Well, that's not the way one hopes to meet the neighbors.
http://www.ajc.com/news/couple-held-at-gunpoint-1423138.html
QuoteBy David Ibata
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Newton County Sheriff's Office is investigating why a couple was confronted at gunpoint by neighbors and then arrested and forced to spend the night in jail when they tried to move into the home they had just purchased, Channel 2 Action News reported.
The Kalonji family had just closed on a foreclosed home and were told by their real estate agent they should go over to the house and change the locks.
But when Jean Kalonji and his wife, Angelica, started working at the home, an armed man and another person who appeared to be the man's son allegedly confronted them.
"He say to put the hands up and get out from the house, otherwise he would shoot us," the husband told Channel 2.
The neighbors didn't believe the couple when they told them they had bought the home and called the Newton County Sheriff's Office. The Kalonjis didn't have the closing papers with them, so deputies arrested them, charged them with loitering and prowling and took them to jail.
Yvette Harris, the couple's real estate agent, said they never should have been arrested.
"They rightfully own this house," Harris said.
Kalonji, who grew up in the Congo, said the experience brought back painful memories.
"There, they put me down with the gun to my head, and come here, the same," he said.
Mark Mitchell, spokesman for the Newton Sheriff's Office, said authorities are "looking into it, exactly what occurred, why it occurred."
A person at the neighbors' house said no one wanted to talk to Channel 2 about the incident.
It must be a hoot to be a middle class African-American.
Quote from: Martinus on April 23, 2012, 05:50:39 AM
It must be a hoot to be a middle class African-American.
QuoteKalonji, who grew up in the Congo,
Sounds like an African-African. :contract:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 23, 2012, 09:13:15 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 23, 2012, 05:50:39 AM
It must be a hoot to be a middle class African-American.
QuoteKalonji, who grew up in the Congo,
Sounds like an African-African. :contract:
Well, obviously.
A
real African-American would have been shot dead on the spot. :P
Quote from: Malthus on April 23, 2012, 09:14:43 AM
A real African-American would have been shot dead on the spot. :P
:lol:
lawyers: What's the standard on a kidnapping charge defense that basically argues that one can threaten to use deadly force, and carry someone off property one does not own, if one thinks that the persons kidnapped were, in fact, criminals?
Similarly, can the assault be mitigated or eliminated by the fact that the defendants thought they were interrupting a crime, even though not in defense of their own property?
So, the neighbors saw some strangers they've never seen before ripping out the locks on the property and intervened? I hope my neighbors would react the same way.
Yeah, I'd say the most in-the-wrong party would be the cops. At least give them a chance to prove their assertions (i.e. escort them to obtain the documents proving ownership) before hauling them off to the pokey.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 23, 2012, 06:15:54 PM
So, the neighbors saw some strangers they've never seen before ripping out the locks on the property and intervened? I hope my neighbors would react the same way.
I wouldn't. Sounds like my neighbors were fucking annoying busybodies if they were watching someone change the locks (the horrors!) but didn't know the house had gone up for sale. Also clearly a case against citizens owning guns. We aren't trying to have vigilantes running about. :rolleyes:
:( @ what Malthy had to say...though I like how the article tries to suggest its unclear why this occurred. <_<
Stories like this make me proud to live in Georgia. It brings a tear to the eye. I'm so proud of our boys in blue. *sniff*
QuoteKalonji, who grew up in the Congo
Which one?
Quote from: JonasSalk on April 23, 2012, 07:11:22 PM
QuoteKalonji, who grew up in the Congo
Which one?
The Jersey one.
They were fortunate that the neighbors didn't feel threatened and stood their ground.
A defence lawyer was telling me of a similar story a few weeks ago. He was trying to rent out a house he owned, but the power was turned off, so he's showing this house at night using flashlights. Police were called and arrested him - I think he was eventually released when a cop realized that he was a reasonably prominant defence lawyer in the city.
He sounded half amused / half upset about the situation (which had happened several years ago) but I couldn't help thinking that police acted entirely appropriately in the situation.
Quote from: grumbler on April 23, 2012, 09:39:42 AM
lawyers: What's the standard on a kidnapping charge defense that basically argues that one can threaten to use deadly force, and carry someone off property one does not own, if one thinks that the persons kidnapped were, in fact, criminals?
Similarly, can the assault be mitigated or eliminated by the fact that the defendants thought they were interrupting a crime, even though not in defense of their own property?
Well in Canada...
of course the use of firearms by just about anybody is severely frowned upon. But if we pretend there are no firearms involved, any person has the power to arrest anyone who, on reasonable grounds, is found to be comitting an indictable offence (and break and enter is an indictable offence). Anyone who is authorized by law to do anythign in the enforcement of the law is justified in doing so if they act on reasonable grounds and use only as much force as is necessary for that purpose (sections 494 and 25 of the Criminal Code).
So yes, acting to arrest someone found to be commiting an indictable offence is absolutely a defence to actions which would otherwise be assault and/or unlawful confinement, if you act on reasonable grounds and use only as much force as is necessary.
What was the point of mentioning that the guy was from Congo? Was the writer of the article trying to tug at emotional strings?
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 09:00:54 AM
So yes, acting to arrest someone found to be commiting an indictable offence is absolutely a defence to actions which would otherwise be assault and/or unlawful confinement, if you act on reasonable grounds and use only as much force as is necessary.
Yes, both the neighbors and the cops were acting under good faith to prevent a felony; however, that does not relieve the neighbors of the civil liability for being wrong. I SMELL LAWSUIT
I blame the cops, however, for not taking the time to sort it all out. Where's the fucking shift sergeant? That's his job.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 09:26:50 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 09:00:54 AM
So yes, acting to arrest someone found to be commiting an indictable offence is absolutely a defence to actions which would otherwise be assault and/or unlawful confinement, if you act on reasonable grounds and use only as much force as is necessary.
Yes, both the neighbors and the cops were acting under good faith to prevent a felony; however, that does not relieve the neighbors of the civil liability for being wrong. I SMELL LAWSUIT
I blame the cops, however, for not taking the time to sort it all out. Where's the fucking shift sergeant? That's his job.
:huh: Again I'm just a poor, humble Canadian lawyer, but the section I cited (s. 25 of the Criminal Code) acts as a defence to both criminal and civil liability. And in general there are very, very few situations were liability can be found for merely being "wrong" (aka absolute liability). The regular standard is one of negligence, where there are notions of reasonableness and honest but mistaken belief.
And how the fuck is the shift sergeant supposed to figure this out after hours? In order to prove their story the couple needs the land transfer documents. Unless someone can raise the realtor on the phone the couple is either going to be detained untill a bail hearing, or released with a court date
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 23, 2012, 06:15:54 PM
So, the neighbors saw some strangers they've never seen before ripping out the locks on the property and intervened? I hope my neighbors would react the same way.
So, the neighbors saw some strangers (ones that they've never seen before, as opposed to well-known strangers) ripping out the locks on the property and threaten them with death before kidnapped them at gunpoint? And that's the outcome you wuld hope for from your neighbors? Not mine. I would hope my neighbors call the cops, while writing down everything that they can find out about the suspects. Maybe go and ask what they are up to, but certainly eschewing the gunplay until circumstances made it legal for them to engage in such gunplay.
What's the point of having a gun if you can't even point it at people?
When we legally took possession of our house we had a hell of a time getting the keys. So we stood around for the longest time trying doors and windows trying to get in (there were apparently another set on the counter). I'm almost disappointed that nobody challenged us about what we were doing. :(
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 09:38:15 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 09:26:50 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 09:00:54 AM
So yes, acting to arrest someone found to be commiting an indictable offence is absolutely a defence to actions which would otherwise be assault and/or unlawful confinement, if you act on reasonable grounds and use only as much force as is necessary.
Yes, both the neighbors and the cops were acting under good faith to prevent a felony; however, that does not relieve the neighbors of the civil liability for being wrong. I SMELL LAWSUIT
I blame the cops, however, for not taking the time to sort it all out. Where's the fucking shift sergeant? That's his job.
:huh: Again I'm just a poor, humble Canadian lawyer, but the section I cited (s. 25 of the Criminal Code) acts as a defence to both criminal and civil liability. And in general there are very, very few situations were liability can be found for merely being "wrong" (aka absolute liability). The regular standard is one of negligence, where there are notions of reasonableness and honest but mistaken belief.
I was simply adding supplemental information as a complement, not as a challenge, you litigious twat. We know you're a fucking lawyer. Why? Because you argue over every fucking thing.
Next time, I won't include any fucking quotes from your Indian-prosecuting ass. Dickhead.
QuoteAnd how the fuck is the shift sergeant supposed to figure this out after hours? In order to prove their story the couple needs the land transfer documents. Unless someone can raise the realtor on the phone the couple is either going to be detained untill a bail hearing, or released with a court date
You answered your own fucking question. COUNSELOR.
Fuck, not all cops have the urgent need to arrest black people, you know. SOMETIMES--JUST SOMETIMES--WE TRIED TO FIGURE SHIT OUT.
I'm glad out of that racket, putting up with pencilnecks like you.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 09:42:53 AM
When we legally took possession of our house we had a hell of a time getting the keys. So we stood around for the longest time trying doors and windows trying to get in (there were apparently another set on the counter). I'm almost disappointed that nobody challenged us about what we were doing. :(
I would've shot you in the fucking head. No sergeant available.
OK, maybe just the leg.
:lol:
I mean, really now. Let's just forget the Stand On Someone Else's Ground yahoo gunplay neighbors for a moment.
You, as an officer, show up at an empty house, and there's an adult male and an adult female present. With replacement door locks. At an empty house. That's been known to have been for sale recently.
There's nothing in the home to rob. The door locks and hardware could be construed as burglar tools under rogue and vagabond, but what burglar brings replacement door locks?
Excuse me, maybe I'm slow on this, and let me get this straight...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.magnetmagazine.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F06%2FColumbo.jpg&hash=471eb2494780fb41d133f92832e005d9151f05b1)
Now I'm just a lawyer from the Yukon, so maybe I don't understand your complex big-city ways.
You don't have squatters in Baltimore? Fixtures and building materials aren't valuable items to thieves?
But yes, as I said, I'd expect someone to try and look into their story. It's just that if the realtor isn't answering their phone (because it's late at night) I can't think of much else they'd do...
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 11:14:42 AM
Now I'm just a lawyer from the Yukon, so maybe I don't understand your complex big-city ways.
You don't have squatters in Baltimore? Fixtures and building materials aren't valuable items to thieves?
But yes, as I said, I'd expect someone to try and look into their story. It's just that if the realtor isn't answering their phone (because it's late at night) I can't think of much else they'd do...
Of course we have squatters. We also had a drug lord that took an entire city block of abandoned homes, replaced all their doors with Magna-Seals and new locks, and used the entire block as a shooting gallery; they'd issue you a key from the rack when you picked up your shit, like checking in at the front desk of an old hotel, so you could do your thing in private.
However, I would ensure that an effort was made to establish the veracity of their claim. And dispatch had access to the state's Department of Taxation's real property database to verify property ownership and status of sale, which unlike a lot of state stuff, is actually updated very quickly. Amazing how efficient government can be when it comes to its revenue.
But, that made me a conscientious police officer, and therefore tremendously unpopular with coworkers.
Catch and release. Got more important shit to do, like rolling up on slingers and watching Pook toss his shit and haul ass like a cockroach.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 11:39:48 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 11:14:42 AM
Now I'm just a lawyer from the Yukon, so maybe I don't understand your complex big-city ways.
You don't have squatters in Baltimore? Fixtures and building materials aren't valuable items to thieves?
But yes, as I said, I'd expect someone to try and look into their story. It's just that if the realtor isn't answering their phone (because it's late at night) I can't think of much else they'd do...
Of course we have squatters. We also had a drug lord that took an entire city block of abandoned homes, replaced all their doors with Magna-Seals and new locks, and used the entire block as a shooting gallery; they'd issue you a key from the rack when you picked up your shit, like checking in at the front desk of an old hotel, so you could do your thing in private.
:lol:
Up here we have a centralized Land Titles registry which is very good, but I'm not 100% sure if police have online access. In any event if does take a few days for any new registration to actually hit the system, so if they'd bought the property that day it wouldn't be online yet.
I wonder what the reaction would be if this were, say, an officer from a bank foreclosing on the house out there changing the locks and got arrested.
That's going to make for an awkward 4th of July street party down in the cul de sac.
Personally, I think the neighbors should be looking at weapon assault charges. The argument that they were being conscientious neighbors ran out when they pointed guns at the "possible burglars/squatters."
Those deputies should go bye-bye, too. Strike 1 was not checking the tax records, strike 2 was (story doesn't say, so I'm assuming they didn't) not taking in the idiots pointing guns, and there shouldn't be a strike 3 when it's likely to end up in a lawsuit costing the city millions of dollars.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 24, 2012, 12:23:07 PM
Personally, I think the neighbors should be looking at weapon assault charges. The argument that they were being conscientious neighbors ran out when they pointed guns at the "possible burglars/squatters."
Those deputies should go bye-bye, too. Strike 1 was not checking the tax records, strike 2 was (story doesn't say, so I'm assuming they didn't) not taking in the idiots pointing guns, and there shouldn't be a strike 3 when it's likely to end up in a lawsuit costing the city millions of dollars.
True dat to all points.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 24, 2012, 12:23:07 PM
Personally, I think the neighbors should be looking at weapon assault charges. The argument that they were being conscientious neighbors ran out when they pointed guns at the "possible burglars/squatters."
Those deputies should go bye-bye, too. Strike 1 was not checking the tax records, strike 2 was (story doesn't say, so I'm assuming they didn't) not taking in the idiots pointing guns, and there shouldn't be a strike 3 when it's likely to end up in a lawsuit costing the city millions of dollars.
The "guns drawn" aspect troubles me. It would be a serious no-no in this country, but I can't possibly comment on how it's viewed in the US.
But they purchased the house that same day. Tax records or land titles will NOT be updated that quickly. Without a copy of some of the paperwork (whether it be the Land Transfer, the Purchase / Sale agreement, or whatever) I don't see how you don't arrest the couple. And the neighbors, unless you have them on gun charges, are in the clear.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 12:33:58 PM
The "guns drawn" aspect troubles me. It would be a serious no-no in this country, but I can't possibly comment on how it's viewed in the US.
We show up with people with guns, there are serious issues.
QuoteBut they purchased the house that same day. Tax records or land titles will NOT be updated that quickly. Without a copy of some of the paperwork (whether it be the Land Transfer, the Purchase / Sale agreement, or whatever) I don't see how you don't arrest the couple. And the neighbors, unless you have them on gun charges, are in the clear.
That's because you're a fascist monarchist.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 12:33:58 PM
The "guns drawn" aspect troubles me. It would be a serious no-no in this country, but I can't possibly comment on how it's viewed in the US.
But they purchased the house that same day. Tax records or land titles will NOT be updated that quickly. Without a copy of some of the paperwork (whether it be the Land Transfer, the Purchase / Sale agreement, or whatever) I don't see how you don't arrest the couple. And the neighbors, unless you have them on gun charges, are in the clear.
That's my thought on the neighbors. With everybody on edge about the Trayvon Martin debacle, we should be cracking down on armed "neighborhood watch" types. Kudos for being vigilant, but leave the gun-pulling between the violent criminals and law enforcement.
Also, the house probably still had the "for sale" sign. Even if the buyers didn't have the documents
and the system hadn't updated yet, the cops could have taken less than five minutes, called the realtor, and verified that the property had been sold that day. Or they could have gotten the owner still on record from the tax assessor and tried to
contact the actual homeowner on record to verify the couple was unauthorized to be on the property. Seriously, Beeb. Computer lag is no excuse for a lack of due diligence.
IMO, even if you're on your own property and it's perfectly legal, I would still keep to the "don't draw unless you're gonna fire" rule.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 12:33:58 PM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 24, 2012, 12:23:07 PM
Personally, I think the neighbors should be looking at weapon assault charges. The argument that they were being conscientious neighbors ran out when they pointed guns at the "possible burglars/squatters."
Those deputies should go bye-bye, too. Strike 1 was not checking the tax records, strike 2 was (story doesn't say, so I'm assuming they didn't) not taking in the idiots pointing guns, and there shouldn't be a strike 3 when it's likely to end up in a lawsuit costing the city millions of dollars.
The "guns drawn" aspect troubles me. It would be a serious no-no in this country, but I can't possibly comment on how it's viewed in the US.
But they purchased the house that same day. Tax records or land titles will NOT be updated that quickly. Without a copy of some of the paperwork (whether it be the Land Transfer, the Purchase / Sale agreement, or whatever) I don't see how you don't arrest the couple. And the neighbors, unless you have them on gun charges, are in the clear.
I would think, as a cop, if they claimed to be the new owners, and offered to retrieve the proving documents (I assume they had them at home), why not take the time to escort them home and verify the paperwork? It would have to take far less time to do that than to run them downtown and through booking.
I can see defending your own property with weapons but is this a trend of taking your weapons off your property to do vigilante work or is it just getting reported? I mean this is getting ridiculous and dangerous. I do not want some asshole pointing his gun at me because he is too fucking stupid and/or uninformed to understand what he is seeing. And it seems these people can just threaten perfectly innocent people's lives (on their own or public property it seems) with the blessing of law enforcement.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 24, 2012, 01:30:14 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 12:33:58 PM
The "guns drawn" aspect troubles me. It would be a serious no-no in this country, but I can't possibly comment on how it's viewed in the US.
But they purchased the house that same day. Tax records or land titles will NOT be updated that quickly. Without a copy of some of the paperwork (whether it be the Land Transfer, the Purchase / Sale agreement, or whatever) I don't see how you don't arrest the couple. And the neighbors, unless you have them on gun charges, are in the clear.
That's my thought on the neighbors. With everybody on edge about the Trayvon Martin debacle, we should be cracking down on armed "neighborhood watch" types. Kudos for being vigilant, but leave the gun-pulling between the violent criminals and law enforcement.
Also, the house probably still had the "for sale" sign. Even if the buyers didn't have the documents and the system hadn't updated yet, the cops could have taken less than five minutes, called the realtor, and verified that the property had been sold that day. Or they could have gotten the owner still on record from the tax assessor and tried to contact the actual homeowner on record to verify the couple was unauthorized to be on the property. Seriously, Beeb. Computer lag is no excuse for a lack of due diligence.
You ever worked with a realtor? They're generally pretty good, but they certainly are not on call 24/7. I've had to wait a day or two to hear back from mine.
This was a foreclosure. The owner still on title is either pissed off at having just lost their house (and whose contact address is probably the very house in question), or is the bank in which case GOOD LUCK getting ahold of anyone after hours.
Due diligence is great - but there's only so much you can do in a short time frame. And as I said, in this particular instance short of locating some of the paperwork of speaking with the realtor there's really no other due diligence you can do.
And our turn around for the Land Titles Office is 7-10 days. You drop it off, but you don't get back a Certificate of Title for 7-10 days. Lawyers have all kinds of forms and protocols to cover that problem so you still get possession that day, but registration is not immediate. And that's on a straight-forward transaction. A foreclosure is only going to be more complicated.
Why would they be arrested though? Is there any evidence a crime has happened or is about to happen?
Quote from: Maximus on April 24, 2012, 01:46:35 PM
Why would they be arrested though? Is there any evidence a crime has happened or is about to happen?
IMO the fact they are breaking into a house, at night, with no key or proof of ownership constitutes reasonable and probable grounds to arrest for break and enter.
Rememebr grounds for arrest are not the same as proof to obtain a conviction.
Quote from: Tonitrus on April 24, 2012, 01:36:08 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 12:33:58 PM
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 24, 2012, 12:23:07 PM
Personally, I think the neighbors should be looking at weapon assault charges. The argument that they were being conscientious neighbors ran out when they pointed guns at the "possible burglars/squatters."
Those deputies should go bye-bye, too. Strike 1 was not checking the tax records, strike 2 was (story doesn't say, so I'm assuming they didn't) not taking in the idiots pointing guns, and there shouldn't be a strike 3 when it's likely to end up in a lawsuit costing the city millions of dollars.
The "guns drawn" aspect troubles me. It would be a serious no-no in this country, but I can't possibly comment on how it's viewed in the US.
But they purchased the house that same day. Tax records or land titles will NOT be updated that quickly. Without a copy of some of the paperwork (whether it be the Land Transfer, the Purchase / Sale agreement, or whatever) I don't see how you don't arrest the couple. And the neighbors, unless you have them on gun charges, are in the clear.
I would think, as a cop, if they claimed to be the new owners, and offered to retrieve the proving documents (I assume they had them at home), why not take the time to escort them home and verify the paperwork? It would have to take far less time to do that than to run them downtown and through booking.
Two possible answers.
1. Accuseds lie. All the time. About stuff that's easily provable false. I can imagine a real crook maintaining that charade, going to their home, searching all over, apologizing as to why they can't find them, they were here a minute ago...
2. Less charitably, booking them may well be someone else's problem within the police.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 01:43:33 PM
You ever worked with a realtor? They're generally pretty good, but they certainly are not on call 24/7. I've had to wait a day or two to hear back from mine.
In this case, only an issue if the realtor's a solo. The receptionist would probably be able to verify the realtor's appointment- all they need is the sale date for corroboration to ease off of probable cause.
QuoteThis was a foreclosure. The owner still on title is either pissed off at having just lost their house (and whose contact address is probably the very house in question), or is the bank in which case GOOD LUCK getting ahold of anyone after hours.
This
was a foreclosure, so do you really think the bank's going to inconvenience themselves and set closing for after-hours? Article heavily implies (granted, it doesn't say outright) that the couple didn't waste much time in getting over to the house.
QuoteDue diligence is great - but there's only so much you can do in a short time frame. And as I said, in this particular instance short of locating some of the paperwork of speaking with the realtor there's really no other due diligence you can do.
And our turn around for the Land Titles Office is 7-10 days. You drop it off, but you don't get back a Certificate of Title for 7-10 days. Lawyers have all kinds of forms and protocols to cover that problem so you still get possession that day, but registration is not immediate. And that's on a straight-forward transaction. A foreclosure is only going to be more complicated.
With even more of a paper trail. In a bank sale, we've got the bank, the buyers,
their mortgage provider, the realtor, almost definitely an attorney for each side, not to mention the title insurer. You seriously expect me to believe there's no way they could have gotten a hold of
any of up to six different parties that could verify the sale and date?
EDIT, Mk II: Also, where are you getting this "at night" portion of the story? The article doesn't say anything about time of day or even what day of the week this occurred... actually, the video at the link does point out it was a Thursday. So, so much for the weekend argument.
Quote from: Valmy on April 24, 2012, 01:41:45 PM
I can see defending your own property with weapons but is this a trend of taking your weapons off your property to do vigilante work or is it just getting reported? I mean this is getting ridiculous and dangerous. I do not want some asshole pointing his gun at me because he is too fucking stupid and/or uninformed to understand what he is seeing. And it seems these people can just threaten perfectly innocent people's lives (on their own or public property it seems) with the blessing of law enforcement.
There's a huge difference IMO between carrying (either open or concealed) and actually pointing a handgun at someone. If you're going to draw your weapon, you had better make sure you know what the situation is.
Having said that, this over-active attitude (call it vigilantism or whatever) rarely comes out of a vacuum. I'd be willing to bet that this neighborhood in question had seen an increase in burglaries.
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
There's a huge difference IMO between carrying (either open or concealed) and actually pointing a handgun at someone. If you're going to draw your weapon, you had better make sure you know what the situation is.
Oh yeah I have no problem with carrying....I mean half my state is carrying. But I figured it was supposed to be for protection not performing citizen's arrests.
Quote from: Valmy on April 24, 2012, 02:01:41 PM
Oh yeah I have no problem with carrying....I mean half my state is carrying. But I figured it was supposed to be for protection not performing citizen's arrests.
Like I said, imminent danger aside, leave drawing to law enforcement.
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
Having said that, this over-active attitude (call it vigilantism or whatever) rarely comes out of a vacuum. I'd be willing to bet that this neighborhood in question had seen an increase in burglaries. is lily ass white and not used to seeing black people.
Edited for clarity. And reality.
Quote from: Valmy on April 24, 2012, 02:01:41 PM
Oh yeah I have no problem with carrying....I mean half my state is carrying. But I figured it was supposed to be for protection not performing citizen's arrests.
Leaving out some exceptions for certain circumstances, I'd generally agree with you on that.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 02:04:30 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
Having said that, this over-active attitude (call it vigilantism or whatever) rarely comes out of a vacuum. I'd be willing to bet that this neighborhood in question had seen an increase in burglaries. is lily ass white and not used to seeing black people.
Edited for clarity. And reality.
Yes, Seedy. Everything is about race and needs to be seen in black or white :rolleyes:
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 24, 2012, 01:56:35 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 01:43:33 PM
You ever worked with a realtor? They're generally pretty good, but they certainly are not on call 24/7. I've had to wait a day or two to hear back from mine.
In this case, only an issue if the realtor's a solo. The receptionist would probably be able to verify the realtor's appointment- all they need is the sale date for corroboration to ease off of probable cause.
QuoteThis was a foreclosure. The owner still on title is either pissed off at having just lost their house (and whose contact address is probably the very house in question), or is the bank in which case GOOD LUCK getting ahold of anyone after hours.
This was a foreclosure, so do you really think the bank's going to inconvenience themselves and set closing for after-hours? Article heavily implies (granted, it doesn't say outright) that the couple didn't waste much time in getting over to the house.
QuoteDue diligence is great - but there's only so much you can do in a short time frame. And as I said, in this particular instance short of locating some of the paperwork of speaking with the realtor there's really no other due diligence you can do.
And our turn around for the Land Titles Office is 7-10 days. You drop it off, but you don't get back a Certificate of Title for 7-10 days. Lawyers have all kinds of forms and protocols to cover that problem so you still get possession that day, but registration is not immediate. And that's on a straight-forward transaction. A foreclosure is only going to be more complicated.
With even more of a paper trail. In a bank sale, we've got the bank, the buyers, their mortgage provider, the realtor, almost definitely an attorney for each side, not to mention the title insurer. You seriously expect me to believe there's no way they could have gotten a hold of any of up to six different parties that could verify the sale and date?
EDIT, Mk II: Also, where are you getting this "at night" portion of the story? The article doesn't say anything about time of day or even what day of the week this occurred... actually, the video at the link does point out it was a Thursday. So, so much for the weekend argument.
You're right. The article does not say it happened at night.
I realized why I thought it did - the article says they were charged with prowling. The charge in Canada is "Prowling At Night" - so the same action could be quite legal during the day, but becomes criminal at night.
It's rarely charged, so I've never litigated over exactly what "at night" means. I wonder how that'd work up north when you'd get 20+ hours of daylight (or 20+ horus of darkness). :hmm:
You're right that during the day there are plenty of people you could get ahold of. But not after 5pm. You're not going to be able to reach any lawyers, the title insurer, the mortgag cmpany, or the bank. The only ones who do try and be aailable after hours are realtors. But that's only by giving you their cell number. If they don't pick up you're out of luck. And they sure don't have after-hours answering service.
Fair enough. I'll get off your back now, since we're both just guessing about the time. You could be right, I could be right- we won't know without more details.
As an aside, I see some interesting differences between US real estate and Canadian real estate- you have a separate "Land Title Office," whereas our titles are conveyed directly by trust deeds, and they're filed directly with the county/parish clerk's office, and corroborated by records kept with the local tax assessor's office.
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 02:09:02 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 02:04:30 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
Having said that, this over-active attitude (call it vigilantism or whatever) rarely comes out of a vacuum. I'd be willing to bet that this neighborhood in question had seen an increase in burglaries. is lily ass white and not used to seeing black people.
Edited for clarity. And reality.
Yes, Seedy. Everything is about race and needs to be seen in black or white :rolleyes:
What makes you think the neighbors have personally seen an increase in burglaries?
Quote from: Razgovory on April 24, 2012, 03:06:49 PM
What makes you think the neighbors have personally seen an increase in burglaries?
That's often the back story for incidents like this.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on April 24, 2012, 02:27:02 PM
Fair enough. I'll get off your back now, since we're both just guessing about the time. You could be right, I could be right- we won't know without more details.
As an aside, I see some interesting differences between US real estate and Canadian real estate- you have a separate "Land Title Office," whereas our titles are conveyed directly by trust deeds, and they're filed directly with the county/parish clerk's office, and corroborated by records kept with the local tax assessor's office.
Yes, we have a very nice, centralized Land Titles Office which records all interests in property (and conversely, if an interest in property is not registered it literally does not exist). Google the Torrens system if you're curious (but if you are curious about land registration systems you need to give your head a shake).
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 03:09:15 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 24, 2012, 03:06:49 PM
What makes you think the neighbors have personally seen an increase in burglaries?
That's often the back story for incidents like this.
Well here's a different context: It was Georgia and the guy was black. Mine works better since there is no need to assume facts not in evidence.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 11:45:41 AM
Up here we have a centralized Land Titles registry which is very good, but I'm not 100% sure if police have online access. In any event if does take a few days for any new registration to actually hit the system, so if they'd bought the property that day it wouldn't be online yet.
actually the pending title change hits the system immediately - the final (which is stamped by the land title registry can take days).
But the question I have is why the police didnt just phone the realtor the check out the story? That has got to be close to the negligence line.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 03:13:54 PM
Yes, we have a very nice, centralized Land Titles Office which records all interests in property (and conversely, if an interest in property is not registered it literally does not exist). Google the Torrens system if you're curious (but if you are curious about land registration systems you need to give your head a shake).
Not quite true. If an interest in land is not registered it is just more difficult to prove. Many times an equitable interest will not be registred but it can still be asserted against people who are on title but have knowledge of the equitable interest. The really great property law exam questions are on fact patterns involving an unregistered interest in land which is conveyed buy the title holder to a third party purchaser.
Also, an unregistred holder of title may still have a duplicate certificate of title in their possession which is proof of ownership.
Apparently the Vigilantes have been arrested and charged. http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/charges-dropped-against-couple-arrested-after-tryi/nMgQq/
QuoteCharges have been dropped against a couple who got tossed in jail after visiting their son's new house, but not before they faced gun-wielding neighbors. Now, the neighbors are the ones behind bars.
Jean and Angelica Kalonji's son closed on a Newton County home Thursday and, on the agent's advice, they went over to change the locks.
Neighbors then showed up with guns drawn.
"(I was) told to put my hands up and to get out, otherwise he shot us," Jean Kalonji said.
The Kalonjis said they were so glad when Newton County sheriff's deputies arrived to straighten things out, but the deputies took them to jail and charged them with loitering and prowling.
"For me to get out, we had to pay bond," Kalonji said.
Channel 2's Jeff Dore talked with a spokesman for the Newton County sheriff, who said they have now dropped charges. The father-son pair of neighborhood watchmen in the confrontation turned themselves in to the Sheriff's Office Monday evening. Robert, 45, and Branden Canoles, 18, were charged with false imprisonment, aggravated assault and criminal trespass.
As for the deputies who arrested innocent new residents, they were not on administrative leave at this time.
"They just spontaneously arrested him, arrested his wife, threw them in jail, made no phone calls, made no effort to verify the truthfulness of what they were saying and told the people with the guns in essence, 'Thank you for your good service,'" Kalonji family attorney Don Samuel said.
The deputies are facing an internal investigation within the Newton County Sheriff's Department.
"The case is still fluid. We're still investigating the case. And also our Office of Professional Standards, there's an internal investigation as well," Lt. Mark Mitchell of the Newton County Sheriff's Department said.
The one of the charged individuals has a neck beard. Goddamn Hipsters.
Were the gunmen Oceanian-Americans?
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2012, 03:21:37 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 11:45:41 AM
Up here we have a centralized Land Titles registry which is very good, but I'm not 100% sure if police have online access. In any event if does take a few days for any new registration to actually hit the system, so if they'd bought the property that day it wouldn't be online yet.
actually the pending title change hits the system immediately - the final (which is stamped by the land title registry can take days).
But the question I have is why the police didnt just phone the realtor the check out the story? That has got to be close to the negligence line.
According to wiki (and my own memory) you guys only have a modified Torrens system, while the prairies have the full Torrens system.
Surely even the prairies have computerized their records. I have no idea what a full vs partial torrens system has to do with it.
...and the thread comes to a screeching halt.
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 04:22:39 PM
...and the thread comes to a screeching halt.
You shouldnt have posted.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2012, 04:09:14 PM
Surely even the prairies have computerized their records. I have no idea what a full vs partial torrens system has to do with it.
I'm handicapped because I worked a couple years in real estate - but that was close to 15 years ago! It definitely wasn't computerized back then.
Even now I think the records are comptuerized, but you still need to physically file original documents.
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 03:09:15 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 24, 2012, 03:06:49 PM
What makes you think the neighbors have personally seen an increase in burglaries?
That's often the back black story for incidents like this.
Edited for clarity. And reality. Again.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 04:30:49 PM
Even now I think the records are comptuerized, but you still need to physically file original documents.
Yeah, that is why there is a pending status put on immediately and the final comes about a day or so later. All transactions are done electronically with paper to follow. Has been that way for close to a decade. ;)
Fucking Canucks, always killing threads.
You can only dine out on dumb Americans and their guns for so long.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 02:04:30 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
Having said that, this over-active attitude (call it vigilantism or whatever) rarely comes out of a vacuum. I'd be willing to bet that this neighborhood in question had seen an increase in burglaries. is lily ass white and not used to seeing black people.
Edited for clarity. And reality.
The wife is white.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 04:31:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 03:09:15 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 24, 2012, 03:06:49 PM
What makes you think the neighbors have personally seen an increase in burglaries?
That's often the back black story for incidents like this.
Edited for clarity. And reality. Again.
So what's the Blackuweather forecast for tomorrow?
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 06:26:22 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 04:31:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 03:09:15 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 24, 2012, 03:06:49 PM
What makes you think the neighbors have personally seen an increase in burglaries?
That's often the back black story for incidents like this.
Edited for clarity. And reality. Again.
So what's the Blackuweather forecast for tomorrow?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesharkguys.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F02%2Follie.jpg&hash=3857704916e92abc065b86d1e7da949e483a96d3)
RAIN!
Quote from: JonasSalk on April 24, 2012, 06:12:22 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 02:04:30 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 01:59:18 PM
Having said that, this over-active attitude (call it vigilantism or whatever) rarely comes out of a vacuum. I'd be willing to bet that this neighborhood in question had seen an increase in burglaries. is lily ass white and not used to seeing black people.
Edited for clarity. And reality.
The wife is white.
So that's why they were so quick to pull guns. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/magazine/24prom-t.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1
Intermarriage between whites and blacks is repulsive and averse to every sentiment of pure American spirit. It is abhorrent and repugnant. It is subversive to social peace. It is destructive of moral supremacy, and ultimately this slavery to black beasts will bring this nation to a fatal conflict." Seaborn Roddenberry Congressmen from Georgia.
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 06:26:22 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 24, 2012, 04:31:18 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 24, 2012, 03:09:15 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 24, 2012, 03:06:49 PM
What makes you think the neighbors have personally seen an increase in burglaries?
That's often the back black story for incidents like this.
Edited for clarity. And reality. Again.
So what's the Blackuweather forecast for tomorrow?
Don't hate me because I'm enlightened. :hug: :hug: :hug:
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 01:50:59 PM
IMO the fact they are breaking into a house, at night, with no key or proof of ownership constitutes reasonable and probable grounds to arrest for break and enter.
Rememebr grounds for arrest are not the same as proof to obtain a conviction.
I missed the part where they didn't have a key. Do you have more information than is in the article? Would you agree that if they did have a key it was rather strange to arrest them?
I mean if I see someone going into a house the first thing I think isn't that they must be burglars.
Quote from: Maximus on April 24, 2012, 10:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 01:50:59 PM
IMO the fact they are breaking into a house, at night, with no key or proof of ownership constitutes reasonable and probable grounds to arrest for break and enter.
Rememebr grounds for arrest are not the same as proof to obtain a conviction.
I missed the part where they didn't have a key. Do you have more information than is in the article? Would you agree that if they did have a key it was rather strange to arrest them?
I mean if I see someone going into a house the first thing I think isn't that they must be burglars.
Again, another assumption on my part. But this one is a more fair assumption. On a foreclosure they are much less likely to be given the keys by the people who were just foreclosed on.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 10:08:17 PM
Quote from: Maximus on April 24, 2012, 10:03:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2012, 01:50:59 PM
IMO the fact they are breaking into a house, at night, with no key or proof of ownership constitutes reasonable and probable grounds to arrest for break and enter.
Rememebr grounds for arrest are not the same as proof to obtain a conviction.
I missed the part where they didn't have a key. Do you have more information than is in the article? Would you agree that if they did have a key it was rather strange to arrest them?
I mean if I see someone going into a house the first thing I think isn't that they must be burglars.
Again, another assumption on my part. But this one is a more fair assumption. On a foreclosure they are much less likely to be given the keys by the people who were just foreclosed on.
Wouldn't the Realtor have the key? I can't imagine they sent the new owners over to change the locks with a pair of bolt cutters.
If the previous owners didn't give up the keys when they were forced out, don't they usually basically just break in and put some sort of temporary locks on there? When we were looking at houses, we checked out a couple foreclosures, and both of them had temporary locks. Hell, one of them had a temporary door.
I'd assume the realtor advised them to change locks because they were given the bank's keys, which were presumably copies.
Btw, neighbors were charged.
http://www.ajc.com/news/newton-county-neighbors-charged-1424231.html
On one hand, what the neighbors did was over-zealous, and it seems the cops could have done more without having to make an arrest....on the other hand, I think making a huge stink out of what the neighbors did...starting a lengthy/expensive court process and throwing them in jail is overkill as well.
There should be a more reasonable way of dealing with that kind of momentary stupidity. Lashing maybe.
The ideal outcome would be if the vigilante types could somehow make a convincing apology to the neighbours and be all like "now we'll protect you with our mad guns, because you're our neighbours" and they can all have a beer and some bbq and laugh about the whole silly mix up.
The home along with the 11 acres was purchased for $55,000?!?
Wow.
Low population density ftw.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 25, 2012, 06:09:56 PM
Low population density ftw.
Newton County is kind of out in the sticks and home prices throughout Georgia have plummeted dramatically since 2007.
Plus, seriously, look at the house. It looks like a trailer.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 25, 2012, 06:09:56 PM
Low population density ftw.
I wouldn't count being held at gunpoint a win. From the last sentence of the article seems the son doesn't think so either.
Quote from: Tonitrus on April 25, 2012, 05:54:34 PM
On one hand, what the neighbors did was over-zealous, and it seems the cops could have done more without having to make an arrest....on the other hand, I think making a huge stink out of what the neighbors did...starting a lengthy/expensive court process and throwing them in jail is overkill as well.
There should be a more reasonable way of dealing with that kind of momentary stupidity. Lashing maybe.
When a gun is involved (or any dangerous weapon), only takes a moment of stupidity for someone to end up dead.
Quote from: Jacob on April 25, 2012, 06:01:01 PM
The ideal outcome would be if the vigilante types could somehow make a convincing apology to the neighbours and be all like "now we'll protect you with our mad guns, because you're our neighbours" and they can all have a beer and some bbq and laugh about the whole silly mix up.
Good idea. Obama should get involved and have a beer summit (after having prematurely weighed in & called one side 'stupid').
Quote from: garbon on April 26, 2012, 09:22:09 AM
I wouldn't count being held at gunpoint a win. From the last sentence of the article seems the son doesn't think so either.
Cause people never get mugged in city centers, right.
Quote from: garbon on April 25, 2012, 05:35:33 PM
Btw, neighbors were charged.
http://www.ajc.com/news/newton-county-neighbors-charged-1424231.html
Well, thank you Johnny-come-lately.
Quote from: derspiess on April 26, 2012, 10:11:40 AMGood idea. Obama should get involved and have a beer summit (after having prematurely weighed in & called one side 'stupid').
:hug:
Quote from: derspiess on April 26, 2012, 10:11:40 AM
Quote from: Jacob on April 25, 2012, 06:01:01 PM
The ideal outcome would be if the vigilante types could somehow make a convincing apology to the neighbours and be all like "now we'll protect you with our mad guns, because you're our neighbours" and they can all have a beer and some bbq and laugh about the whole silly mix up.
Good idea. Obama should get involved and have a beer summit (after having prematurely weighed in & called one side 'stupid').
... but there is only room on his living room wall for *one* Nobel Peace Prize. ;)
Quote from: derspiess on April 26, 2012, 10:11:40 AM
Quote from: Jacob on April 25, 2012, 06:01:01 PM
The ideal outcome would be if the vigilante types could somehow make a convincing apology to the neighbours and be all like "now we'll protect you with our mad guns, because you're our neighbours" and they can all have a beer and some bbq and laugh about the whole silly mix up.
Good idea. Obama should get involved and have a beer summit (after having prematurely weighed in & called one side 'stupid').
Running around with a gun playing Pretend Cop is pretty fucking stupid. Sanford PD has enough of those.
But by all means, since it's the smart thing to do, go out and patrol your neighborhood with your gun, derblackiess. :P
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 26, 2012, 01:01:19 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 26, 2012, 10:11:40 AM
Quote from: Jacob on April 25, 2012, 06:01:01 PM
The ideal outcome would be if the vigilante types could somehow make a convincing apology to the neighbours and be all like "now we'll protect you with our mad guns, because you're our neighbours" and they can all have a beer and some bbq and laugh about the whole silly mix up.
Good idea. Obama should get involved and have a beer summit (after having prematurely weighed in & called one side 'stupid').
Running around with a gun playing Pretend Cop is pretty fucking stupid. Sanford PD has enough of those.
But by all means, since it's the smart thing to do, go out and patrol your neighborhood with your gun, derblackiess. :P
:huh:
:lol:
Quote from: derspiess on April 26, 2012, 10:11:40 AM
Quote from: Jacob on April 25, 2012, 06:01:01 PM
The ideal outcome would be if the vigilante types could somehow make a convincing apology to the neighbours and be all like "now we'll protect you with our mad guns, because you're our neighbours" and they can all have a beer and some bbq and laugh about the whole silly mix up.
Good idea. Obama should get involved and have a beer summit (after having prematurely weighed in & called one side 'stupid').
Or perhaps we can have a tea party instead.
How does the Second Amendment get involved? The jackass with the gun said it was his right to go assaulting his neighbors.
What interests me is that they're being held without bond. Given that there was no wounding going on, that tells me these guys probably have a history.