Christopher Clements indicted for Isabel Celis & Maribel Gonzales homicides
CLICK HERE TO JOIN THE DISCUSSION

CA - Elliot Rodger kills 6, injures 13 in Isla Vista, Near UC Santa Barbara, #3

Discussion in 'Rampage Killings and Terrorist Attacks' started by Coldpizza, May 24, 2014.

  1. Coldpizza

    Coldpizza WS Administrator Staff Member Administrator Moderator

    Messages:
    19,755
    Likes Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    83
    7 Dead in Drive-by Shooting Near UC Santa Barbara
    SANTA BARBARA, Calif. May 24, 2014 (AP)

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/dead-drive-shooting-uc-santa-barbara-23853689



    Link to Media thread: CA - Elliot Rodger kills 6, injures 13 in Isla Vista, Near UC Santa Barbara shooting - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
     
  2. Coldpizza

    Coldpizza WS Administrator Staff Member Administrator Moderator

    Messages:
    19,755
    Likes Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Please continue here

    :tyou:
     
  3. Suthrnqt

    Suthrnqt Verified Luddite

    Messages:
    3,587
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Thanks CP. I appreciate all the work the mods do.
    And I just love that new thread smell. :D
     
  4. ATasteOfHoney

    ATasteOfHoney Active Member

    Messages:
    5,883
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I don't have a firm personal opinion yet if police should've or could've done more when they went to chat with ER **however** it probably should become protocol: check for gun registrations & dog registrations. We have the technology & it would make for a better informed police response. Their lives are on the line so the more knowledge, the better the response.
    The situation that did occur with ER could have become even deadlier if ER sprung his weapon out & started surprise-shooting cops, ykwim?

    Anyway.....more communication via technology may prove helpful. We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto! ;)
     
  5. Disguiseduser0308

    Disguiseduser0308 New Member

    Messages:
    1,864
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I teeter on wishing LE could have done more and understanding that their hands were tied at the time. I don't doubt for a moment that those officers who went on the call that day aren't asking themselves the same question. Could they have done more? Can't say I want to be in their shoes.
     
  6. human

    human Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    19,219
    Likes Received:
    4,257
    Trophy Points:
    113
  7. lawstudent

    lawstudent New Member

    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have a JD and I'm a bit confused on this - better keep studying for the bar!

    So, if the police asked ER if they could come look around, and he said yes, and they found something incriminating, could he later get the evidence excluded at trial? I know with consent they can go in, but is that only if there's reason to suspect a crime in the first place, even without probable cause that would justify warrantless entry? I imagine they aren't supposed to be going to the homes of suspicious people and asking to enter (many will be too afraid to say no) and then searching around until they find something that constitutes illegal activity - some weed etc.

    One thing to keep in mind is that it's risky to engage in a possibly illegal search "just in case", only to have the charges dropped or the person acquitted because the evidence is excluded. Obviously, the person may do something bad in the meantime, but it is still generally better to make sure you do it right so that if they do something that gives you cause to go investigate, you can make sure they are put away.

    Also, imagine the police asked to come in and look around. Assuming it was only said he was likely a danger to himself, what are they looking for? If the guns were hidden, they'd have to really tear the place apart - not just glance around. It would take a lot of time to do this for every welfare check. Then are they supposed to look for any pills he could OD on? Log on to his computer and look for a suicide note? Go through all his papers and files until they find the manifesto, and then realize what it was? And even then, those weren't public threats - he can say he was writing a script or something - they wouldn't even have enough to take him in, most likely.

    One major issue is that you have to verify that someone actually is the source of online content, and that the description of the content is accurate. So if someone is instagramming drug use, they won't generally act on that - you can't arrest someone for drug possession based on a video because you can't test the substance and verify it's their account and actually drugs and all that. Federal authorities usually are the ones who can pull records of online accounts and who posted what, and local authorities can get some cell records, but unlike in Asian countries, we don't arrest for drug use based on photos or text chatter. That's how so many people get away with all that bragging. That stuff is used as evidence later at a trial to support the idea that the person was engaging in bad behavior - but it's not the basis for an arrest itself. If ER had survived and been charged with murder, that manifesto would clearly have been presented. But it couldn't have resulted in him being arrested for the water-throwing crimes and the deck crimes and all that - not in and of itself. If the witnesses had come forward and pressed charges, then police could have used it to help make the case - but they need the witnesses. I know in the balcony case witnesses came forward but the police couldn't sort out what happened - if ER had survived, I'm sure now they would have prosecuted him.
     
  8. Bernina

    Bernina Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,565
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    LE was called to do a welfare check because his mom thought he was depressed when viewing his earlier Youtube videos.
    No mention of "threat to himself", "threat to others", or "suicidal/homicidal".
    If any of those HAD been mentioned, the LE operator would have asked the caller if ER had any weapons.

    Again, you have the "Suicide by Cop", any mention of a "threat of bodily harm" is going to followed up with a query about weapons.
    In Arizona, if a threat of self harm is posed, the officers CAN take possession of any firearms and give the individual a receipt of said weapons, that can later be re-posessed at the LE office by the individual in question. It does not require a warrant, they have probable cause initiated by the initial caller.

    If ER had allowed the LE entrance into his apartment and they saw weapons, ammo, and the call had been "I think my son is going to kill himself", they would have had "probable/sufficient cause" to confiscate the weapons/ammo run the serial #'s for registration and ownership, give receipt to ER, and hold the weapons until such time as it was deemed safe for their return or a 1510 was commenced.

    As far as we know, the parents/therapists were unaware of any weapons. The call to LE was not a "possible suicide". LE didn't have justification to enter ER's apartment. ER didn't make any statements to LE indicating any type of self harm or death threat. ER was probably aware that you do not need to invite LE into your premises when they knock on your door, unless they have a warrant, if you have something to hide.

    When LE enters a name into their computer base, it will show info from State issued driver's licenses and ID cards, vehicle registration, insurance, convictions, prison ID #, parole/probation status, warrants, 1510's (in Arizona it's Title 36) and possible "person of interest" or "red flag" if there's been repeated conflicts with this individual (nuisance calls, neighborhood trouble maker, uncooperative with LE, etc.).
     
  9. lawstudent

    lawstudent New Member

    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Is this true, though? I'm just curious if you know of this happening or a certain law. Can they confiscate weapons like that, particularly based on someone else's concerns? If ER had said he was going to kill himself, they would have taken him to the hospital, but is there a law providing for removal of weapons at that point?
     
  10. MyBelle

    MyBelle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    5,686
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What would checking for gun registrations & dog registrations accomplish? The purpose of dispatch is to avert an emergency, not do research on if a dog is registered or not. Whether cops did or didn't check, we do not know because his guns were legal. If they had encountered a dog, they could have checked on registration but it's a moot point because he had no dog.

    I'm pretty sure cops are trained to both anticipate and react if an allegedly suicidal person suddenly pulls out a weapon and starts firing whether the gun is registered or not. ER did not do that.

    Police are not mind readers and sometimes they do screw up but this isn't one of them.

    JMO
     
  11. MyBelle

    MyBelle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    5,686
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BBM. Of course not.
     
  12. Bernina

    Bernina Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,565
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    They do in Arizona.
     
  13. mikeysmommom

    mikeysmommom "A grandchild fills a space in your heart that you

    Messages:
    4,623
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That is a very good question! I have to research CA 5150 law but if it's intent is a safetguard to protect the community and at the same time protect the rights of individuals who fall into a select group of individuals who need to be protected from themselves and those they might hurt ,it seriously is flawed and just gives a false perception that it allows all people who are under mental health to protect their second amendment rights but if certain steps are not taken EX HIS FAMILY like most in their situation,try to keep it under wraps . Either because of denial or combo of denial and hope that the steps they do follow will lead to their child being able to lead a productive life at some point,so the last thing most families want to do is have documentation so they difuse the temper tantrum by changing schools instead of letting a trained MHP SEEthe child in that state.If a wellness check is because your concerned about someone possibly being suicidal ,which I did do in my state about 10 yrs ago. The police went to that person and talked to him they knew he had a gun because of our state police where you apply for a permit send that info to the local police . The officer not only talked to the person outside his residence he then asked him to make the loved one who called feel better coupon he take the guns, for just a few days ,they could be picked up at the local police dept anytime like a day or two .Once he said sure he had no problem with that he then started to follow him inside to where the gun was kept because that was to protect the cop.He complied just like the people you see on cops ,they know they are guilty as sin but try to look innocent hoping the cop is just bluffing.Everybody knows if they want to they can get a warrant and they might. The person called on never went and got his guns.He was going to wait 3 days then get them and blow his own brains out,but waiting the 3 days made him realize exactly how he would destroy his son who needed him to be there. It gave me time ,and I realized if he would die for his son,maybe it would work in reverse. I told him that I was sorry I made him go thru that but all I kept doing was thinking how it would destroy his sons life and he would be devastated .
     
  14. lawstudent

    lawstudent New Member

    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Do you know which law or is this from experience? I'll look into it.

    There are many situations in which the qualifications for a 5150 are not met and horrible things happen. I don't know if I could call it flawed though. It works as intended - it provides a limited way to provide protection to those people and those around them in certain situations. It was not intended to ensure that no one is harmed by a mentally ill person or commits suicide. No law is possible or constitutional that would do such a thing. It was intended to be a very narrow law for obvious reasons. Humanity is flawed, but no law or system can be flawless.

    Also, regarding the gun permit issue you talked about. I have no doubt that in small towns police chiefs know who in the town has a gun - they have to authorize the permits, decide where the person can take it, etc. Especially where I live, which does not have a high rate of gun ownership, so it stands out. It doesn't mean it's standard procedure to check the registry - in many places, gun owners are just widely known among law enforcement. In cities or huge rural areas, there's a lot less chance of that, obviously.
     
  15. ATasteOfHoney

    ATasteOfHoney Active Member

    Messages:
    5,883
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I guess it's all pretty obvious to me but like I said, I haven't made my mind up on how we can prevent these hideous mass murders from happening.
     
  16. mrsobrien

    mrsobrien Active Member

    Messages:
    3,051
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Marking my spot. What's this dog talk about?
     
  17. ATasteOfHoney

    ATasteOfHoney Active Member

    Messages:
    5,883
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    36
    It is just a generalized talk (not necessarily about ER) & what should be done on a 5150 or a welfare check......in general.

    Some posters were hypothisizing if the police response would be more pro-active & safer if they accessed gun reg records & dog records before landing on the doorstep of a person who has mental health issues (significant enough for someone to make a call).

    Thats about it, mrsobrien.

    :seeya:
     
  18. Disguiseduser0308

    Disguiseduser0308 New Member

    Messages:
    1,864
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just something I wanted to share and not directed to any poster:

    I'm not sure about the law in CA. When I was admitted for severe postpartum issues I had to sign a form saying that I was made aware that the state of Illinois would be notified of my admission and that I would ineligible to purchase a FAOC, firearm, or ammunition for five years.

    Of course, I was being cooperative with the system because I just wanted to get better. How do you keep someone with ER's issues from purchasing all he did when he's not honest about who and what he really is?

    How do we help someone that doesn't want to be helped? How do we stop these rampage killings in the future? I don't know it's possible.
     
  19. HMSHood

    HMSHood Admiral-Class Battlecruiser

    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It is a very tough one. One could get a court order to have custody of someone who is mentally ill. Of course, there is not guarantee that will happen.
     
  20. Disguiseduser0308

    Disguiseduser0308 New Member

    Messages:
    1,864
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ty, HMS. I wondered if that was possible. ER came across to some as very charismatic, which would fit with his manipulation that read through out the manifesto, IMO.

    He seemed to know what to say and what to do when he didn't want his plans thwarted. The mere fact that he seemingly charmed seven LE officers the night they were called, speaks of his determination to not be okay. There were many chances where he could have put a stop and yelled out for help.

    JMO & :twocents:
     

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice