Only in Florida! Judge punches public defender

a reply to: HanzHenry

Well, to be fair it just happened yesterday I believe. But yeah. He should be reprimanded for a certainty.

As for why the bailiff acted the way he did? Because Florida.

That's my best guess HanzHenry, sorry.

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: AnteBellum

Yup.

But like RickyD said, bat shish crazy is par for the course here in the sunshine state. Unfortunately... is there something in the water? Wtf...

I go way outta my way to only drink distilled water here…the smell and taste of what comes out of the tap makes me inclined to believe your sentiment about the water is true. I go so far as to not even drink water at restaurants and stuff because I know it's tap water. That's another story though…maybe it's the water and the heat/humidity that makes one crazy if exposed for too long.

Before everyone goes off and bashes the baliff please realize that he wasn't arrested for battery because the lawyer did not press charges.

If the victim does not press charges an arrest cannot be made.

Surely Hanz you knew that, because if I remember correctly you stated you worked in federal law enforcement.

Interesting.

a reply to: CagliostroTheGreat

If I was the defendant I would have asked for a new judge. If my legal representation is not allowed there then I wouldnt say another word beyond expressing why this is unacceptable and ILLEGAL and until I am provided a new one and a new judge that I wont move an inch.

Anything they did after that would be reported to the Florida BAR (which this already was) and I would make one hell of a case for a law suit. Even if they just escorted me out, I am there for arrangement and deserve to have it happen THEN. I would not be at fault for the judge acting like a criminal.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Well that depends on what state your in and if it's felonious or not. I know in Virginia if it's felonious the state will prosecute regardless of if you press charges or not. It happened with some friends of mine who got out of control at a bar. The guy dating the girl poured a drink on her for some slight she said…so she smacked him with one of those tallboy glasses and it broke and cut the crap out of his face. They had a kid which she almost lost custody of over it…and neither of them wanted to press charges the next day only to find the state didn't care and was going to press them any way.

a reply to: RickyD

The situation you cite sounds like a domestic/dating violence situation. That would result with an arrest being made without the victim pressing charges.

That is pretty standard across the US.

As for this situation, they were not related so if the victim declined charges no arrest for battery could be made.

Speaking from my experience as an active police officer in Florida you could hurt me, hell you could shoot me in the foot and I can decline to press charges against you.

If I declined charges against you the police could not charge you with aggravated battery with a firearm/attempted murder.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
The most disturbing part of the video to me was how nobody, not the sheriffs deputies, officers, court appointees, lawyers and civilians did anything, not even react like it was abnormal to what was happening. Everyone took it in stride like, OK this happens all the time!

Odd and sad that our broken system is lowering its standards to even higher levels then before.
Really what is next, duels at high noon?

That freaked me out too! It's like these days, anything goes and it's ok. Scary!!

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Well I guess you do have more experience with florida law than I do...not just because of being an officer but because I'm pretty sure that's one of the more common things you deal with on a day to day. Thanks for the FL law tip too never know when that might be handy to know lol.

Is it just me, or does Florida seem like the trailer park of America?

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

not pressing charges? that is incredible.

truly an unaware LEO i guess. The pressing charges aspect is due to the sworn officer not being there at the time of the incident. example: A husband hits wife and she calls the cops. The officer did not see the assault, and must then be bound by the pressing charges. (this is the origination of the terms. Charge-accuse. and Press- which is like pleading)

But, when a sworn officer actually WITNESSES a crime/assault, noone is required to PRESS CHARGES, because the sworn official WITNESSED the actual act.

your grasp of the way it works is really scary.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Well I guess you do have more experience with florida law than I do...not just because of being an officer but because I'm pretty sure that's one of the more common things you deal with on a day to day. Thanks for the FL law tip too never know when that might be handy to know lol.

do NOT believe his stance, it is WRONG. An officer does not need someone to press charges if he witnesses the actual act.
An officer is sworn to uphold the law, and in seeing an infraction is required to act and arrest the perpetrator.

It is when the sworn officer does NOT witness the assault that there needs to be someone pressing the charge of assault. And at that point it is the officers discretion if the claim (pressing) is legitimate.

This is incredible coming from someone who states to actively be involved in LE, but quite common sadly.

Once again, when an officer actually SEES the infraction, there is no need for someone to press charges. The officer is able to charge on face value having been a witness.

assault, a law was broken. that is grounds for arrest. had it not been witnessed then PRESSING of the charge would be required.

This is why someone is charged with a crime. the pressing is the part where a victim pleads to charge.

a reply to: HanzHenry

Whatever you say man....

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: HanzHenry

Whatever you say man....

would the florida statute help?

FL statute 901.15

901.15 When arrest by officer without warrant is lawful.—A law enforcement officer may arrest a person without a warrant when:
(1) The person has committed a felony or misdemeanor or violated a municipal or county ordinance in the presence of the officer. An arrest for the commission of a misdemeanor or the violation of a municipal or county ordinance shall be made immediately or in fresh pursuit.

notice the NUMBER ONE REASON!!

are we going to attempt to move the goal posts now?

a reply to: HanzHenry

No need to move goal posts. You are misinterpreting the statute.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: HanzHenry

No need to move goal posts. You are misinterpreting the statute.

wow! I am misinterpreting something written to a 10th grade level?

that IS an attempt to move the goal post. let me re-quote it for you to read it again.

"committed in the presence of an officer".. i can also pull in numerous quotes from lawyers from various law websites of you would like. I know the law pretty well. It used to be my obsession.

If you are actually on officer in Florida, and you do not understand this statute, please take some time and study, or ask the an asst DA to explain it.

this is why we cant have nice things.
people act like judges are above the law they are sworn by.

a reply to: HanzHenry

Florida statute 901.15 discusses when an officer can make an arrest without a warrant.

To make an arrest without a warrant (or any other arrest) an officer needs to establish probable cause.

In the topic of debate, that probable cause is officially established when the victim of the battery signs an addidavit.

If they sign a decline to prosecute (as in this case) there is no probable cause for the officer to make an arrest.

I guess we are not going to agree on this one. Maybe some of the other LEO ATS members will chime in.

a reply to: HanzHenry

Oh, also if you read (10) of the statute it says "The officer has determined that he or she has probable cause to believe that a misdemeanor has been committed, based upon a signed affidavit"....

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: HanzHenry

Oh, also if you read (10) of the statute it says "The officer has determined that he or she has probable cause to believe that a misdemeanor has been committed, based upon a signed affidavit"....

those reasons are under the OR category, 1 or 2, or 10.

Not 1 and 2 and 10 must be met.

RIGHT! withOUT a warrant, when an arrest can be made? was there a warrant out on the judge? NO.
Did the judge commit the crime of assault in the presence of an officer? YES...FFS!

you dont like me, and will never admit being wrong, I have the statute and experience behind me, you have goal posts on wheels, and a significant refusal to use adequate reading comprehension on that statute.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: HanzHenry

Florida statute 901.15 discusses when an officer can make an arrest without a warrant.

To make an arrest without a warrant (or any other arrest) an officer needs to establish probable cause.

Probable cause is "if it probably happened" in regards to a plea to charge from someone involved.

All these other ones after number one are of the officer was not 'in presence" i.e.; not there as a witness.

here is #10. which means it was in the presence of another official.

(10) The officer has determined that he or she has probable cause to believe that a misdemeanor has been committed, based upon a signed affidavit provided to the officer by a law enforcement officer of the United States Government, recognized as such by United States statute, or a United States military law enforcement officer, recognized as such by the Uniform Code of Military Justice or the United States Department of Defense Regulations, when the misdemeanor was committed in the presence of the United States law enforcement officer or the United States military law enforcement officer on federal military property over which the state has maintained exclusive jurisdiction for such a misdemeanor.

I am really starting to question your reading comprehension.. this pertains to ON FEDERAL MILITARY PROPERTY..