Odd encounter with law enforcement.

D

Daddycat

New member
Heres the story. This afternoon while my wife and I were going over our new security system with the rep who had just finished activating it, the doorbell rang. I went to the door and saw a police officer on the door step. I opened the door and he proceeded to tell me that he was investigating an illegal entry to a townhouse at the end of our row of townhouses. This particular townhouse isn't occupied yet. Indeed we just moved into our townhouse on the 12th. I invited him to come in as he was asking me if i had seen anyone suspicious hanging about. Now I've worked in a cooperative manner with the police (primarily probation)in my role as a therapist for the last 18 years. As such I appreciate the job they do and have no axe to grind with law enforcement in general. In fact I'm waiting to pass a background check in order to be hired as a probation officer with the VA DOC. Heres the thing, after my wife and I had answered his questions about who we might or might not have seen in the neighborhood (primarily kids) and he was about to leave, he asked for my name. Ok, makes sense. Then he asked for my middle initial, hmm. I gave it to him. Then he asked for my birthdate. At this I felt somewhat surprised and taken back, however I gave him this information as well. He then asked for my wifes name but not her middle initial or her birthdate. Then he gave me his card and left. This has been brothering me all day. I have this nagging suspicion that he wanted to run a make on me. Why, I haven't the foggiest. I don't look like a "suspicious character" and it seems pretty evident that the aforementioned illegal entry was the work of kids. New construction sites almost always experiences some of this.
I was carrying concealed at the time, however
I feel confident that I was covered up, and afterall I was in my own home. What do you Tflers think? Am I just being oversensitive?
Any feedback would be appreciated, in particular from any LEO's on line. I've thought about calling this guy and asking him whats up, however I'm not sure that this would be a productive move or even a reasonable one. I wish I had asked him at the time and would if I had it to do over again. What do you folks think of this story?
Daddycat

------------------
"A rigid investment in flexability is but another closed system of thinking"
 
The following is purely my take and my take only. Before I answer questions from ANY "offical", I want to know who is asking and exactly why they are asking. Absent the "right" answers to what I consider reasonable questions, a polite "no comment" would be my reply.

Others might well feel differently, and they might be correct, where I could certainly be wrong. That is however, beside the point, as above noted.
 
Kinda strange, but cops, especially experienced ones, will sometimes throw you a curve just to see how you react. In high school I was questioned about some vandalism and one of the questions was something semi-personal about my mother. Can't remember right off hand what it was, but I remember I was really put off. I thought about it later and realized it had nothing to do with the questioning, it was just something asked to get a reaction.
 
I take a dim view of "curve" questions when the officer is asking for community help...especially in a person's domicile. DaddyCat's post is a case in point: Bet it'll make you think twice before inviting a cop in next time. And to what end? His personal questions only served to widen the gulf.

How 'bout this for a response:
My middle name and birthdate? You first, officer. You married? What's your wifes name? Oh, one more thing....what's your address?
Rich
 
The cop was on a fishing expedition, his questions except for asking if you'ed seen any suspicious people in the neighborhood none of the rest added anything to the nighborhood break in, nor were they anything more other than prying into your private lives. I would resent some coming to my door in such a manner. Remember what happened to the nosey government census takers and their screwy questions. Most people on these threads sent them packing.
 
I can think of one reasonable explanation: some departments like to make sure their guys are "actually working" so they make 'em record the names of citizens they come in contact with. It's not about tracking the citizenry, it's about tracking the cops :).

Dunno for sure, but it's possible...

Jim
 
If you gave any information to the officer that was pivotable to the case, or if a detective or DA's investigator wants to re-interview you, your complete name and birthdate makes it easier to find and verify that you are the person who talked to the officer.

Ther may be a couple of dozen 'Jim Thompson's in town, but less than a handful of 'Jim Allen Thompson's and only one 'Jim Allen Thompson, born 2/31/60.'

On the other paw, a lot of departments require that any interview be followed by a Report.

One copy of this report will go into the case file that the officer is working on, another will go into a file on the officer.

If ever that officer is accused of civil rights violations, misconduct, bribes, graft, or shining the Chiefs car with carbolic acid, Internal Affairs will get out the officers file and use the copies of the reports to check up on anyone the officer had 'official contact' with.

It's sort of 'fishing for complaints' and one of the reasons I can't stomach IAD.

"Hello, sir, I'm with Internal Affairs Division and I'm investigating Deputy LawDog for Official Misconduct. When he spoke with you on Feb 31 of this year, did he do anything to make you nervous? Are you sure about that? Spit on the floor? Ogle your wife? Grope the cat? Sit lasciviously? Steal your breathing air? Track mud on your carpet? Well, if you think of anything he did wrong, give us a call."

:mad:

LawDog

[This message has been edited by LawDog (edited July 25, 2000).]
 
When investigating any serious crime, such as a burglary, the investigating officer has to canvass the neighborhood to see if anyone saw anything. Rather than report, "I talked to the neighbors and they didn't see anything," it is better for the officer to list who he talked to, where they live, etc. The birth date helps narrow down who you are if you happen to be Bill Smith and they need to talk to you some more.

There is nothing sinister about this. It is just good investigative technique and report writing. Especially if the case doesn't result in arrests until several years later, you have moved, and you are needed as a witness. That's how I explained to witnesses why I needed such detailed information about them.
 
Daddycat,
Like some others here said he wanted your name etc. for his report.

Considering that you are in a background investigation right now I would advise you wouldn't want to "rock the boat" at this time. I don't know how much you know about backgrounds but the background investigator makes a recommendation on whether you should be hired or not. Basically your future employment as a LEO is in his hands at this point of the game.

[This message has been edited by mrat (edited July 25, 2000).]
 
I probably shouldn't but I will through this in as well. Officers (myslef included) will often ask for anyones info they come into contact with to "run them". There are a lot of warrant arrest made of crime victims and witnesses after getting their info.

------------------
Gunslinger
 
I'm having a real hard time with the explanation, "They need your birthdate, SSN, mother's name and Religious Persuasion for identification."

This is a case in which they have the potential witness name and address. What more do they need for a reinterview of someone who cooperated in the interest of the Law? The technique does nothing but dumb down the couch potato and alienate the sentient.

As for his report and IA, screw 'em both. Shall we next require a financial records check of every "potential" witness in order to dot the "I's" and cross the "T's"? How about a telephone/computer tap "just in case". This is pure BS. This is about power. This is about Privacy. And most important, this is about someone's domicile.
Rich

[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited July 25, 2000).]
 
Thanks for the responses. Here is my thinking about some of them:Jim, Lawdog, bruels, mrat. Your explanation about needing my name and birthdate in order to write an appropriate report that may be used to locate me again and make sure I"m the one who
the officer interviewed makes sense. Having the officer do this as a interdepartamental mechanism for accountability also makes sense. Here where I get stuck: He did not ask my wife who was as active as I was in the interview for her middle initial or birthdate. Lets say he was reluctant to ask a woman her age(I think this is reaching, but...) why did he not ask her for her middle initial. Surely the same report writing criteria would apply to all parties being interviewed. I'm sadened that Gunslingers response makes sense also. As Rich pointed out he had OUR name and address.
We had made it clear that we had just bought the property and were the owners. As for inviting him in to begin with, well now I wish I hadn't. As I stated earlier I have an appreciation for Leos in general and that hasn't changed. However now I have a slight anxiety about encountering this guy again.(If he patrols the neighborhood for example)
Afterall, I do carry a weapon(with ccw) and I am going through a background check. Any more thoughts from the rest of you would be appreciated. Now if I get a birthday card I'll REALLY be concerned :)

------------------
"A rigid investment in flexability is but another closed system of thinking"
 
Daddycat, if they've got enough information to find you, they general reasoning is your wife will either be close by, or you'll know where she is.

LawDog
 
Thanks Lawdog, That makes a little more sense to me.
Daddycat

------------------
"A rigid investment in flexability is but another closed system of thinking"
 
Some witnesses are more mobile than others. Try locating Juan Gonzalez (no date of birth) in a farm worker town after Juan has chased the fruit picking season up and down the west coast. Sometimes your witnesses end up being suspects.
 
In all my dealings with LEO's doing follow up reports to accidents, crimes, they have always asked for name (full) and birthdate and place of residence for the report. Now, the only thing that I WON'T give is my SSN. In Idaho, when the place where I worked burned down (no arson, electrical but they had to make sure) they asked for my SSN. I refused to give it. They asked why and I told them that it was a private number which is not to be used for proving who I am. The LEO didn't say anything but at the time, he prob. thought I had something to hide. On DL I refuse to have my SSN printed (they issue a state number if you do this), I won't print it on my checks (or write it on the checks) or even on my CHL.

USP45usp
 
Here's a possible...

Some police agencies, once they've ascertained that a person lives at the home, use that information in their 911 data banks. It's a way of keeping the databanks updated. That way if a call comes in from your address, they're hopefully a little ahead of the curve.

The birthdate thing, though, is a little strange.

I would have asked him why he needed that information.

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daddycat:
...about to leave, he asked for my name. Ok, makes sense. Then he asked for my middle initial, hmm. I gave it to him. Then he asked for my birthdate. At this I felt somewhat surprised and taken back...
[/quote]


Daddycat,

Something the others didn't bring up: all he did was ask for information that is on your driver's license. Can't a LEO ask that you provide some identification in connection with official police business? I quess he could have asked for your DL, right?

I just don't see it as a problem. I'd be glad to know that in my new neighborhood, there is a police presence and crimes are investigated. I want the cops that patrol the sector that I live in to know me and, more importantly, to be able to realize the faces that are not associated with my address.

Joe
 
Numbers,
I agree 100% about being grateful that there is a police presence that follows up on crime reports. Thats why I invited him in, rather than leave him on the doorstep. I wanted to give the message that this home cooperates with Law enforcement and that he is appreciated. And this may very well not be a problem at all. The feedback from everyone helps me keep things in perspective. In particular it helps to hear that others find it a matter of routine that LEOs ask for full name and birthdate. However, regarding him asking for information
that he could get from my drivers license, well, once again, under different circumstances I would have produced my ID and not thought twice about it,IE, out driving or walking around the neighborhood. After my having invited him in and gone out of my way to involve my wife in answering questions(none of which I had to do, afterall
I didn't even have to talk to him)had he asked for my ID I would have considered that quite over the top. The crime we are talking about was an illegal entry into an unoccupied townhouse, nothing was taken, the garage door was damaged by a forcible entry,
certainly worth following up on, however not the crime of the century.

------------------
"A rigid investment in flexability is but another closed system of thinking"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top