Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Some more information on the Medford PD thought police

and their actions from Balko. Including
It's hard to see that happening. Joseph Bloom, a psychiatrist at Oregon Health & Science University and a specialist in civil commitment law, says the police who apprehended and detained Pyles were likely acting under the cover of Oregon law. Bloom says the police are permitted to make a determination on their own to take someone in for a mental health evaluation—there's no requirement that they first consult with a judge or mental health professional. Bloom believes this is a wise policy. "It's important to remember that this is a civil process," he says. "There's no arrest, these people aren't being taking to jail. It's not a criminal action."

So SWAT teams, guns, and handcuffs...but not a criminal action? And what if Pyles had refused to "voluntarily" surrender to the police? "Well, yes," Bloom says. "I guess then it would become a criminal matter."

And if the bastards had charged in and killed him, they'd hide behind "We were following procedure, so screw you." Maybe THAT would count as a 'criminal action'?

"The idea that Pyles turned himself in voluntarily is ridiculous," says Starrett, the gun rights activist. "There's nothing voluntary about waking up to a SWAT team outside your home, then having a police negotiator call and suggest you surrender. They had no arrest warrant. But Pyles only had one option. If he didn't come out on his own, they were going to come in to get him."
Leading, again, to "We were following procedure when we murdered used lethal force."
Even if the apprehension of Pyles was legal, the seizure of his guns wasn't. Because civil commitment laws aren't criminal in nature, they don't carry authorization for the police to search a private residence. According to Pyles, he closed the door behind him as he left his home. Because the police didn't have a search warrant, they had no right to even enter Pyles' home, much less seize guns inside that he bought and possessed legally.
Sue them. For everything; no, he probably can't sue the clowns responsible personally, but when the city gets the bill maybe they'll do something about them.

1 comment:

Bob S. said...

The Oregon state law says that police can act if they perceive an immediate threat to a person or others.

If there was an immediate threat that required them to act, why did they wait so long?

They started observing his house at 9:00 p.m. and made the decision at 3:00 a.m. -- 6 hours.

Immediate threat?

Another 2 or so hours go by while they are waiting for every police force to get people there for some live fire training.

Immediate threat?

There was enough time to get SWAT there but not a warrant? Not enough time to get a civil commitment order?

And exactly how did they determine that there was an immediate threat?

No mention of firearms being loaded and out.
No mention of threats being made, preparations being made.
No mention of yelling, screaming, phone calls.

Nothing so how did they determine immediate threat?