Printable View
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...-under-new-red
I must say I'm pleasantly surprised.
Quote:
Lincoln County, where Limon is located, has indicated it will not honor the Colorado law, but state Rep. Alec Garnett (D) said the law allows for requests to be turned down.
He told CBS4 that in this case, the mechanism for denying a request worked as intended. The reasoning behind the judge's denial was not immediately made public.
In Lincoln County which declared it would not enforce red flag laws.
https://denver.cbslocal.com/2020/01/...ByupDg4ATiHXaI
Could one of these judges nullify it, or it the law in violation of the constitution?
Good
A judge could declare it unconstitutional...but in this case he just denied the request for reason(s) unknown.
I read an article that made me think the petition did not rise to the occasion.
I suspect the woman was obviously lying. If that's the case, good on the judge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric P
This makes me happy.
It's a start...
Good for the Judge
Meanwhile, shit like this is already happening: Cop ERPO Red Flagged By Mother of Man He Killed In 2017 Colorado Police Shooting; Mother Claims They Have Child Together
I really can't wait for the shit show to start for the judge who approved the ERPO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jer
I actually support it just for sake of showing how stupid it is. The standards require (much as a TPRO) that everything in the ex-parte complaint be assumed true - without any notice or response from an opposing party - even if it sounds ridiculous and the judge himself doesn't personally believe it. There are also no real ramifications for doing it - save in this accord, since it's an LEO, the DA will probably pursue a perjury charge; but for Jo-Blow, anyone can lie and claim they are (whatever necessary to file) and even when you disprove that, they won't face consequences - if she did it anonymously I don't see how she would've even in these circumstances; but she didn't. Everyone file an anonymous ex-parte complaint on your local magistrate and judge in the adjoining county, and it'll get cleaned up quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rucker61
Pretty interesting abuse. From the little info in the article, it would appear that this lady is upset and wants to enact some sort of revenge on the officer, but does not otherwise care how her actions will effect the legitimacy of this law. There really can't be a more perfect case to illustrate the problems with this law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jer
Unfortunately, this is just the tip of the iceberg, having allowed an erpo to be filed. Think of how many other people with an ax to grind with law enforcement will do the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
I don't see the problem. Everyone has been bitching about them potentially being abused. If they really do get abused, they are much more likely to be changed.
Until you are the one falsely red flagged.
someone needs to red flag those that passed the law....just to make a point.
Anyone falsely flagged is best off in the midst of many others being falsely flagged and all the national attention that goes with it. It's much better to have public abuse of this law, than occasional abuse that goes unnoticed.Quote:
Originally Posted by buffalobo
This is a bit over the top for me but fuk that. Being put through that and having no recourse, absolutely insane and intolerable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Take a moment to consider yourself in that circumstance.
Our justice system is already a wreck, this turns it completely upside down.
Here's a newsstory that shows 3 pages of the ERPO petition.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xVN8g2KJwU
I guess my point is that I just don't see these laws going away, or being nerfed under any other circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by buffalobo
How can any judge deny any ERPO position under these standards?Quote:
Originally Posted by OxArt
You are probably right about them not going away but the opposition should still be strike down as unconstitutional not "oh well, guess there is nothing we can do."Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Legit judges have the duty to strike down uncostitutional legislation/laws not ignore it or twist constitution to fit.
The uncostitutuonality of this is obvious and the judge who signed ERPO in this case needs to be hounded off the bench cause he obviously is not going to do the honorable thing and perform Sepukku on court house steps.
Justin Smith, LCSO Sheriff, penned the following on his facebook page:
On Colorado’s Red Flag Law:
It turns out that a Larimer County has become ground zero for Colorado’s Extreme Risk Protection Order (aka Red Flag) Law within days of its implementation. Within the first week of 2020, we have witnessed two cases in Larimer that demonstrate the two opposite extreme scenarios under this law. I find both of these incidents as classic examples of how this law both be used and abused.
The first involves a criminal suspect, David Galton, incarcerated in our jail facing very serious allegations of making credible threats to carry out a mass shooting. Despite our best efforts, the mental health system has failed to intervene with this individual and last week he went before the court in an effort to have his bond reduced in hopes that he would be released from custody pending trial. Given that Gatton is not a convicted felon and has no other prohibiting factors - if released, he could have walked into any gun store and passed a background check to purchase a firearm. At my direction, an LCSO investigator filed an emergency ERPO
petition against Gatton last week. That petition was approved and will soon go to a full hearing.
While there are no firearms to be turned over, this order will flag Gatton in a background check from purchasing a firearm, should he be released pending trial. We obviously continue to oppose his release and we are frustrated by the continued failure of the state’s mental health hold process. I believed it would have been a dereliction of duty if we had not taken all available steps to reduce the possibility of Gatton getting his hands on a firearm at this time.
On the other extreme, we’ve also witnessed another scenario that demonstrates the tremendous procedural deficiencies in the ERPO law- deficiencies I’ve spoken out about many times over the previous year. In that case, Susan Holmes filed a petition against a CSU police officer who was involved in a deadly force encounter with Ms. Holmes adult son in 2017. Evidence in that 2017 case irrefutably supported the actions of both the CSU and another Fort Collins officer. However, under Colorado’s flawed ERPO law, Ms. Holmes was able to file a petition against the CSU officer, despite the facts that Ms. Holmes has no legal standing and the petition on its face has zero merit.
That petition was delivered to my office for service. I have not and will not be serving that petition, not because it’s against a police officer, but because it is a fraud. We are actively investigating this abuse of the system and we will determine what charges may be substantiated against the petitioner, Ms. Holmes. Because this represents an active investigation, I will not be making any additional comments on this case at this time.
It is my hope that these two remarkably timed cases will serve to promote productive conversation on this issue. In my mind, they demonstrate a need to address dangerous and oftentimes mentally ill persons and their potential to carry out violent acts, while at the same time, exposing the tremendous potential for abuse of ill drafted, politically motivated laws, like Colorado’s Red Flag law.
The petitioner in the latter case spoken about above, Susan Holmes, actually filmed a Youtube video of herself explaining her ERPO. It clearly should be used to file perjury, if not more serious charges against her.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGyq3fETIiM