Colorado: Red flag used against officer in good shoot

8 days in and the abuse has already started.

In Colorado, 8 days after red flag law went into effect, a woman has red flagged one of the officers who shot her son in a suicide by cop situation. The law allows LEOs or family members to file. The woman falsely claimed the cop and her have a child together to get standing.

Court has not yet had the initial hearing,do not know if the officer’s guns have already been removed.
https://www.9news.com/mobile/article/news/local/next/colorados-red-flag-law-used-to-target-officer-involved-in-fatal-shooting/

7 Likes

Article says:
[…] Both officers were later cleared of any wrongdoing, but Susan Holmes became a vocal critic of police policy in the years since […]

Her petition should be denied in few seconds after was read.

4 Likes

Abuse is inevitable.

My Aunt Kim & I don’t get along well…

She admitted not to long ago after being mad at me to call on me only to relies Louisiana does not have red flag laws.

4 Likes

Based on my personal experience, just gonna say should is not a comforting word.
What should happen is this never should have even gotten in front of a judge at all. These laws are written for abuse, and if written at all there should be frightening penalties for trying to misuse them.

And that’s a prime example of why.

I’ve been up close and personal with a case where someone was wrongly accused and as horrendous as that was, it would have been worse if there was a fed flag law in place.

4 Likes

In the ERPO, under penalty of perjury, Susan Holmes claims she has a child in common with CSU police Officer Phillip Morris.

Holmes told the FOX31 Problems she planned to argue in court that she had a different interpretation of what “have a child in common” actually means.

3 Likes

In the ERPO, under penalty of perjury, Susan Holmes claims she has a child in common with CSU police Officer Phillip Morris.

Holmes told the FOX31 Problems she planned to argue in court that she had a different interpretation of what “have a child in common” actually means.

Can anyone explain to me what different interpretation there is to “have a child in common” means? To me it means either biological, adopted, or step-child…? What am I missing?

Please be tactful in your response.

5 Likes

For me, she just used this phrase [“have a child in common with CSU police Officer”] only to be able to file the petition. I don’t see any other logical explanation.
I can understand her anger (losing a child doesn’t make life easy) but this is not the way “normal” person expresses grief.

4 Likes

I’m pretty sure the child in common is her son who he shot. So they both have a relationship to the young man. And that’s not even close to what is meant. And I hope they drop the full weight of perjury penalty on her because she is deliberately misusing the law… and that’s where this law is most dangerous… deliberate misuse.

I feel sympathy for this woman, but civilized people don’t get to use their pain as an excuse to harm others. That way lies vengeance and retribution as a core principle of excusing people’s bad behavior.

8 Likes

I am sure what she will argue is the child in common is the fact he knows her form the shooting of her son and the dead son is the child in common.

NO I do not agree with this, but anyone want to bet against me this is what she tries to argue?

8 Likes

That’s exactly what I think @DBrogue

4 Likes

I am going to go out on a limb and say she is going to say the child they “have in common” is her son that the LEO shot.

4 Likes

This is one topic that should not exist. If the courts would do their jobs and legislatures follow the Constitution, we would not be discussing this.
Factually, the police with Psych Eval authority and some decent guidance on evaluation of threats have more legal authority than needed to deal with dangerous individuals.
The Protective order from a judge is legal authority to remove a persons weapons from their possession. They can be transferred to a relative or other individual pending a hearing. No other disposition available, The police can take possession and assume responsibility for the weapons. Including having to pay for or replace them if the judge finally decides to return them to the individual.
If a person is reported for whatever reason, then you assign officers trained to evaluate threats and coordinate response in the system.
The current ideas of Red Flags is utter Bovine defecation that flies in the face of Federal and State Constitutions. What we need is for the various legal entities to work on getting the bugs out of using the legal authorities to deal with this in Constitutionally correct framework.

3 Likes

Constitutional rights are rendered meaningless; the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms; the 4th Amendment right that requires a search warrant to be based on probable cause; the 6th Amendment right to confront accusers in a court of the law; and the 14th Amendment rights that prohibit the states from enforcing laws that abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens and deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Federal courts should strike down red flag laws.

10 Likes

Welcome @Jeffrey14

Great first post.

4 Likes

I’ve said this before about Red Flags. Any Red Flag and I mean any Red Flag that comes across a judge’s desk will be enforced. All it would take is for one Red Flag to be denied and that individual actually did shoot someone. Its game over for that judges career.

3 Likes

I agree with others. The child in common was hers that he shot with justification. She is now being investigated for fraud.

5 Likes

:+1:
Bad decisions have to be followed by consequences. That the rule of our life.

4 Likes

Not sure where the “abuse” is here. Maybe “attempted abuse,” at best. A woman angry at the police tried to make a fraudulent red flag charge against an officer, claiming they have a child together to give her legal standing. The charge is denied, there are no repurcussions to the police officer, and she is now being investigated for fraud.

Sounds kind of like exactly the way the legal system ought to work.

I know folks on this forum generally oppose red flag laws, but I’ve seen mostly hypothetical abuse as justifying the concern. @Zee, you’ve told a tragic and compelling story about a friend, but also note that no red flag law was used in that situation. In the meantime, 17 states have red flag laws, including ours, and I just don’t hear the stories or see the stats of actual rampant abuse. In contrast, the cases in our state suggest really painful situations where someone is clearly imminently suicidal or homocidal, and some real damage was avoided. Sure some people have tried to use these laws for less than noble motives, like any other law, but they’ve almost always been stopped at the initial complaint like in the case quoted here. On the plus side, though, anecdotal evidence suggests that both suicides and the number of murdered spouses/partners are down as a result of these laws.

I know these are tough conversations, and my hope is that we now have enough evidence to have them based on actual experiences, not just on extreme scenarios that we’re concerned may happen in the future.

3 Likes

Legally, her filing this would be abuse of process.

4 Likes

… because red flag laws were not in place at that time. My perspective is that if that is what can be done WITHOUT them, what will happen WITH them. People who are inclined to abuse the old laws are not going to get better behaved with newer easier to violate laws.

I’ve seen far too many people who are willing to be vindictive, who feel entitled to punish the other person, and who have no respect for the law in doing so, to feel any sense of security in the face of these laws. All it takes is an angry neighbor, a resentful ex, or a boss unwilling to pay what you are legally due … and a phone call. I’ve seen it without these laws, and with them… well, I think the bar should be much higher than that.

Don’t get me wrong, I know a lot of very nice people. But I’ve lived long enough to see a share of the other kind. Even if they are one in thousands, the amount of destruction they can do on a grudge or a whim is a compelling enough for me to want no part of these laws.

4 Likes