NCWatcher said: ↑
But IMO NPPD is now trying to say "but they didn't live here either" to make themselves look better.
I think that the comments from NPPD are indeed CYA, but for a different reason. Here’s my perspective…
I’ve been seeking GP’s address of record (DL/ID, passport, voter ID, USPS change of address) since the very beginning of this case. There have been various reasons as the case moved along, I will address the very first reason here.
I believe NPPD went to wabasso ave on 9/10 to perform a welfare/wellness check on GP, JMO. I have been unable to to find the FL state or local statutes on welfare checks (please hook me up if you have them). I do know the laws for where I live tho. In these cases LE is permitted (almost expected) to enter the home of the person who’s welfare is in question. They can even use force. But this can only occur at said person’s address of record.
With this in mind, if GP’s address of record was wabasso ave, and there was a welfare check on 9/10, LE could/should have entered the house and searched for GP. (I have wondered if a homeowner’s rights would supercede this) If they had, and what we’ve been told about BL’s whereabouts is accurate, LE would have encountered BL on 9/10.
What was GP’s address of record? Did NPPD know that GP’s address of record was wabasso ave (IIRC, NS tried to file a missing persons report with NPPD on 9/10)? Did NPPD fail in their due diligence to adequately search for GP at a welfare check? Did NPPD search the house, encounter BL, fail to speak with him, and then ‘lose’ him (I don’t think this is true, but in the early days of the case I thought it was possible)? Was NPPD unable to search the wabasso ave house for GP because of the address given on GP’s missing person report (if a welfare check took place not on 9/10 but 9/11)? Is NPPD using the address on the misper as an excuse or PR misdirection?
you decide.
all MOO.
ETA- I do believe NS entered NY as GP’s address to facilitate the filing if the misper.
I don't know the state/local laws in North Port, Florida either. I do know that police may be able to enter a person's home without a warrant if a credible request for a welfare/wellness check has been made. But I'm not sure that means they can enter if an adult answers the door and says X isn't here as the L's apparently did.
Where i live (NC) welfare checks are done when out of town family or friends can't get in touch with the person OR with others with whom the person lives. So a person living alone or even a couple or family might not be able to be reached. Once LE comes to the house, if someone who lives in the house says he/she/they are not here, that's it. LE isn't expected to enter (or even allowed to enter unless invited in.) On the other hand, if no one answers the door they are not supposed to just go away either. So if LE knocked and no one ever came to the door at the L's they should not have simply left. But that's not what happened.
Family could be worried about just about anything, of course but welfare checks are commonly done if family/friends are worried someone may have been taken ill or may have "fallen and can't get up." But the assumption isn't that the person is being held against her will in her home by other people who live there. So I don't think it's possible to convert a welfare check into a warrantless search after the homeowner has said X is not here unless there are obvious signs of an emergency (like screams)
Of course, there could be a bad outcome if LE doesn't enter a dwelling although it made no difference in GP's situation. But dispensing with warrants across the board any time a friend or relative claims to be worried about what's happening in a house would be a very big deal.
JMO