There is new info from this paper - The sheriffs view:
Garfield County Sheriff Lou Vallario defends decision
GLENWOOD SPRINGS - Use of the Garfield County All Hazards Response Team (AHRT) was appropriate to seize Tom Shiflett's son for medical care because of Shiflett's confrontational history and repeated lack of cooperation, according to Garfield County Sheriff Lou Vallario.
"I wouldn't have done it if I didn't think we would have been able to accomplish it with just the deputies we had on duty," Vallario said. "The end result of what happened was based on (Shiflett's) decisions, not mine."
The team used force to break into Shiflett's home Friday night in Apple Tree Park near New Castle, and seized his 11-year-old son, Jon Shiflett. The boy was examined and returned hours later with the recommendation to ice his bruises and take Tylenol.
More at the link.
The doctor(s?) at the hospital, evidently held the kid for observation for about 18 hours to make sure that the head trauma was non-life threatening. I don't think we can fault the medical staff for this. It was a reasonable precaution, given the nature of head wounds to children.
What appears to be at odds, are the descrepencies in the two "stories." That is, the story as told by Shiflett and that told by county personel.
A first responder with West Care Ambulance wrote in an affidavit that she and others in an ambulance crew also believed the boy needed medical treatment.
The responder wrote that paramedics left the residence for fear of their safety after Tom Shiflett refused to let them treat his son and became "verbally abusive" to the ambulance crew.
I would think the the above was also told to the Social workers. They went to Shiflett's home, the next day, with preconceived ideas as to the belligerence of the father and the actual state of the child.
The social workers didn't interview the owner of the park, who was there at the time of the paramedics, who said:
Talbott said he was there when paramedics responded, and that Shiflett was not yelling or acting abusive. He only asked them to leave, Talbott said, and paramedics were in fact acting belligerent.
Classic "He said, She Said" situation.
It makes one wonder at what the attitude of the DSS folks might have been, had the paramedics not reported the alleged abusive behavior of Shiflett.
If Shiflett was not combative or abusive as the statements by Talbott seem to indicate, then there was an abuse of power perpetrated first, by the responders and secondly, by the DSS people. This is further bourne out by what the paper reports:
Community relations sheriff's deputy Tanny McGinnis said two deputies were first sent to notify Shiflett of a court order for his son's medical treatment and that Shiflett did not comply.
Notice that Shiflett was notified of the court order. The CR Officer does not say that the warrant was presented. Ommission or fact? Shiflett was under no legal obligation to comply if the warrant was not presented.
Also notice that there was no mention that Shiflett was abusive or combative towards the deputies? The CR Officer would have reported this to the newspaper had that occured, I would think. I have no doubt that the paper would have reported such, since it has so far done an excellent job of actually reporting the entire event... Even to the point of reporting that Talbott is a freelance writer for the paper (full disclosure).
But in the second story by the paper, it is now claimed that the warrant was in fact signed and presented, that Shiflett became abusive with the two officers, that the officers left out of concern for their safety and the sheriff elected to use his CAHRT (SWAT) team to execute the warrant, based upon his own perceptions of Shiflett's past behavior.
A lot of unanswered questions remain.
As it is, I cannot find fault with the Judge or the SWAT team. Both were acting in good faith. That leaves the first responders, the DSS people, the Sheriff and last but not least, Mr. Shiflett himself.
