SWAT team terrorizes family whos 11yr son fell at school and didn't go to a hospital

This is a discussion on SWAT team terrorizes family whos 11yr son fell at school and didn't go to a hospital within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; I won't eat crow but my initial impression was wrong. The story is legitimate and still unbelievable. I guess the New Castle SWAT team doesn't ...

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 100

Thread: SWAT team terrorizes family whos 11yr son fell at school and didn't go to a hospital

  1. #31
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    I won't eat crow but my initial impression was wrong. The story is legitimate and still unbelievable.

    I guess the New Castle SWAT team doesn't get much business and this was an opportunity to put their practice into a real situation.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array Arisin Wind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    450
    The actions the magistrate and police took are just so wrong. How can so many people be involved in this and not see how wrong it was? I bet these people even took some kind of oath to support and defend either the state or federal constitution, yet they trampled all over these people's rights and freedoms. Shades of Nazi Germany and the USSR.

  4. #33
    Senior Member Array flagflyfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks, Alaska
    Posts
    993
    I forwarded the original links to Bill O'Rielly and to Rush Limbaugh's website. We'll see what happens, This kind of thing needs to be brought to the forefront of the American people's minds
    "These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier
    and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the
    service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the
    love and thanks of man and woman."

    -- Thomas Paine (The American Crisis, No. 1, 19 December 1776)

  5. #34
    Senior Member Array rabywk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Louis Metro Area
    Posts
    675
    I'm not a big believer in lawsuits, but think this is a perfect one. It looks like they will be moving out of the mobile home park and moving up to the "East Side"
    NRA Rifle Coach
    NRA Pistol Instructor
    NRA Personal Protection In the Home Instructor

    --- Some of the friendliest people I have ever talked to are gun owners and shooters and according to the gun activists we are the mass murders and felons of the nation???

  6. #35
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,709
    Bad, bad play by the Sheriff - very poorly handled. However, let's play Devil's Advocate for a minute...

    A couple of points:

    Here is a quote from the father -
    "Who in the world puts a stipulation on how adequate a person is to care for an injury?" Shiflett asked.
    Well, the obvious answer is THE LAW. There are laws against practicing medicine without a license; you must have valid certification to work as an EMT/paramedic, and so on... Does this guy not know this? If anyone is advocating the free practice of medicine by anyone, fine, that's your opinion, but it certainly isn't the law.

    Let's look at it from the LEO's perspective. You have a Vietnam vet with 10 kids living in a trailer (doesn't mean anything in and of itself, but let's call a spade a spade - this is a higher 'threat indicator' then a professional couple with 2.4 kids living in a four bedroom ranch house with a white picket fence...) He has stated (to the best of your knowledge - you have to believe your paramedics when they tell you something) that the police better "bring an army" if they plan on serving the court order. He has refused to abide by the court order when two deputies tried to enforce it with less drastic means. He has made 'threats' in the past. There is a child in possible danger. These are a lot of red flags if you only know what you have been told by the paramedic, the social workers, and the sheriff...

    Look, I'm not defending this action - it was heavy handed at best and moronic at worst. But we are only looking at this from one perspective, with the benefit of hindsight. In the case of a self-defense shooting, we all expect to be judged based only on what we knew and could reasonably surmise AT THE TIME of the shooting; we are not to be judged with the cool calm of hindsight. Perhaps we should extend that same courtesy to others...
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,992
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    There are laws against practicing medicine without a license; you must have valid certification to work as an EMT/paramedic, and so on... Does this guy not know this?
    Comforting and tending to one's only family members in one's own home constitutes "practicing medicine"? Since when?

    Best hide the Bactine and hydrogen peroxide, then, lest the Authorities catch wind of it. I used the toenail clippers this morning. Is that a misdemeanor or felony? You never know about those sharp and pointy things ...

    I have a hard time seeing it from any perspective that justifies it, and I've been trying.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  8. #37
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,709
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    Comforting and tending to one's only family members in one's own home constitutes "practicing medicine"? Since when?
    That's not what the guy said. They guy said "Who in the world puts a stipulation on how adequate a person is to care for an injury?" and the answer is the law. He didn't specify a level of injury or level of stipulation - he stated that he doesn't believe in the ability of anyone ('who in the world') to regulate a standard for any medical care ('puts a stipulation on how adequate a person is to care for an injury').

    I'm not trying to justify it - I think it was a bad play. But, again, if you look at if from the facts known to the officers at the time, it becomes less outrageous.
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  9. #38
    Senior Member Array rabywk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Louis Metro Area
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    That's not what the guy said. They guy said "Who in the world puts a stipulation on how adequate a person is to care for an injury?" and the answer is the law. He didn't specify a level of injury or level of stipulation - he stated that he doesn't believe in the ability of anyone ('who in the world') to regulate a standard for any medical care ('puts a stipulation on how adequate a person is to care for an injury').

    I'm not trying to justify it - I think it was a bad play. But, again, if you look at if from the facts known to the officers at the time, it becomes less outrageous.
    OK, court order to take child in for treatment, overstepping the bounds, but could see a nanny state doing it.

    A no knock warrant for this is completely unacceptable and a violation of rights.
    NRA Rifle Coach
    NRA Pistol Instructor
    NRA Personal Protection In the Home Instructor

    --- Some of the friendliest people I have ever talked to are gun owners and shooters and according to the gun activists we are the mass murders and felons of the nation???

  10. #39
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,709
    Quote Originally Posted by rabywk View Post
    OK, court order to take child in for treatment, overstepping the bounds, but could see a nanny state doing it.

    A no knock warrant for this is completely unacceptable and a violation of rights.
    Why? (I'm not saying I disagree, but what's the reasoning behind the conclusion?) Let's lay it out bare, minus any extra information:

    1) The court ordered that an injured child be seen by a credentialed medical professional out of legitimate concern (expressed by a paramedic and social workers) for the safety and well being of the child.

    2) Deputies tried to enforce the court order. They were rebuffed, and the child remained untreated.

    3) During the course of the events, the homeowner stated that the police had better "bring an army" if they intended to enforce the court order.

    4) The homeowner has a history of threatening behavior.

    The police are legally mandated to enforce the court order. They are faced with a subject who has explicitly expressed his intent to resist, and has in fact resisted lesser means. There are up to 8 adults (mom, dad, six grown kids) in the house, and 4 minor children. The father is a combat veteran. While all of this is happening, the child remains untreated and his condition is unknown.

    I still think that it was the wrong tactic to take at the time, but if you look at it devoid of the emotions involved and the information you find out AFTER the fact (the child wasn't badly injured, etc.) you can at least appreciate that there was reason to do something more than just send over two more deputies...
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  11. #40
    Member Array Arisin Wind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    450
    I'm at a loss here. Here's what was report earlier in the thread.

    The child was seen by paramedics and found to have no significant impairment. They wanted him taken to a hospital for further observation. This was refused by the parents.

    A social worker saw the child the next day at the families home and there is no report of any issues.

    The sheriff said the decision to use SWAT team force was justified because the father was a "self-proclaimed constitutionalist" and had made threats and "comments" over the years. Yet the sheriff could not provide any evidence of the father involved with illegal activity. However the sheriff did say the father was rude and confrontational to the paramedics.

    So based on the above:

    1. No one found anything wrong with the child when he was examined by the paramedics and social worker.

    2. The sheriff can't give an instance of the father involved in illegal activity.

    3. When the child was finally examined by a doctor nothing wrong was found.

    4. At least 24 hours passed from the incident to when the SWAT went in.

    5. The sheriff labels the father "a "self-proclaimed constitutionalist" and had made threats and "comments" over the years."

    So if you believe in the constitution and stand up for your rights, the judge will order the sheriff to enforce the state's will and the sheriff will use a SWAT team to overpower you.

    This folks, is why the founding fathers wrote the second amendment.

  12. #41
    Member Array Arisin Wind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    450
    "The sheriff said the decision to use SWAT team force was justified because the father was a "self-proclaimed constitutionalist" and had made threats and "comments" over the years."


    Where do I go to be accredited as a "constitutionalist" so I'm not self proclaimed? Does my taking my enlistment and commissioning oaths count?

  13. #42
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Arisin Wind View Post
    (sic)

    This folks, is why the founding fathers wrote the second amendment.
    I couldn't agree more. I'm infuriated to say the least.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  14. #43
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,709
    Arisin Wind - good points, but your first one is incorrect. The child was reported to have injuries by the social workers. From the cbs4 report: "Caseworkers who visited the family Friday reported seeing injuries that including a "huge hematoma" and a sluggish pupil." Note that these are not the only injuries, they are just "including" (although I think the author meant 'included'). They were denied the ability (as was the paramedic) to perform a thourough examination.

    From the Post Independent article: "Someone - possibly a neighbor - called paramedics. Shiflett said paramedics looked at Jon after coming through an open front door uninvited. Shiflett told them he didn't want them to treat Jon and asked them to leave." So, here the paramedics are prevented from doing a thourough examination, much less provide treatment, and are ejected from the house. Had the father allowed the paramedics to perform a basic eval at the scene, this whole thing most likely would never have happened.

    Again (and again), not justifying the tactics, but let's all keep an open mind.

    I also hate the fact that the sheriff used "self-proclaimed constitutionalist" as a pejorative, but would any opinions here be different had those specific words been omitted? Are we focussing on that too much, and on the actual facts too little?
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  15. #44
    Member Array Tye_Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    233
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    Why? (I'm not saying I disagree, but what's the reasoning behind the conclusion?) Let's lay it out bare, minus any extra information:

    1) The court ordered that an injured child be seen by a credentialed medical professional out of legitimate concern (expressed by a paramedic and social workers) for the safety and well being of the child.
    Opfor- I think a no-knock warrant is ridiculous for most things! I would say, the burden of justification should be on the pro-no-knock side of this argument. In my opinion, the reason we have these situations is because we have SWAT teams out there that get all this training and nowhere to use it. Leadership starts to feel like they need to justify the training so they use the SWAT team to do things that SWAT has no business doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    2) Deputies tried to enforce the court order. They were rebuffed, and the child remained untreated.
    This is where I lost it. How on earth were they "rebuffed"? How do you "rebuff" 2 deputies at your house with a warrant? Perhaps this is one reason crimes still happen, the officers keep trying to arrest the criminals and are told "nope, not going with you" and they just leave feeling "rebuffed"!


    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    4) The homeowner has a history of threatening behavior.
    I re-read all the links posted here and I found nothing that said he has a history of threatening behavior. Please back this up with a link. Maybe he has a criminal past that I did not see, but all I saw was a statement that he was a "known constitutionalist". If that means a history of threatening behavior, then there are quite a few people on this board that are in trouble!
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    The police are legally mandated to enforce the court order. They are faced with a subject who has explicitly expressed his intent to resist, and has in fact resisted lesser means. There are up to 8 adults (mom, dad, six grown kids) in the house, and 4 minor children. The father is a combat veteran. While all of this is happening, the child remains untreated and his condition is unknown.
    Only 6 of the 10 children still live at home, so that is a total of 8 in the house, 4 of them minor children. However, even if all 10 of the kids were at home, doesn't that make this a worse scenario for a no-knock warrant? The more people in the home, the more likely someone will get hurt.
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    I still think that it was the wrong tactic to take at the time, but if you look at it devoid of the emotions involved and the information you find out AFTER the fact (the child wasn't badly injured, etc.) you can at least appreciate that there was reason to do something more than just send over two more deputies...
    I agree that sending over two more deputies may not have helped, but maybe it would have. Maybe the next two would have known how to serve a warrant!

    There is a lot about this situation that I don't understand. Paramedics illegally entered the house and demand to treat this kid. Legally, I can refuse medical care if I'm in an accident. I understand we want to protect the kids from all those idiot parents, it takes a village and all, but this paramedic over-stepped his bounds. The dad grudgingly allows them to look at his son then kicks them out of his house. Then social workers come to the house and look at the child. The dad again grudgingly allows them to look at his child and then tells them to leave as well. These 2 social workers provide false testimony (blown pupil, etc.) to the court and get a court order. Now 2 deputies come to the house and demand the child. I don't know what happened at this point but if I was the dad, I would be pissed. This is the third set of people to come tell me how to take care of my kid. But again, how did he get rid of them? This is the first group that had a LEGAL right to enter his house but don't? WHAT?

    Now, I'm going to create a scenario that might justify the rest of the events. Here goes: The 2 deputies arrive at the house with a warrant. The dad answers the door and tells them no. They insist and proceed to enter the house (since they have a warrant). He unexpectedly pulls a gun on them and "gets the drop" on 'em. They manage to escape with their lives and call for backup. Backup arrives, they surround the house and they attempt to negotiate his surrender. SWAT is called, and they go in with flashbangs and everything. Father and mother are arrested, kids go to protective custody and the shows over... Except some right wing wacko newspaper picks up the story and a big conspiracy unfolds that prevents the real story from being reported.

    Barring that, I don't see how we got here with the dad walking free.

    I think I'm going to send a letter to the dad to get tips on how to "rebuff" 2 deputies enforcing a court order. This might be handy to know if I ever get pulled over for speeding or something.

  16. #45
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,918
    Let's not go crazy here, using a hematoma as justification for their actions...

    he·ma·to·ma (hē'mə-tō'mə) Pronunciation Key
    n. pl. he·ma·to·mas or he·ma·to·ma·ta (-mə-tə)
    A localized swelling filled with blood resulting from a break in a blood vessel.

    In other words: A Bruise

    Now... the sluggish pupil is concerning, but accompanied by no other real issues... I don't think I'd go to the Doctor myself, I might with my kid but that's because I'm overly protective, paranoid and a first time parent.
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. SWAT Team Members Kid Gets School Suspension For Crayon Drawing
    By QKShooter in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 9th, 2010, 10:51 PM
  2. 84 year old vs. SWAT team
    By mr.stuart in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 25th, 2010, 11:28 AM
  3. Ny shooting and the swat team
    By zachgry in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: April 7th, 2009, 12:23 PM
  4. VIDEO: SWAT TEAM UNLOADS on CAR
    By Rob99VMI04 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: July 22nd, 2008, 02:19 PM
  5. SWAT Team (Maybe some LEO's can help)
    By elrey718 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: September 16th, 2006, 07:09 PM

Search tags for this page

boy terrorizes family
,

our government terrorizes a florida nurse with a swat team

Click on a term to search for related topics.