Mountain growing dark down here.

Grace, I think he was at the kids arraignment.

He had one pre-trial hearing, where he was offered a plea deal which he refused. The Judge bound him over for a another pre-trial.

I don't know which forms you are asking about. The charges are theft, resisting and illegal consumption. No alcohol test or field sobriety test were run.

the first posting says "I", the second one says "he". father, son--it doesn't matter which--the answer is the same. Also, the first posting "I" says "I dont have a home", the second one says it is for his son---implying he has a place to go to live--with his father. Not that it matters in the least. Just saying.

If the trial hasn't happened yet, contact the PD for assistance. Sit there until someone sees you , if you must.

You/ He were going to SIT in a LAWN chair at 2 am in a parking space to play a prank because the gal was parking in YOUR space? Young kids out in the middle of the night doing virtually ANYTHING is cause for note by the police--and rightfully so. Doesn't mean you did anything wrong--just means that alone is probable cause.

Probable cause doesn't mean innocence or guilt. There was probable cause to innitate, investigate and to question and detain the subject. Crouching down in the dark by a wall IS PROBABLE cause. Also, the fact that he RAN IS probable cause. This doesn't mean he is guilty, it means the officers had probable cause to proceed to investigate, question, and detain.

Now---the supposition that he ran because it was late and night and it was a "bad" area so to speak is a prosecutors delight. If that is the premise, the following questions come to mind.

1. Why was he THERE crouched down in the dark beside a fence in an admittedly bad or poorly lit area? He wasn't walking home through a seedy neighborhood after getting off from work late--he was CROUCHED DOWN ( i.e. hiding) in a dark area. That is suspicious --and doesn't support the "he was scared of bad people" so he ran premise.

2. Also, what "bad guys" shine their light in your eyes and ask WHAT ARE YOU DOING? Also, his reply is telling, too. He replies, "What are YOU doing?" HE ADMITS HE LAUGHED----Hardly the response of a frightened young man who thought he had come upon nefarious strangers.

I am not saying the case has merit----I am simply stating that the police DID have probable cause to act as they did. Probable cause is based on reasonableness--was it reasonable to feel that perhaps something might be amiss when a young person is crouched down beside a wall at 2 am? I believe so. If there were no probable cause, he could sue under Section 1983 for wrongful arrest. But, the scenario that night leads one to reasonably believe something possibly COULD be going on that was illegal--and that is all an officer needs to proceed.

Obviously an attorney can challenge the legitimacy of the charges, the alcohol with no test being given, etc. But that doesn't change the probable cause issue, because clearly there was a lot of probable cause.

I won't argue the merits of the case, whether he should have been charged, if the charges are valid, yada yada. I am only pointing out that to state there is no probable cause is incorrect. There may not be enough EVIDENCE for a conviction, but there was a lot of probable cause to innitiate those events that night. DOESNT mean guilt, just means enough reason , or cause for the police to investigate, question and detain. REASONABLE SUSPICION. Was it reasonable to assume someone crouched in the dark at 2 am might be worth looking into? The answer is, obviously yes. Reasonable suspicion doesn't determine guilt or innocence. It only establishes a venue for investigation and detainment. Something as simple as a tail light out can establish probable cause. Probable cause is broad and very subjective.

Thank you Grace for the time that you spent posting information to me. It is very appreciated.
IMO and I am not in law, that is why I wanted some help, I cannot believe that the Prosecutor has enough to convict. I have told my son to request a jury trial. I find it very hard to believe that the state is so backed up in cases that they want to clog the system with this kind of BS. They do so we will move forward with this. It is very obvious that no Malice was intended.

I believe they did have probable cause to question him, but once it was established what happened and that no malice was intended it should have been dropped IMOO! The owners of the lawn chair did not want to press charges, they said nothing was taken and they knew the story of the parking place. When my son heard some one speaking initially he may have thought it was one of his friends and realizing it was a stranger my have ran. I don't know what he was thinking, but he did inform me he would not intentionally run from Officers of the Law and I believe him.

I don't know what my son was thinking, but I did ask him if it ever entered his mind that he was doing something that would result in his arrest. His response was no, it was a prank meant to make for laughs.

I have considered myself to be an upstanding citizen all of my life, well since I became an adult, many years ago. I have served my country and I have raised my child to be mannerly, responsible and to do the right things. He has been a very good son, and I am very proud of him. I would gladly anytime take a stand for him, unfortunately my home is in the hands of realators, I am moving out of state, most of our household items have already been shipped, so my son has no place to live. He has lost his job with the offer of another with a promotion but cannot hold the position until this is cleared up. In the mean time he gets further and further in debt and more and more piling on him.


Once again thank you for explaining the other side of the coin to me.

I do understand your point about no malice intended. The law recognizes crimes with no malice intended---strict liability crimes, such as speeding. If you are mindlessly heading home from work and don't realize it and your speedometer is a dozen miles over the posted MPH, are you breaking the law? yes. did you mean to? No, probably not. But it is still a crime.

I am not saying he committed a crime---just pointing out it is possible to commit a crime without evil intent.

Also, the two things that worry me--the lawn chair thing---he was trying to prove a point about her taking his parking space at 2 am? She was asleep at 2 am--that doesn't really make sense. And, it isn't reasonable to assume that having a bright light shone in your eyes at 2 am and having someone ask what you are doing wouldn't tell you automatically it was a cop. If you weren't doing anything wrong, then answer. I am sitting in a lawn chair in my parking space--why do you ask? He ran because he knows COPS have bright lights and COPS investigate things like this at 2am. Your sons position has merit--to assert these two things I have mentioned detracts from the legitimacy of his other claims. Don't muddy the water by insulting a jury by trying to convince them a guy was in his OWN neighborhood, and it was such a bad neighborhood that he was scared---then why sit in a lawn chair outside at 2 am? Or crouch by a fence? See my point? His position has merit--don't cloud it by things that sound, to the careful observer, almost silly to believe. Focus on the strong points of his case----no alcohol testing done--that sort of thing.

I appreciate, too, your fond opinions of your son. Unfortunately, though, police officers don't always have that perspective in their line of work.

If what you are saying is true, the case against your son is largely circumstantial. And I think a jury trial is a good idea, too.

I know of a situation where a friend wrote a check for her rent, and the landlord held it for quite a while and in the meantime, my friend changed banks, closed the account. When the check didn't go through, landlord called her, she went to his home, gave him a certified check for the payment ( plus bank fees ) and he gave her a signed receipt for the money. However, after she left, he took the check to the police and tried to prosecute her for writing a bad check. She was arrested, even though she produced the receipt with the guys name on it---and at trial, the judge looked at the receipt, compared it to the landlords drivers license receipt ( same signature) and threw the case out completely and scolded the landlord for his deceit.

My point is---some people are just like that. Vindictive. I am not saying the police are, but the point is when it goes to trial, it will be evident. This gals record was cleared--not just "not guilty", but completely cleared, but the aggravation, embarrassment and inconvenience was still there. I am afraid your son will have to struggle through this, and will, hopefully be exonerated and will be better for having gone through this. I know he appreciates your support.

My son had guest at his apartment. They are young this is when the socialize. The girl lived next door and she had been there earlier and was still awake entertaining friends of her own. This is a campus town. She just didn't put the name to the face when asked. They did not take my son when they interviewed. So it was not clear who my son was until after I bailed him out approx. 30 minutes later.

Thank you I do understand what you are saying and I am not trying to argue, I hope you don't take it as that. I am trying to set the enviroment of what was happening at the time and what I have read in the reports. Yes I think my son has done a lot of growing, he is still young and immature I would like to see him pick himself up, brush himself off and have a wonderful life.

I cannot afford college for him, he did have some money saved as he wanted to take some class's this year. He has been employed by Delta since he graduated HS, and has since lost that job. He cannot get back into what he loves until this is cleared up. He has used his own savings from the job to help himself survive the past two months, but now he is broke.

I certainly understand your postings about how the charges aren't legitimate. I don't have any opinion in that regard because I cannot read the reports, etc. I believe your statements and if you are accurate, the case should be dismissed. The only thing I was commenting on was the probable cause, and you stated you understand why they acted as they did. BUT just because they had probable cause to arrest DOESNT mean he is guilty.

Good luck. And--it won't hurt your son to work his way through college A lot of parents don't pay for their children's college. My parents did---and unfortunately, I didn't appreciate it nearly as much as I did when I had to pay the bill for my higher education. I am sure this speed bump in the road will make your son a better person when it is all said and done.

Thank you Grace and others, I will update the case after the next court hearing. I hope his public defender will take the time to talk with him and go through the photo's and other information we have on this case. I hope she will have this dismissed.

I have a feeling this is going to stretched out as long as the law allows, I hope not! I hope I am wrong. I would like to see him get back to work and on his feet. The proof will be in the pudding, I guess.

Thanks Again.
VE