Kid threatens to kill 23 students and a teacher

J

jimpeel

New member
So the kid threatens the school in an e-mail which they traced back to him. They then went to his house and searched and confiscated several firearms of various type.

SOURCE

Here is the relevant part that I found curious:

"Once the student was identified, they searched his house and confiscated rifles, handguns and several computers."

...

"... the weapons were locked up when they searched his house and were under the supervision of his father.

“The student did not have access to the weapons. They were in the care and custody of the father,” Donahue said."
Click to expand...

The conundrum:

WHY DID THEY CONFISCATE THE FIREARMS???
 
Since the threatening email describes the specific weapon types the kid said he planned to use, as well as "3,000 rounds of ammo", the guns (and likely the ammo, as well) would be collected as evidence against him, specifically evidence of the legitimacy of his threat.
 
The authority is an interesting question, the reason is pretty simple... The weapons were under the "care and custody" of the Newtown killers mother too.
 
But according to the article, these were locked up, and the student did not have access. Perhaps the father simply handed them over, but I'm not sure that LE could have gotten them without a warrant, and the next question would (of course) be whether the warrant would have to specifically include the contents of the safe.
 
How do we know that the student didn't have access? He could have known the combination or the location of the key, and his father might have had no idea.

Also, if you read other articles on the subject, the police *were* serving a search warrant, and it would be unbelievable that the guns mentioned in the threatening email wouldn't be included in the search warrant.
 
All speculation, but if I'm those cops, I'd be wanting 1 of 2 things... either any firearms in the house listed on the warrant or the kid in custody until the issue is resolved. "Locked up" doesn't mean much when the key is on the dad's keychain and he takes a nap, or a baseball bat to the head.

Ala Newtown.
 
chris in va said:
Scary that someone can hack into your email account and sic the SWAT team on your family and take your possessions.
Click to expand...

Confusion: Are you say this is what happened; or are you saying that this is a possibility in the future that someone could perform to harass someone outside of their household?
 
and the next question would (of course) be whether the warrant would have to specifically include the contents of the safe.
Click to expand...

If the warrant was for items that could possibly be found in the safe, then the police have the right to search the safe. But if the police were looking solely for a stolen big-screen TV, they couldn't go looking through night-stand drawers or inside the microwave oven.
 
Brian Pfleuger said:
"Locked up" doesn't mean much when the key is on the dad's keychain and he takes a nap, or a baseball bat to the head.
Click to expand...

You are assuming there is a key. What if the safe has a combination lock? A ball bat to the head would simply send that knowledge off to Glory.
 
Kids can be inquisitive. If the combination was written down *anywhere*, there's a good chance the kid knows it. Regardless, the point is that there's no way to know for certain that the kid didn't have access.
 
Well, I didn't read any other articles, so I wasn't aware that there was a warrant in play. ScottRiqui, I think you're right about inclusion in the warrant. It's been a while since I had to really get down on the nitty-gritty of a home search involving a warrant.
 
If there is a warrant, the cops may seize the firearms regardless of whose control imthey were under. If I were the father I'd be angry at the son.
 
Threatening schools is a crime. These guns were used in the commission of this crime. Therefore, they were taken. Progunners complain that existing laws aren't enforced and that it leads to new laws. Well, this is an instance where the old laws were enforced and a tragedy possibly prevented. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Saying they were in the father's care doesn't say anything other than the dad had the key and was "pretty sure" the kid didn't know where it was.

We should be promoting this story
 
Even though they "confiscated" them, the dad might have given them up willingly. I'm sure he was pretty freaked out.
 
Hardworker:
Threatening schools is a crime. These guns were used in the commission of this crime. Therefore, they were taken.
Click to expand...

So, if the kid made the same threats, but planned to use his uncles guns and ammo (from across the street) that were also locked up in a safe, then they were used in the commission of a crime? Would they be confiscated? What if he planned to steal guns from a local pawn shop and use them? Would they be confiscated because they were used in the commission of a crime?

Locked in a safe, no matter where they are, if proven to be "not accessible" to the kid, means they were NOT used in the commission of a crime, and are not subject to confiscation. To be confiscated, the dad must have let the kid have access to them, know the safe combo, or have access to the key, etc.
 
There is no way to make a gun completely non-accessible to a kid unless it's a combo lock with no key. Just because the dad says he kept the key with him doesn't mean the kid couldn't get the key.

Being that it is a kid, the dad will probably get the guns back. But assuming that a safe automatically makes a gun inaccessible is wrong.
 
Scary that someone can hack into your email account and sic the SWAT team on your family and take your possessions.
Click to expand...

No, what is scarey is that some people don't seem to know that this can happen, does happen, and happens easily.

As soon as the kid made the threat a crime was committed. At that point the cops subpena the ISP that the email came through and that tracks the email back to the source in most cases. Then they get the warrant and come knocking and it can happen very fast given the current climate.

But you knew this so it's not that scarey right :D
 
The people who actually shoot up schools don't email and let them know first. This is just some sad kid crying out for attention...

that is however reguardless of the point, I'm not legally informed enough to speculate on the legality of this seizure... I can only hope those effected take a good long hard look at the law and be sure they were not wronged by the PD/county/state.

Leaving a home/family defenseless is no trifling matter, specially when word gets out to the community about what was threatened and emotions run high. I personally would take my family to another residence for a week or 2 until things died down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top