned down a church in the middle of nowhere no one was hurt...
Come on a lawful order from a police officer MUST be obeyed, you don't get to pick and choose which laws are ok to apply to yourself. Yep there are cops that have an ego problem BUT going only on the facts in that story I think the officer was justified. Was it his best route probably not, not doing anything would have been a worse option.
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:25 pm
by marksiwel
If the officer was in Full Uniform, I could almost see your point. But the guy was drunk and taking a Whiz, I've been that drunk and you get tunnel vision/ hearing you could have set a flare off next to me and I wouldnt have known. But I think that may be too much information.
Wait for the guy to finish (Because he's gonna finish anyway better on the wall then in your car/on you) and then do whatever.
Where was he peeing? Was it in the bushes or on a church or something? Where was this? Was the guy drunk?
Re: Dallas officer in off duty confrontation
Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:29 am
by casingpoint
one would hope that nobody with a CHL would be carrying while drunk and urinating in public...
That's a lofty thought, but there's gotta be more than one Aggie out there with a CHL...