Submitted by L-V-4-2-6 t3_11z45cr in newhampshire
L-V-4-2-6 OP t1_jdb0jk3 wrote
Reply to comment by RickyDaytonaJr in North Hampton Chief Leaves After Investigation Into Questionable Arrest by L-V-4-2-6
Still boggles my mind that they arrested her and searched her home for...drinking at home.
LacidOnex t1_jdbzqca wrote
That's not why. Imagine what kind of fucked up shit they aren't admitting to so they can protect their crew
Rough_Magician_8117 t1_jdcg4zu wrote
It seems like the officers were arresting her on the premise she admitted to having a few drinks before driving home. Which is stupid because she also said she had a few drinks once she got home so any alcohol test results are pointless because there is not a way to determine if the impairment occurred before or after she got home. The article doesn’t state what the arrest was filed as, unless I missed it. I guess the officers wanted to make extra sure to violate some rights by taking pictures of the interior of her home for some reason, not sure what the angle was with that.
TLDR the police screwed up hard all around on this one and the chief did nothing to reprimand them.
EDIT: OP clarified in comment below. I misinterpreted some language in the article.
nixstyx t1_jdcla2g wrote
There's one important lesson to be learned from all of this: The police are not your friends. They are not looking out for you. They are not protecting you. Do not talk to police. DO NOT. TALK. TO POLICE.
ThisIsNotTuna t1_jdcrhm2 wrote
I always think of this video whenever this subject comes up.
L-V-4-2-6 OP t1_jdcgy16 wrote
"Officers returned to Loud’s home to further question her. They noticed the unclean condition of the home. Loud later told officers she had not cleaned in 10 years, according to the police report.
Asked if she had been drinking, Loud said she stopped off after work and drank a few beers before coming home to watch baseball. She said she might have had some hard lemonade at home."
There's no indication, at least in this article, that she drove at all. She simply said she came home. Those sorts of technicalities are huge in courts. To your point, you're absolutely right in that alcohol and its resulting effects take time, so any testing done (especially when they came back to her house a second time) should have absolutely no standing.
Rough_Magician_8117 t1_jdchv2q wrote
Oh the “came home” is ambiguous, got it. Thanks for the insight.
thenagain11 t1_jdctpv0 wrote
I'm confused. Did they arrest her, or did they take her into protective custody? Because those aren't the same and the article doesn't clarify.
Protective custody would mean they took her in for observation overnight because they were concerned about her mental/inebriated state. The article makes it sound like the woman might have other issues - says her house was dirty and she hadn't cleaned in 10 years. I could see why officers would be concerned, but I dont know what our state laws are about hoarders and such. I do think they are legally allowed to take people overnight if they feel they are in danger to themslves or others, and there wasn't like another legal adult around to make sure she was ok. But arresting her for drinking would be some real bullshit. Hard to tell cause this article seems to be missing some info.
L-V-4-2-6 OP t1_jdcwykr wrote
They arrested her. It's stated multiple times throughout the article, and anything about protective custody isn't mentioned by anyone involved.
If protective custody was the case, wouldn't it stand to reason that the officers involved would have stated as much and provided evidence beyond a messy home to corroborate it? There's nothing there to suggest that she was a danger to herself or others. Indeed, the fact that Chief Mone abruptly announced her retirement while this is going on should also raise eyebrows.
thenagain11 t1_jdd61b6 wrote
I just looked it up. It was a PC. Seacoast online said:
"According to the report, after clearing the accident, Johnson decided to reapproach the residence with McCue, to check on the woman's status. When she came to the door again...she said she had consumed three beers and a hard lemonade. [They] asked if there was someone who could stay with her and when she walked into the house to make a call, they followed. What they found...caused concern...(Johnson) said that he had never been in a residence that was that bad since he has been a police officer.” According to the MRI report, McCue described it as “not livable.”
In his police report, McCue wrote he “smelled the odor of rotting food and fecal matter. There were mountains of trash and belongings throughout the house, making walking impossible without stepping on something. In the back bedroom, there were large piles of clothes and garbage. In the bathroom sink, I observed what appeared to be a combination of fecal matter, vomit and urine covering the table and sink."
According to the report, Johnson felt the woman should not be left on her own due to intoxication and the condition of her home. When he was told it would take an hour for the woman’s brother to travel to North Hampton, he decided he could not spare an officer to stay with her for that length of time. He allowed the woman to smoke her cigarette then drove her to the Rockingham County jail to be held in protective custody. According to the MRI report, McCue added, “She was compliant but did appear more intoxicated by the time he dropped her off at the jail.”"
The internal review of this by the MRI consultant basically said what the officer did was legal but just generally unhelpful:
"According to New Hampshire Chapter 172-B, a police officer who encounters someone who is intoxicated as defined by New Hampshire law may take the person into protective custody. The law states they can either help them to their home, release them into another person’s custody or “lodge the person in a local jail or county correctional facility for said person’s protection, for up to 24 hours,” or until the individual sobers up.... The report concludes that although Johnson believed he was acting in the best interest of the woman involved, his action was not appropriate "and other short- and long-term remedies should have been pursued."
The consultant noted, "the extreme conditions observed by the officers did not occur overnight. There is no nexus to connect her use of alcohol that evening to the condition of her home which may have developed over many years," he stated."
Like that all makes a fuck ton more sense. Holding her overnight was legal- but probably unwarranted bc it really wasn't gonna do anthing to solve this lady's issues. This other article is misleading and missing a lot of facts. This form of custody is completely legal under NH law if they felt she was a danger to herself. And that's the real issue - laws like this are completely subjective to the officer. Clearly, the town didn't like the officers judgment on this and no wonder (like what the fuck was sitting in a cell gonna do? ) but this woman definitely probably does need some legit help.
The rest of the article goes on to say police chief diagreed with the MRI report, that she did not discipline the officers involved but that she did have a conversation with them that "there could have been a better resolution than taking the woman into protective custody." So it sounds more like she left bc she was sick of the town questioning her decisions more than she was covering shit up.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments