An off-duty fireman spotted a fire and gave chase to a vehicle he saw leaving the scene. He probably followed my neighbor who has a black Ford Ranger and parks across the street from the site of the fire. In a distance of a block and a half that included one corner, he managed to lose sight of the vehicle and decided that my son’s slow moving black Ford Ranger was driven by an arsonist also. The fireman did not accomplish this incredible feat alone. He was accompanied by his sleuthy wife who was driving their red pick-up truck. My son’s pulling in the alley and backing into his normal spot next to the back door was reported as, “He’s doing a one 180, he knows he’s been spotted, he’s coming back out”. (This may not be exact, but it was 3rd hand by the time it went through dispatch, and the officer.)
My son did not come back out, unaware of the fire in the neighborhood that was reported as “someone set the trees in the park on fire.” and that he was now the prime suspect due to his driving a very common vehicle. He was in a good mood having just returned from visiting friends which required him to pass within a block of the fire to get home.
The hysterical nature of this event continued after the police arrived, but things got worse. Because they gave a fellow city employee more credibility than my son who belonged in the neighborhood and could account for his exact path home, the police subjected him to an abusive and coercive interrogation on the front porch.
When he could not be coerced into confessing, one of the officers went in our backyard and took the gas can for our weedeater we store in the garage and placed it in the back of my son’s truck. This officer believed that an accelerant would be necessary to set the park on fire and a gas can in the truck would provide probable cause to search the vehicle, and would make my son confess.
By then a third officer had been to the site of the fire which was a pile of Christmas trees waiting for the City to remove. He hadn’t conveyed this information to the other officers as the third officer was too busy on the phone with the witness. After all, they had two witnesses claiming arson, although by then, the fire call had been aborted, no one had been seen standing, walking, or running away from the fire. There was no damage.
When they couldn’t coerce a confession, the police arrested my son and issued my son a citation for open container that had been legally stored behind the seat of his truck. They confiscated the liquor and left the gas can. (An arrest is necessary to issue a citation. They didn’t take him to jail.)
This swift justice took place from 7:30 until 8:30 at night.
We spent the following days documenting what had happened and how. We knew the can was planted and were able to document this. We were able to eliminate the fireman and his wife as having planted the gas can. With the police report, we were able to identify which of the officers was in the backyard alone.
Through a strange set of events earlier the day of the incident, we were able to have photographic evidence that the gas can was not in the truck prior to my son’s leaving for his friend’s house.
The same circumstances allowed for recognizable footprints left next to the truck which the officer had reported as being “in the alley behind the house”. He also reported that the liquor was openly visible. It was visible after he searched the truck and uncovered it from under the clothing behind the seat. He reported a gas can in the truck, but failed to report that he had just put it there. He did all this knowing that my son and I were occupied in the front of the house as were the other two officers. He had to open the truck door to have enough light to see anything.
In trying to incriminate my son, the officer incriminated himself. It has been almost three weeks since we reported this and I don’t know if the officer has been suspended or if the investigation continues. My phonecalls have not been returned. If he is not prosecuted, his superiors are guilty of obstruction.
The officers were laughing boisterously as they left the house. If the officer told the other officers what he had done, they are guilty of obstruction. Filing a false report is a misdemeanor. Planting false evidence is a felony like perjury. These are fairly serious crimes when they cause harm to other people.
My son was cited for open container under Title 23-505 which any one of the three officers should have recognized as unsupportable because of the City Ordinance 4-2-22.
TITLE 23 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CHAPTER 5 PERMITS AND LICENSES 23-505. TRANSPORTATION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. (1) Alcoholic liquor lawfully purchased may be transported, but no person shall break open, or allow to be broken or opened any container of alcoholic liquor, or drink, or use, or allow to be drunk, or used any alcoholic liquor therein while the same is being transported. Provided however, that an unsealed alcoholic beverage container may be transported in an enclosed trunk compartment or behind the last upright seat of a vehicle which has no trunk compartment.
4-2-22: POSSESSION OF OPEN CONTAINERS PROHIBITED:
(B) Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall prohibit the possession of an open container of liquor within the following areas:
(2) Within any private residence or upon the yard thereabout, or within any apartment, duplex, condominium, boarding house or other structure lawfully used as a permanent residence, or within any common area or area designated exclusively for and appurtenant to such residential occupancy.
Also, the truck was parked. My son was not in the vehicle. He’d been home for awhile when the police arrived. The hot pursuit was not by the police, although one of them claimed this to be the case. I had seen my son drive in and followed shortly thereafter by a red truck. The red truck spent a lot of time in the street with the witnesses trying to catch a glimpse of the would be arsonist , who was already in the house in the bathroom. They couldn’t have made a mistake… they never lost sight of the truck. Well, a little math and a little common sense tells you that the witness was behind the first truck as it made the corner, which was accelerating and overtook the second vehicle as he was slowing and had pulled over to make the turn into the alley. The witness wouldn’t have been able to see this switch until they came past the house on the corner. They never saw the two vehicles together or ignored the faster vehicle. They saw only a slow moving black Ford Ranger with it’s rear license plate obliterated making the corner and thought that the slow moving black Ford Ranger pulling into the alley were the same. But both witness were certain they had never lost sight of the vehicle.
The officer lying about the location of the vehicle and the location of the liquor is very relevant here. This is perjury. The officer took the liquor and in doing so, he destroyed my son’s defense for the location of the bottle. He took the bottle, later the bottle was photographed and the contents “disposed of”. But he couldn’t take the truck off our property. By saying that the truck was in the alley, he caused the other officer to write a bad citation.
For your own protection from police abuse, keep your garage and your cars locked. Park in your driveway or in your yard. Make it a habit. Do not park in the public right-of-way. Buy a digital camera, preferably a video camera. Never let a member of your family be interrogated without a witness and you have the right to tell the police to get off your property. You do not have to speak to them without an attorney. You don’t have to let them in your house without a warrant. Never let them separate you from your family members. I was standing inside the house and could hear the abuse. That is not good enough. With two people, there won’t be abuse. Verbal harassment is damaging. Don’t let it happen.
Clean out your vehicles…
Most of us are polite and will do what we are asked. The police have all the time in the world. They are on the clock and we are paying them. Don’t let them force a sense of urgency on you. They wouldn’t be concerned this much about a pile of trash if they actually had a real crime to investigate. Idaho Falls must be pretty boring if they had to make a Federal case out of this.. Which ironically, they did.
This incident proved to me that when there is no trouble, they will make trouble. And we will be the recipients. The City is not going to pay your attorney to defend these unwarranted intrusions. The City will not pay your doctor bill when you have PTSD from one of these incidents.
Separating people is a police tactic and it is very hard to not be intimidated when a large man in uniform, skilled in doing this, tries it. A way to avoid this is to simply grab the other person’s hand and don’t let go for any reason. Don’t think about being embarrassed. Just do it. Stand with your back to a wall or your vehicle. Don’t let an officer get behind you. Make them face you. Don’t believe everything they say because they lie to confuse you.
Don’t let them traumatize you. As you see how they came here, half-cocked, they will gaslight you because they don’t know what is going on. My son and I were honest in every detail, except his comment about the bottle of whiskey. (Described later.) Two of the officers lied about the circumstances in trying to undermine my son. Just tell them to arrest you and let them know that you will follow up on a wrongful arrest. That was the only thing that got rid of them that evening.
We had to do our own investigating to find out what really happened. No one returned calls except Mr. Tenner of the IFFD. And he was grand. He assured me that the fireman was honorable and helped eliminate his as the one who planted the gas can.
Taking these precautions might make them presume you have something to hide, but if you are innocent, you have nothing to fear. Not taking these precautions can result in abuse of authority and serious psychological harm… to you.
Had we been wiser, we would have just told the police to come back with a video camera or talk to our attorney and asked them to leave. As you can see that the burning of the Xmas trees was not a reason to subject us to any of this. The arson investigation was dropped about the time the fire call was aborted, but my son was made to believe it was ongoing and he was the prime suspect. He didn’t know until five days later that this was not the case. By then, we had most of the evidence to protect him from these charges. You can get a lot done if you can’t sleep from the stress and don’t need to eat because you are too upset.
After the officer came back with the bottle and announced the presence of the gas can, my son told the officers he was cold and asked them to come inside. This officer jumped up on the porch, raised his empty hand and yelled, “You take one step toward that door and I will mess you up.” He really wanted a confession and thought my son’s invitation was a sign he was “breaking.” My son was being very co-operative and truthful, but he had already been held outside for 15 minutes without a coat and was wearing slippers.
A word to the wise.. We were completely surprised by this. We never expected this sort of behavior from the police. This officer is a rogue cop. It is a tragedy that his behavior is allowed, but the other officers witnessed this and did nothing.
The police report emphasized only those things that might support my son being drunk as he had told the police that he had consumed a half bottle of whiskey on the way to the door. They knew that wasn’t true as he had no bottle of whiskey when they first saw him in the house and he had to put on his slippers to go outside. It did reflect his asking the 3rd officer when he arrived “Are you here to violate my civil rights also?”
The officer in charge wrote the report. He intelligently reported what he was told and by whom. In doing so, he was protected from the behaviors of the other policemen. Because of the confusion I wanted to know what was going on. After all, there was an arsonist on the loose in our neighborhood. He never got back to me when I left a message for him to call me.
After this, we were afraid of the police, but there is little you can do. The Sheriff won’t look at it. The Idaho Attorney General won’t look at it. You have to go through the IFPD, the Mayor and the City Council. The new Chief of Police responded appropriately to this, and I am following up, but it takes time. Of course, I have concerns that it won’t be handled at all because of the culture in place that has allowed this incident to happen. Our Mayor’s background is in law enforcement.
We saw how Kimball Mason behaved. Who was the whistle-blower? Kudos! It takes a really strong constitution to stand up to corruption of authority and I appreciate those who will not tolerate it.
I am 60 years old and have lived in large cities and small towns from the West Coast to the Gulf Coast, the Philippines and Singapore. I’ve never personally seen this kind of malfeasance before and I didn’t expect it in the place I was born. I retired here because I expected Idaho Falls to be safe and sane.
I did not expect my son to be treated like a criminal by a criminal who has the position to make my life miserable if he so chooses. Do I expect retaliation? Of course! That is why I am going public. A sociopath who would try to incriminate another person just to take an already open bottle of liquor must feel the risk is worth the reward. Either he wanted the liquor for himself or he wanted to make a case, any case..
I can’t imagine this being the first time he lied or planted evidence. It might be the first time he got caught. He was practiced at lying. His planting of evidence still needs work. Because he planted it behind the cab on the driver’s side and the truck was so close to the back door and backed in so far from the alley, the can was not visible unless he was trespassing in our yard, standing next to the truck. The gas can would have been more incriminating in the garage as an arsonist would have likely hidden it. The can would have had to have been on the hood or the cab to be visible. If my son had made the footprints to the garage, where the can was stored, the can would have been in the garage.
We had NEVER had the can in the truck. Why would you have 2-cycle gas in the truck in January? Maybe you would be using a chainsaw to cut trees? If your heart was set on maliciously destroying public property, a chainsaw would be louder, but more efficient. Maybe you would want it to be stolen? Maybe you would take your wanton ways a bit further from your own back yard? The fire was 250 feet from out back yard..
So many of the employees of the City are like Mr. Tenner, responsible, kind and would never do anything untoward. Most of my experiences with the City have been delightful. The police have some grand people working there. One rogue cop can destroy the trust of a community and require someone like myself to take a stand. As long as there is the threat of this person on the force, you have to be careful. I will never trust the police as I did before.
My son has asked for a jury trial so that the malfeasance can be brought out. The charges will probably be dropped before then because it isn’t worth the taxpayer’s money to prosecute something like this. He has a pre-trial hearing on February 21 for an incident that took place on January 10. We have a meeting scheduled with a prosecutor on February 13. The prosecutor has promised to read the Motion to Dismiss that my son filed before that meeting. He filed a motion so that all of the above would be on record, in case it were dismissed.
I don’t think it is appropriate to name the officer here, but it is also not fair to paint the whole police force with the same broad brush. Two of the officers were quite competent and mostly acted appropriately. If one of the officers hadn’t taken the announcement of the gas responsibly and told me, I wouldn’t have smelled the fish in all this when they took the bottle and not the can. Of course, my son immediately recognized what had been done and realized that the garage door was open. Since the officer I’m accusing is entitled to know his accuser and the evidence against him, I want him to know that I’ve done a far better job of police work and developing a case than he ever has. He didn’t know how seriously we took his threats and how we would feel about my son being accused of arson and the distress it caused us.
The other officers used smaller degrees of coercion, one almost as if he were pained to do so. These two officers were as much victims of the third as we were, although they all left laughing and we weren’t laughing at all. This would never have happened except for the false report …. and if that City Sanitation had picked up those trees! Maybe the real crime is the folks who dumped the trees…
I was unaware until this week that the police have audio recorders on their person. In one case where the defendant got a copy, the original had been lost before the trial. Since these are public record, one should be able to secure the 911 calls and the recordings the police make through the Freedom of Information Act. When going to trial, if these are used as evidence, you will get a copy if the prosecutor collects them to use against you. If they are supportive of your claims, I wouldn’t expect them to automatically provide them. You can request that the prosecutor get them.
If you want to see how the misidentification was made, use Google maps. My neighbor parks his vehicle in front of 265 S. Placer… and it is a lot nicer looking that my son’s… we live at 438 Maple which is on the alley between Corner and Placer. The fire was on the east end of the trianglular piece of land on the corner of Pine and Placer. (Not Poitivin Park) My son was coming down Maple from Yellowstone Highway. There are other black Ford Rangers in the neighborhood, and there are probably several in your neighborhood. Heaven forbid you own one!
http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=265+S+Placer+Ave,+Idaho+Falls,+ID+83402&geocode=&dirflg=&daddr=438+Maple+St,+Idaho+Falls,+ID+83402+(Hawthorne+Elementary+School)&f=d&sll=43.490027,-112.035849&sspn=0.006959,0.014462&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=17&om=0
(Copy this from the top down and paste it in your browser for a birdseye view.
The satellite picture shows the houses and it is daylight. Imagine this at dark with other traffic on the street. We average about 2 cars a minute. The distance from one house to the other is about 354 feet. It takes 1.8 seconds (I have a stopwatch) for the average car to pass from visibility from midway on S. Placer. The distance between the intersection of Maple and Placer and our alley is 164 feet.
The distance from the fire to the front edge of the house on the corner is 308 feet.
It takes a vehicle about 4 seconds to turn from the stopsign and be out of vision from any spot on Placer behind the front edge of the corner house. From there accelerating from 12 to 25, it take 5 seconds to pass the alley.
Decelerating from 25 to 0 to make a tight turn into the alley from the earliest line of sight on Maple requires 12.7 seconds.
Traveling from the fire on Placer to the edge of the house requires18 seconds, decelerating from 25 to zero at the stopsign. Of course, the witness didn’t stop at the fire or need any reaction time. It is pretty hard to imagine any way that the witness didn’t lose sight of the vehicle except in their minds. By the time they decided to give chase, the truck was probably at the intersection and all they saw was the direction it went. Unfortunately, either my son came in before or after this truck made the turn. They could have missed his coming through the intersection in the time it took them to call 911. The driver should have been watching her driving and decelerating to the stop sign. They wouldn’t have paid any attention to a vehicle passing ahead or behind the first truck. They just had to get up to the corner…
The witness had no idea what would ensue.
All of this happened in a few seconds and in a length of a football stadium. Be very , very careful when giving chase.. At night following black Ford Rangers.
If you are a City Employee and recognize yourself and feel embarassed, or feel good because you know you are doing a good job, remember you reap what you sow. City employees are no different than the next human being. They deserve our thanks and recognition for the many who are out making our lives easier in sometimes less than pleasant conditions. They need our support, our smiles and polite gratitude. I love my garbage men who are as regular as clock work and our dedicated City Employees who are kind and effective and pleasant. Anyone who treats me with less respect than I deserve will get a call to his or her supervisor. When somebody is exceptionally good, I make the effort to have a letter put in his or her file. I introduce myself and ask his or her name.
After two police vehicles stopped on my street today , I was apprehensive. I didn’t feel like this the last time the streets were plowed and they had to remove vehicles. Before all I thought about was how cold it was for them. Give these guys a wave and a smile. Let our city workers know the taxpayers appreciate a job well-done.
You get the service and the people you tolerate. Ultimately, the responsibility of our city and how it functions depends on the voter. Know your candidates and hold their feet to the fire. They are responsible for the work environment, and the ethics our workers are subjected to.
Pay your taxes and vote.. And speak up.. This officer should have known that I believe in protecting our rights and wouldn’t put up with malfeasance. Right there in my front window for all to see is my Ron Paul sign. He was warned!
Mary Helburn
Popularity: 33%
Related posts:
Let's have a new poll, alright, Joe?
:@:)
Loading ...
{ 104 comments… read them below or add one }
If you wish to be fair you should put up the police report as well. I’ve personally no reason to believe or disbelieve what was written here but having both sides up there would be good. Perhaps this person is telling the truth but perhaps they are one of many who have lied by accusing police of misconduct to cover their own tracks or those of a loved one.
1. I agree with anonymous that both sides should be represented on this, so those of us reading can get the full picture (as much as possible). Is it possible to publish a copy of the report made by the officers in this situation?
2. And the fire itself, was there an arson investigation that determined that gasoline was the accelerant? And where WAS the son, can someone vouch for where he was, if it wasn’t him that set the fire?
3. It’s scary damn business when this kind of allegation is made. I don’t know either of the parties but it’s just scary. I don’t know why it makes me scared, because I’m old enough to know that police officers aren’t any less human than the rest of us and can do bad things on occasion, but it still bothers me greatly to find these kinds of accusations.
4. Is it true, what she said, about the liquor legality? And if so, why would an officer write up a ticket for something that is not illegal? I have a small problem with the concept of having the liquor there and the statement that it was okay because it was on private property…to me, if the liquor was in a vehicle, the assumption is made that it was there while the vehicle was on a public roadway. Is that still legal? Or does the officer have to catch them on a public roadway in order for it to be illegal? Splitting hairs, it sounds like.
4. This can’t end here. Obviously there will be more to this story, so please do not leave us hanging, if anything new happens or is known. We have to assume that the officer is innocent, or that Mary’s son is, but we’ll never know which is true unless someone keeps us posted.
I think this story seems rather shady. And I also believe there should be a police report downloaded to this post.
I don’t see how anybody could light some trees on fire (even with gasoline) when every tree in SE Idaho is covered in snow and/or is soaking wet from a month of snowfall.
Where did the kid dissapear to all of a sudden after parking his truck?
It’s agaisn’t the law to have your license plate covered by snow, mud or what have you. (I can’t believe all the vehicles driving around town like this as it is!)
What was your son doing with an open container in his vehicle?
What would you be doing with gasoline for a weedeater in your garage, when you haven’t been able to trim for weeds for at least 5 months! You just leave gasoline sitting in your garage like that? (not very safe!)
Why would he be MELTING the snow out of the back of his truck to reduce the weight? When everyone knows that it’s best to have MORE weight in the back of a pickup to improve traction in icy/snowy driving conditions.
That’s just common knowledge!
There are just way too many holes in this story and I think a copy of the Police report would definately help get the other side of the story. I don’t see you getting too much sympathy and/or public support from this one.
but that’s just MY opinion.
Idaho Code 23-505 addresses Open Container Law. Based on the circumstances at work here, the young man would have to have placed the liquor bottle either in the trunk (which is not applicable here as this is a truck) or behind the last upright seat in the vehicle (so long as it was not opened). As for being on private property, as this is a misdemeanor, the police would have to have viewed the young man driving to ascertain him being in physical control of the vehicle. If not, the witness would have to agree to sign the ticket as the “arresting officer/party” here. Otherwise, the police would have to write it up and send it to the prosecutor’s office for action to get an arrest warrant for the offense as it did not occur in their presence. I think the officer committed a major error there by issuing the ticket (if indeed the witness did not sign it).
Additionally, if the bottle was not in plain view, this would also be an interesting point….did anyone give consent to look in the truck? If so, the police do not need probable cause. Whatever they find there can be admissable in Court.
This is a troubling post. I too will be interested to hear what happens. Please keep us posted.
The officer does not need consent to search a vehicle if he has reason to believe said vehicle was used in committing a crime. C’mon Mike, you should know this!
On things they didn’t see police do not have to submit things to the prosecutor for a warrant although that is one way to handle it. Police can issue a summons, aka ticket, on any misdemeanor they did not personally see which they feel there is probable cause to believe was committed. Where there is confusion is that police may only arrest, aka take to someone to jail, on misdemeanors that occur in their presence. There are certain exceptions to this in the cases of violent misdemeanors and in those cases police may take someone to jail even if they didn’t see the offense.
So in this case the police were well within their legal rights to issue a summons / ticket for open container even if they didn’t see the guy driving. They only need probable cause to believe the crime occurred.
Now there could be an issue as to whether it was a valid ticket because you can have an open container in your car so long as its in the trunk or behind the last upright seat in the cases of trucks / SUV’s.
But these are two different issues. In one the officer did nothing wrong and in the other we simply don’t know because there isn’t enough credible information at this time to fully evaluate the whole incident.
Good Post Anonymous. Here is the statute when officers can arrest:
19-603. WHEN PEACE OFFICER MAY ARREST. A peace officer may make an arrest
in obedience to a warrant delivered to him, or may, without a warrant, arrest
a person:
1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.
2. When a person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his
presence.
3. When a felony has in fact been committed and he has reasonable cause
for believing the person arrested to have committed it.
4. On a charge made, upon a reasonable cause, of the commission of a
felony by the party arrested.
5. At night, when there is reasonable cause to believe that he has
committed a felony.
6. When upon immediate response to a report of a commission of a crime
there is probable cause to believe, that the person arrested has committed a
violation of section 18-902 (assault), 18-903 (battery), 18-918 (domestic
assault or battery), 18-7905 (first degree stalking), 18-7906 (second degree
stalking), 39-6312 (violation of a protection order), or 18-920 (violation of
a no contact order).
7. When there is reasonable cause to believe, based upon physical
evidence observed by the officer or statements made in the presence of the
officer upon immediate response to a report of a commission of a crime aboard
an aircraft, that the person arrested has committed such a crime.
Now, since the police officer was not present for the arson or the open container violation…..and because the officer was investigating arson…..unless consent was given to enter the vehicle the open container ticket should not hold up. This is bolstered by the fact that the officer didn’t even bother to take the gas can and took the liquor instead. A motion to suppress the open container should succeed in Court as this was obviously a case of misuse of authority to supposedly investigate arson and write up an alcohol violation.
If the police had not used the exigent circumstances argument that the evidence could be carted away immediately and applied for a warrant, I doubt that a liquor bottle would have been mentioned on the warrant. Same issue would have been present had a firearm or kiddie porn been found in the truck….it is not related to the reason for the search (i.e. arson) and the evidence seized would be excluded as improperly obtained-absent consent or a warrant authorizing seizure of items related to the crime of arson.
Unless of course the bottle was in plain view as the officer claimed. Was the Ranger or pickup and extended cab? “he had placed behind the passenger seat under some clothes” Or was the bottle visable? I too would like to see the report. As far as footprints to the garage, I would be disappointed if an officer did not check the surroundings, i.e. an open garage door, of a possible arson suspect. That would not be very safe. Maybe I missed it in the complaint, but I did not read where someone watched an officer plant the gas can.
I have a short comment. I am very impressed with the dialog going on here. Thank each and every one of you who have posted for being “on topic” and so focused. The information you have posted is so pertinent. I feel like I am attending a post-graduate seminar in the Idaho Code and its implementation “in the field.” I hope that this thread continues along these lines of civil discourse–this is “Citizen Journalism” at its best. Very inspiring! THANK YOU! Monte
Yeah, absolutely. I used to say I was not a journalist, but now I think I am more of a horribly lousy journalist. The only fact verification I did was that the officer works for IFPD. Unlike mainstream media where the last thing you hear are the accusations, at IFz you hear the followups. Citizen journalism can perform well if it is crowdsourced. So let’s crowdsource.
The police report would be perfect to post here or or post a link to it. Where does the IFPD post these reports online?
“The officer does not need consent to search a vehicle if he has reason to believe said vehicle was used in committing a crime.” This is not exactly true. There are several “exemptions” to the search warrant requirement, but just having a reason to believe a vehicle was used in a crime is not one of them. Since this seems to be a learning post, I’ll give you the first exemption: Plain view. That may apply here, depending on who’s telling the truth. Since there are several PD related people posting here, let’s see if several of you can add to the search warrant exemption list. I’ll give you another: Officer safety. Who wants to add another? Come on guys, you get this every year in block training, and should know it by heart. Oh, by the way, an officer who believes a vehicle was involved in a crime but can’t use one of the search warrant exceptions, can always have the vehicle held until a warrant can be obtained. Oops, gave away exception #3, exigent circumstances. Quick guys, get your exception in before they all get mentioned.
taking the booze and leaving the gas can on an arson investigation? That’s just dumb, if it really happened.
I appreciate all the comments. Believe me I’ve had to get educated about things in the last few weeks.
The story is not quite in the format I want it and I will have Joe post one with more details so that you can be up close and personal.
I had to learn where to find the State Statutes and City Ordinances..
I’m just trying to share what I’ve been forced to learn…
I pulled the text content and replaced it with “waiting for writer revision”.
… later … updated text content
For those who want to see the report, I didn’t find it online. It is number 200800629.1
I think just traffic stuff is posted online.
One more thing….if an officer asks for consent and you decline, he will most likely think you have something to hide and will either hold you and wait for a search warrant stating that he has probable cause, or more often than not, he’ll call a K9 unit out to sniff for any narcotics, illegal substances, bomb materials, etc. etc.
There have been times (in a larger city/different state) where exactly that had happened to me. (on more than one occasion) Just because I was young, owned an expensive sports car and had long hair they thought they could intimidate me. Profiling happens every day in every city in this country and it’s not just “racial profiling” that goes on either. To make a long story short, I refused to a search of my vehicle and they called out the K9 unit. Some may ask “why wouldn’t you just let them search if you didn’t have anything to hide”? To which I would respond, because it’s my right not to consent to a search of my property, especially when I knew for a fact the officer/s where merely wanting to shake me down and where overstepping their boundaries. I had all the time in the world, what do I care if they hold me up for 45 minutes? It’s their own time they wasted not mine, as well as all that paperwork they have to fill out at the end of the day. Plus it gave me a chance to get their badge numbers and report them for harrassment. I even received an apology letter once from the Chief of Police!
But the fact of the matter is, I’ve come across my share of cops over the years that abuse their power. They think they can scare people with their threats and rude treatment, but that doesn’t work on me because I know my rights. I think more people should study up on their rights as well and incidents like what happened above, wouldn’t happen as much. Too many people feel like they HAVE to “suck up” to police officers to keep from getting a ticket or worse. but if you have nothing to hide and you didn’t do anything wrong, then stick to your guns (so to speak) and stand up for yourself & your rights. The statement “knowledge is power” couldn’t be more true in this case and knowing your rights before an incident arises is always helpful. I have nothing but respect for an officer of the law as long as he respects me and doesn’t throw his weight around by trying to intimidate me.
I’ve lived in IF for about 7 years and in that time I’ve only been pulled over once for speeding in town. The officer was very nice and courteous and I was very respectful to him. (yes sir, no sir, etc) And he sent me on my way with a warning.
The moral of the story is “Know your Rights”!
I agree with Johnny, nice that everyone stayed on topic, and no ranting or raving (either pro or anti police) was done. No name calling, just concerned comments and curious questions.
The text content change was disconcerting, I wish the original post was there to link to, as some of the first comments were specific to the info as noted in the original post.
Interesting situation, all of this. More information is needed, as there are still many unanswered questions. It seems so fantastic and slightly absurd as currently detailed, that it seems logical that there must be more to the story, to piece in the gaps.
Since Helburn is making statements she can’t back-up lets get some facts on her son…THis is public info and I got it online, as anyone could.
BONNEVILLE
3 Cases Found.
State of Idaho vs. Nathan Helburn
No hearings scheduled
Case: CR-2007-0012908 Magistrate Judge: Earl Blower Amount due: $0.00 Closed
Charges: Violation Date Charge Citation Disposition
07/13/2007 I18-7001 {F} Property-malicious Injury To Property
Arresting Officer: Burnell, Mark A, IFPD Finding: Dismissed By Court
Disposition date: 08/07/2007
Fines/fees: $0.00
Register of actions: Date
07/16/2007 New Case Filed-Felony
07/16/2007 Prosecutor Assigned Randolph B. Neal
07/16/2007 Criminal Complaint
07/16/2007 Hearing Scheduled (Arraignment 07/17/2007 01:00 PM)
07/16/2007 Hearing Scheduled (Preliminary Hearing 08/07/2007 01:30 PM)
07/16/2007 Bond Set: $15,000.00
07/16/2007 Bond Posted – Surety (Amount 15000.00 )
07/16/2007 Affidavit Probable Cause-warrantless Arrest
07/17/2007 Hearing result for Arraignment held on 07/17/2007 01:00 PM: Arraignment / First Appearance
07/17/2007 Application For Public Defender
07/17/2007 Defendant: Helburn, Nathan Notice Of Appearance Bonneville County P.D. Office
07/17/2007 Order Appointing Public Defender
07/17/2007 Judge Change
07/26/2007 Subpoena Returned – Mary Halburn
08/02/2007 Substitution Of Counsel – Ronald Swafford
08/02/2007 Request For Discovery
08/02/2007 Notice of Hearing
08/02/2007 State’s Response To Request For Discovery
08/02/2007 Request For Discovery and Demand for Notice of Intent to Rely Upon Defense of Alibi
08/06/2007 Defendant: Helburn, Nathan Notice Of Appearance Jim (James) Archibald
08/07/2007 Judge Change
08/07/2007 Assigned District Judge: Richard St.Clair
08/07/2007 Hearing result for Preliminary Hearing held on 08/07/2007 01:30 PM: Hearing Held
08/07/2007 Motion to Dismiss
08/07/2007 Order to Dismiss
08/07/2007 Dismissed by Court (I18-7001 {F} Property-malicious Injury To Property)
08/07/2007 Case Status Changed: closed pending clerk action
08/07/2007 Surety Bond Exonerated (Amount 15,000.00)
08/07/2007 Case Status Changed: closed
——————————————————————————–
State of Idaho vs. Nathan Helburn
No hearings scheduled
Case: CR-2007-0012907 Magistrate Judge: Stephen J. Clark Amount due: $0.00 Closed pending clerk action
Charges: Violation Date Charge Citation Disposition
07/13/2007 Original: I37-2732(C)(3) Controlled Substance-possession Of
Amended: I37-2732(D) Controlled Substance-frequenting Place Used,etc
Arresting Officer: 38, Burnell, Mark, IFPD 92619 Finding: Guilty
Disposition date: 12/06/2007
Fines/fees: $323.50
Jail: 90 days
Suspended Jail: 90 days
Register of actions: Date
07/16/2007 New Case Filed Misdemeanor
07/16/2007 Judge Change
07/16/2007 Prosecutor Assigned Mackay Hanks
07/16/2007 Hearing Scheduled (Arraignment 07/17/2007 01:00 PM)
07/16/2007 Bond Posted – Surety (Amount 300.00 )
07/17/2007 Hearing result for Arraignment held on 07/17/2007 01:00 PM: Arraignment / First Appearance
07/17/2007 Application For Public Defender
07/17/2007 Appear & Plead Not Guilty
07/17/2007 Hearing Scheduled (Pretrial Conference 08/16/2007 08:00 AM)
07/17/2007 Notice of Pretrial Conference
07/17/2007 Plea Agreement – NG (I37-2732(C)(3) Controlled Substance-possession Of)
07/17/2007 Defendant: Helburn, Nathan Notice Of Appearance Bonneville County P.D. Office
07/17/2007 Order Appointing Public Defender
07/17/2007 Notice of Pretrial Conference
07/17/2007 Judge Change
08/07/2007 State’s Initial Discovery Disclosure and Request for Discovery and Alibi Defense
08/15/2007 Defendant: Helburn, Nathan Notice Of Appearance John P. Osai
08/15/2007 Not Guilty Plea
08/15/2007 Request For Discovery
08/16/2007 Hearing result for Pretrial Conference held on 08/16/2007 08:00 AM: Hearing Held
08/16/2007 .Hearing Scheduled (Pretrial Conference 10/04/2007 09:00 AM)
08/16/2007 Prosecutor Assigned Matt Hamilton
08/16/2007 Notice of Pretrial Conference
08/30/2007 State’s Initial Discovery Disclosure and Request for Discovery and Alibi Defense
09/27/2007 Substitution Of Counsel
09/27/2007 Defendant: Helburn, Nathan Notice Of Appearance James H Barrett Jr
10/01/2007 Prosecutor Assigned City Prosecutor
10/04/2007 Hearing result for Pretrial Conference held on 10/04/2007 08:00 AM: Failure To Appear For Hearing Or Trial
10/04/2007 Warrant Issued – Bench Bond amount: .00 Fail to Appear for Hearing Pre-Trial Conference 10/04/07 at 8:00 am Defendant: Helburn, Nathan
10/04/2007 Case Status Changed: Inactive
10/13/2007 Warrant Returned Fail to Appear for Hearing Pre-Trial Conference 10/04/07 at 8:00 am Defendant: Helburn, Nathan
10/13/2007 Case Status Changed: Activate (previously inactive)
10/15/2007 Judge Change
10/15/2007 Hearing Scheduled (Hearing 10/15/2007 01:00 PM) FTA PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
10/15/2007 Hearing result for Hearing held on 10/15/2007 01:00 PM: Hearing Held FTA PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
10/15/2007 Hearing Scheduled (Pretrial Conference 11/08/2007 01:00 PM)
10/15/2007 Order For O.R. Release
10/15/2007 Notice of Pretrial Conference
10/15/2007 Judge Change
10/16/2007 Hearing result for Pretrial Conference held on 11/08/2007 01:00 PM: Continued
10/16/2007 Hearing Scheduled (Pretrial Conference 12/06/2007 09:00 AM)
10/16/2007 Notice of Hearing
10/19/2007 Substitution Of Counsel – James Archibald
10/19/2007 Notice of Pretrial Conference
12/06/2007 Found Guilty (I37-2732(D) Controlled Substance-frequenting Place Used,etc)
12/06/2007 Case Status Changed: closed pending clerk action
12/06/2007 Judge Change
12/06/2007 Hearing result for Pretrial Conference held on 12/06/2007 09:00 AM: Hearing Held
12/06/2007 Probation Ordered (I37-2732(D) Controlled Substance-frequenting Place Used,etc) Probation term: 1 year. (Unsupervised)
12/06/2007 Sentenced To Incarceration (I37-2732(D) Controlled Substance-frequenting Place Used,etc) Confinement terms: Jail: 90 days. Suspended jail: 90 days.
12/06/2007 Surety Bond Exonerated (Amount 300.00)
Everyone wants to believe their kid is innocent.
That’s true cityploy….
I sure hope their kid is innocent….It doesn’t look good though.
Burned up,
If you had ever known someone who is bi-polar, you would have a better understanding of the situation. Sometimes the only resource people have is the police and when they take someone to BHC or jail, it saves a life.
This incident triggered another episode, and I had nowhere to turn. He had been taken in on a bad warrant not that long ago. He had appeared and got a continuance, but the paperwork or something didn’t work right. System error. This happened on a weekend and he wasn’t given his regular dosages of medication. On Monday, I had to go get copies of his appearance and put that on the front of his file so that the judge would know that it was an error. In the process of jail, arraignment, and talking to the prosecutor, he ended up with 3 court dates for the same continuance. The judge put one in, there was one from the original and the prosecutor put one in. This kind of thing happens, but I can’t risk his not getting his medication. It is either BHC or Jail and you don’t know when you make a call how it will be handled.
I filed the felony charges so that he would be confined and couldn’t hurt himself. This was a decision I came to with the help of one of the officers. They had to have something to take him in on. You do what you have to do. And you can’t imagine how grateful I’ve been to the police. They have been my salvation.
One of the problems with jail is that people can be deprived of their medications. But that is a choice you have to make. Knowing that, if the person is suicidal, you put them in place where they can’t do harm to themselves and that isn’t foolproof if a person is have a psychotic or depressive episode.
This is reality. I don’t have anything to hide.
I also have a friend who suffers from it. She is a teacher and taught some of the most deperate children. You can’t help but love her. Bright, energetic, sweet, got praise for her work in the local papers (not here). She had an episode and became a ward of the State. Her parents couldn’t do it any more. Almost two years in a State facility and got regulated. She was out for a year, with the total support of her school district. Down cycle hits. The last I heard was this. Her mother is ready for her to die because she knows she will never get better and she can’t bear seeing her suffer. These self-destructive episodes have gone on for 20 years.
These people are intelligent. They know they have a chronic condition and even on good days, they know that the next episode is around the corner.
We’ve been through the same thing for about the same time, starting very young. There have been quiet periods, but never completely normal. There is always the worry of the next time. It is cyclical. Medication helps lengthen the time between episodes.
Doctors, medication, incarceration. You do what you have to do. We feel blessed for a few good days, or weeks, or months. This was the first holiday season in years that didn’t have an traumatic event.
This is a chronic condition. I hope that the community and especially our police officers who have to deal with this every day can learn something here. Dealing with these people with kindness and compassion works better than harshness. Roughness and threats only make it worse. They are already suicidal.
Stress triggers events.
I’ve only talked about the down cycle. Then you have the manic cycle. This, too can be destructive because, they are feeling overly high and make bad decisions.. What they do in a manic cycle has consequences and that feeds into depression of the down cycle.
When someone already has severe emotional problems, it doesn’t help to be accused of something else.
I can’t help but blame myself because I let the police separate us. My son asked me to stay there.
I am not going to defend anyone here. I am sharing my experience and am being open because there are other vulnerable people in our community who would be better served with respect and compassion than harshness.
You never know when what you have learned is going to help someone else.
Eg: I lived on main thoroughfare in Houston. One Saturday, this little old lady dressed perfectly showed up at my door. Nails done, hair done, nice dress.. and she didn’t know her name or where she lived. She could remember her address in Chicago from years before. She was scared. She gotten away from her family as she got out of the car. I figured she had Alzheimer’s because my sister’s mother-in-law was afflicted and my sister told me about Angela getting away from them. I called the police and two darling young fellows came. They didn’t know what to do. We just sat and visited until a missing person report came in. I think she had just been to Temple, dressed up on a Saturday.. and I called one of my Jewish friends on the off chance he would know her. We just had to be patient and have the family make a missing person report.
She was so cute. She insisted I come with her in the police car to take her home. I made her feel safe.
We all need to feel safe.
If you have some advice, I would love to hear how you handled similar circumstances.
City employee,
Here’s hoping you have regular hours… if not, double thanks for what you do. And I hope you don’t have to work in the cold.. and if you do, quadruple thanks.
This goes for all of you city employees..For those of you who have to work outside and drive on our icy streets, be extra careful.
Okay, so help me with this, burned up…you copied a long series of actions for two citations given at the same time…apparently one (CR-2007-0012908) was dismissed. This was for malicious injury to property, but there are no details as to what this was actually about.
The other (CR-2007-0012907, same day) was not dismissed, and he was eventually found guilty of frequenting a place where a controlled substance was used.
The most recent one is (CR-2008-0000470), in January…regarding the alcohol, I’m presuming, from the story on this posting.
So although it sounds like he had a bad day on July 13,2007…it does not sound like he is a career criminal, at least in Idaho.
I do not know these people, but one previous run-in with the law does not mean he is guilty this time. Actually, LOTS of previous run-ins with the law do not mean he is automatically guilty this time, either. They just point to a character issue that means we rush to judgment, and tend to believe the worst of them in any situation.
And, it’s true, parents tend to want to believe, even in the face of much evidence to the contrary, that their children are innocent.
More telling to me in all of this, is, why is this man who is in his 30s still living with his mother? In all my life, I’ve not seen a section of this country where this happens with more frequency than right here in SE Idaho.
In all the situations I’ve seen, the mother wants the company, safety and security of having a man in the house. The son typically isn’t a productive member of society, usually unemployed and unable to support himself. When the son is employed he keeps his money for himself, he does not split the bills. Frequently the son uses illegal drugs or alcohol. Mom is often complicit in these actions. I’m betting you law enforcement types out there can name many of these fellows in this community.
Now I understand the 6 or 7 instances I can think of probably do not make an indictment of this area in particular, and I also understand that the Mary/Nathan situation may be entirely different…but on the face of it, it seems similar.
I’m just curious. It certainly seems that there is more to this story than we may ever know about, on both ends. I’m curious about the gas can incident, myself.
Funny how there’s ALWAYS an excuse as to why someones kid is always in trouble with the law. Sorry, but after looking at his past criminal record, I don’t see you getting too much sympathy from this crowd. You put a posting online talking about Police corruption and then when you find out that the public can actually look into his background, suddenly the title AND the story changes! He’s not quite as innocent as you would have us to believe. Everything from possession of a controlled substance to malicious injury to property.
Everybody has “emotional” problems, but that doesn’t give you an excuse or a “free pass” to break the law.
I would suggest you get the kid the help he needs before he continues down this destructive path towards becoming a career criminal.
(but thats just my 2cents for what its worth)
I have no way of knowing whether this person was guilty or innocent. However I do think that “burned up” made a blatant attempt to make what were 2 or 3 misdemeanors look like a lengthy criminal record. By showing every court proceeding related to the same offenses, they were obviously trying to make this accused arsonist’s record look worse than it really is. And anyway those other charges have nothing to do with the incident that was being discussed before “burned up” tried to assassinate this person’s character.
What did the police internal investigation find that is most relevant right now. If they did not return her calls they probably found no basis to her claims.
I too, wondered about the changes in the above story and the title change. I noticed it happened after the story wasn’t receiving much sympathy.
Are the police suppose to know by osmosis that they are dealing with a “bipolar” individual? Police have to make instantaneous decisions as to how to conduct themselves in each and every situation. If the policeman feels threatened, then he must take action to protect himself and others.
The story raises many questions in my mind, such as 1) what were you doing with gasoline for a weedeater in the middle of the winter, 2) what was a bipolar individual on meds doing with liquor, and 3) how come the story changed from the first writing? I would like to see the original version of the story printed alongside the latest version. Is that possible?
I agree with 007, get your kid help before his next encounter results in more dire circumstances.
Wow…that’s a completely different post than was up there yesterday! Strange indeed. Two things that caught my attention (aside from the complete change of story) was this woman noted that we should “clean out our cars”. How about this…..don’t leave open containers of whiskey in your vehicle?
And “perhaps it was the Sanitation Dept’s fault for not picking up the trees”??? (that was a good one!) The sanitation department does not pick up Christmas trees. Unless you stuff them in the bottom of a dumpster somewhere, you’re required to take your Christmas tree to the sanitation depository yourself to dispose of them.
It’s ashame that all this happened and whether or not it happened exactly how this woman stated, none of us will truly know and perhaps it was just a case of mistaken identity. The fact is, as the previous poster pointed out, this kid does have a prior criminal record. Sure we all make mistakes, nobody is perfect. But we all don’t have criminal records either. Is this just a case of mistaken identity and police harrassment? Reviewing all the facts presented here, its hard to say for sure.
Eeks! Mary’s comment posted while I was still writing mine, and I didn’t refresh before publishing. She says her son is bipolar, I guess that’s a good reason for him living at home, as she is helping him out.
I also agree, a bipolar person should not be involved with illegal drugs and alcohol, it’s even more so for them than for folks who don’t have these issues to deal with already.
And, illness does not excuse behavior, especially once the illness has been diagnosed. Now the responsible thing to do is seek help and make sure to follow the guidance given.
If Nathan can’t be responsible for himself, and Mary has taken it upon herself to do this for him, then she needs to step up a little and put him back on the right track.
I have a daughter his age who is bipolar, and her husband takes pretty good care of her when she is having a hard time doing it herself. It can be done, but it is not easy.
Always more to the story, always.
The kid definately needs to be taught a lesson and more importantly needs proper guideance. Bipolar or not, that doesn’t excuse his actions. He still knows right from wrong and he choose to do wrong. His Bipolar condition does not affect his decision making and for his mother to sit here and make excuses for him, shows a real lack of leadership and discipline on her part. Perhaps the real blame should be put on this woman for not dealing with these issues when they started to come up over a year ago with the drug possesion charges. Obviously nothing was done if he’s still drinking and driving a year later. You can’t tell me he just happened to have a half a bottle of whiskey in his car. It didn’t drink itself!
Lithium worked great for mood. Except it was toxic (requires test to see how much damage it does) and the side-effects were unbelieveable. 30 pounds in 30 days.. itching..
The police were advised of his condition when they took him outside. I told one officer that he is bi-polar and has a shoulder injury. He got a torn rotor cuff doing construction. Until this happened, he was productive and self-supporting. The medical bills and the legal expenses have wiped him out. He enjoyed work. He didn’t miss work when he was arrested. He was out so that he could be at work on Monday. Two weeks later he was injured.
Although it created a mess in the driveway when he was melting snow, I was delighted to seem him doing something physical with his arms as he has had to be so protective of his shoulder. Workman’s comp is denying his claim and the paperwork there is way longer than the court records.
He was doing very physical work before this. He could shovel all day. Now he can’t even sweep the walk. I paid for his MRI and he needs surgery. It has been six months. Even a person without his psychological problems would find it a bit overwhelming.
I hear what you all are saying. Am I an enabler? I try to set a good example. He does what he can. He does the shopping and most of the cooking.
I spent 5 years with my sister in California before coming here permanently. Her son suffered a TBI in a car accident 9 years ago and is completely dependent and he keeps improving although he will never be independent. It is little things. Like going to the bathroom without being told. Or getting up in the morning by himself and putting on his clothes. Nate has a lot to be grateful for when you make the comparison. One day he is ok and the next day he is down. Two good days is rare.
There have been periods where my son was independent. He’s gone to school, had his own business doing as-built drawings. He never needed an allowance as a kid because he had his own lawn service and worked as a entertainer for parties doing tae kwondo moves as the “White Ranger”. He did Roger Clemens’ son’s birthday party.. He worked in SE Asia in offshore construction for 3 years. He had many successes, but all of this was done while coping with the hand he was dealt emotionally.
Of all those things, I most admire him for the entertaining because I could never do that and enjoy it. and putting our lives out here for full examination is a stretch.
In so many ways, we are better able to deal with what happened than someone else might be because we’ve had adversity and had to learn.
Regarding the changes, please don’t read too much into it. I misunderstood what she wanted published, so we got it republished ASAP.
What are the penalties for first offense arson, especially given that only some garbage trees were burned (no life or property damage)? I suspect this will boil down to a small plea agreement or dismissal if Mary immediately documented the area with photos or video. Did this fire even get reported in local media? I don’t recall…
Like JoseC stated earlier in the post…the fact that all the trees in SE Idaho are soaked to the roots and/or covered in snow, they couldn’t have burned THAT much or for THAT long. Unless somebody threw a couple of gallons of gas on them. And even then, it wouldn’t have burned for very long.
I agree with Joe: i think the case will end up getting dismissed.
If you look Nathan up, there is no arson case at all, just an alcohol related case. I understood Mary’s point that the arson was the initial issue, and the gas can ended up in the truck and the truck was searched, leading to the open container of alcohol…
I didn’t see an arson charge anywhere, just the alcohol charge. So my understanding was that the arson issue went nowhere and was used as an excuse to come after Nathan, then when that didn’t work out they got him on the open container.
So the arson thing is interesting to me, why no charges, and did the gas can really get put in the truck bed, and by whom?
And the alcohol issue, I’m sorry, but a bipolar person on meds has no business drinking alcohol…whatever the legalities of having an open container in a vehicle (a vehicle that was admittedly just out on a public roadway, despite being ultimately parked on a private spot in a private yard…)
I can’t imagine we’ll ever know the truth about whether the gas can was planted or not, because if it was true, it becomes a personnel issue, right? And do we have the right to know about personnel issues? Hopefully if it turns out to be true, POST has some pull.
If it turns out not to be true, we won’t know that, either. And an officer has been named, and may end up with a tarnished reputation as a result.
I just don’t see any winners in this situation.
I find it very interesting how some people will use the media (this site) to accuse the police. If the shoe was on the other foot, the police would be accused of “trying the case in the media.” It is becoming more and more common to throw wild accusations at the police as some type of a defense. Nathan’s mom is obviously trying to undermine the police case against her “very” adult son. How about hiring an attorney if you think the case is wrong and letting the courts sort it out. All an officer has in this profession is his reputation. If he becomes known to the courts as less than credible, he may as well resign. He will never win another case. This type of slander against the police didn’t work for Larry Lyon and I doubt it will work for Nathan’s mom either. Take it to court!
Larry Lyon tried his case on the evening news here we have people demanding evidence before they belief the accusations. Im impressed with the comments how this cops reputation does not seem tarnished. This reflects well for how you view the cops in general.
The thing I find most phony about the mom’s defense of her son is the whole planted evidence scenario. If a police officer is going to go to all the trouble to plant evidence don’t you think they would have charged her son for arson? The fact he wasn’t charged is more than proof to me that they didn’t in fact plant it. Otherwise why bother planting it in the first place.
Furthermore, its interesting that the officer that was so disparaged in the original version of this story is not in fact the officer who charged her son for open container, rather that officer who was so badmouthed was one of the others who happened to be there. Which further erodes the credibility of the mom and son since they implied it was the wrong officer which means they aren’t even really sure what happened.
And I’d love to hear more about this photographic evidence. Because all a photograph does is create a snapshot in time. It doesn’t tell you what happened before or after. Unless there was a continuously running video camera on either the truck or the gas can then the evidence tells us nothing as the gas can could have been moved before or after the photos.
Question for burned up:
How many actual incidents or charges were involved in your lengthy log of all the court dates? Two? Three? The list was so long that at first read I thought it was all separate incidents. And if a person commits a crime, are they really automatically guilty of all future crimes? Some people sure think that way. Say what you want, but I believe that you tried to make his record look worse than it is. I stand by my comment that it was a blatant attempt to distort the truth. You could have put his criminal record on two or three lines, not two or three pages. I’m not addressing the issues of police misconduct or whether the young man is guilty of the new charge.
Don’t act like ALL cops are angels and they all care about their reputations. I’ve met my fair share over the years, that were corrupt to the bone and you and I both know that their out there in every city in this country! “Planting evidence” isnt the only way for a cop to be corrupt. There are many many ways cops abuse their power on a daily basis. I won’t bother to list them all, but you’re a big boy, you can figure it out. I’m not saying ALL cops are corrupt, but i’m willing to bet there’s AT LEAST 1 or 2 in every department who enjoys his power just a little too much and uses it to his advantage.
I don’t really believe the story that’s been portrayed here and I think there’s much that’s been left out. But at my age, I’ve been around block enough and have lived in numerous cities throughout this country (both large and small) to know there’s a bad apple in every bunch. I’ve had friends that were cops that used to talk about all the crazy stuff they used to do AND get away with.
I don’t have anything against police officers in general. I believe they provide a valuable service to the community and more often than not, do not get the respect they deserve for putting their lives on the line everyday. But with that being said, I’m not blind to the fact that in any profession there are bad apples and people that abuse their power, from Enron executives to Priests. And nowhere is this more prevelant (imo) than your local police force where a little bit of training will get you a badge and a whole lot of power. With power comes responsibility and many young officers fresh out of the academy just can’t handle the responsibility OR the power that comes with being a cop.
So while I think there are many holes in this story, I don’t think it’s too far fetched to believe her story regarding the cops being crooked or planting that gas can in the kids truck. They may have just done that to correrce a confession out of what they hoped would be a scared kid, but it ended up backfiring on them.
Presumed Innocent,
I made no “blatant attempt” as you said to misrepresent the charges Helburn has faced in the past. All I did was post the criminal charges from Bonneville County this person has/had. It doesn’t take a genius to see that. It’s funny how many of you want to assume all people that have police involvement should be presumed innocent at all costs (even at the police dept’s expense) however, the police don’t get the same consideration. Why is that? I think it’s safe to say that the officer(s) involved in this don’t have a criminal record; I just posted the one of Helburn. He’s the one who committed the crime and his mother, who seems to enable him, is trying to cover for him as she probably has this guy’s whole life. She knows it and so does he.
To 007 and other likeminded people on this topic…STOP WATCHING SO MUCH TV. Planting evidence is for TV dramas and the movies.
At the very top of the court document are the words:
BONNEVILLE
3 Cases Found
If that’s not simple I don’t know what is. Anyway, the guy has 3 cases found in Bonneville County. One for Malicious Injury to Private Property (dismissed by court), Frequenting a place where drugs are used/sold (found guilty) the original charge was Possession of Controlled Substance), and the one in question, which is what?…Open container of alcohol in a vehicle. I posted the entire document to avoid problems but it didn’t work. The only thing blatant here is…I’ll just stick to the original topic and say that I don’t see the connection her for the topic of “Special Treatment for City Employees”. I expected to see an article about the Parks and Rec Dept getting free tanning at Apple Athletic or something. Is it special treatment because the fireman that witnessed the crime etc was believed over the suspect?
Hey blatant: I didn’t post my comments from information I saw from tv dramas, I posted my comments from past experiences. I’m not like most people here who have lived and grown up in a small town in Idaho their whole lives. I’ve lived in 17 different cities throughout the country and have travelled extensively through every state. So my comments are from experience, not tv. So don’t presume to think you know me. I know what I know and have had friends that were crooked cops, so I know it’s not just stuff that happens on CSI or Law & Order.
And I never the cops in this case planted evidence, I said “her story was not too far fetched” and that they “MAY” have done that in order to get a scared kid to break down and admit to starting this fire.
I’m not sure how long YOU’VE been a cop, but obviously it hasn’t been long and perhaps you should get out and experience more of the world and see how things REALLY happen in the real world. There a lot different from a small town like this I can tell you that much! Heck, all you have to do is think back to the Kimball Mason case and all the press that story got in this town for a year and a half. That type of thing is childs play compared to the crooked stuff other cops have done and do in larger cities! Yet that was the biggest news story in this state for most of 2006 and half of 2007.
And regarding your other ridiculous comment…YES….all people ARE presumed innocent until proven guilty, even you should know that!
Darn…there’s only 12 minutes left of Law & Order…I better not miss it!
As with any dispute there is always two sides to every story. Not having been involved with IFPD on a frequent basis I do not know if they have patrol cars with video cameras as most other Departments do. If they do, the supervisor or the administration can retrieve those tapes which should also have audio recordings on them to show the true activity of what happened. After all these expensive devices have been placed in the cars to protect both the police and the public. If the officer was out of line, then it would be documented on the tapes. If I understand there were three officers there, and it should have three different tapes showing from each vehicle what transpired. If the IFPD doesn’t have cameras in all of their cars, they need to step up and get grants, get the City to allocate, but it will save them from costly litigation in the future. If the family has some misconceptions about what occurred, the video tape should be shown to them to dispel any misconceptions that they might have obtained. It is the responsibility of the IFPD administration to investigate “ALL” complaints against its officers. This means that they return phone calls to the family to get a status on what is happening with the case. The Officers understand that the vast majority will be cleared and it is no fun having to be subjected to these Internal Investigations. In the same theory Burned Up posted that he was giving information that was readily accessible to the public. Maybe he can post a link where this is available or was it a court computer that only certain personnel have access to? Along the same lines if there is a history with the involved officer(s) with past personnel issues, these are almost never given even in discovery requests prior to trial. Frequently when these cases are aired in this type of format those involved can learn alot from what happened and make appropriate changes to avoid such conflicts in the future.
Good point. But then again, they’d have to have the nose of their patrol cars facing the action, otherwise it won’t do them anygood. Regardless, it’ll be interesting to find out.
http://www.idcourts.us
this person has been found guilty of one crime in his thirty-something years so he’s not a problem for the community.
however, if a police officer attempted to frame a person for arson and the charges were dismissed i’d get every piece of documentation i could about this for future incidents. this is a bigger crime than the drug charges this man was found guilty of.
when the police try to frame people it causes everyday people to dislike the police and then people don’t care if crime gets out of hand since rampant crime is less damaging to their lives less than having the expense and stress of having to prove false charges are in fact flat-out false. these cops will cause the public to have sympathy for the worst criminals by filing unwarranted charges against petty offenders.
are these police officers longtime members of the community or are they transplants from places like Los Angelos or NYC where they might be too jacked up to work within a mostly uneventful place like Eastern Idaho? do they have checkered pasts from other police agencies and were they forced out of their jobs at other police agencies? these are the questions locals need to find out.it’s all about getting involved within your community and knowing who’s who. don’t wait until there is a regretable event before you know who is employed by your taxes.
dguy, this person was never charged with arson, so there weren’t any charges to dismiss and there is no proof other than the mother’s side of the story that suggests the officer even tried to “frame” this guy. Wouldn’t you think that if the officer went to all the trouble to plant evidence that he would at least charge the guy with the crime?
I got the impression from reading both versions that there was a half hearted attempt to try to go for the arson, but that the gas can issue was abandoned in the long run after they found the open bottle.
I have no idea what happened that day, we are all speculating, those of us who take sides are still speculating and using mostly our mental models to decide what we believe.
I would like to know where this ends up, just for my own peace of mind, because now that the issue has been raised I’m curious.
Update..
I got the transcript of the 911 call starting at 7:33. The witness reported seeing a late model black Ford Ranger leaving the scene. hmmm? Does a 91 qualify as being “late model”? It has the squarish details and the newer ones are rounded. It was black and it was night…and the rear plates were obscured with snow. Who gives a diddly..just a little matter of arson. I figured the witness had stayed and kept surveillance of the vehicle until the police arrived. Nooo it gets better.
My son came in the house at 7:34 and remained there until the police called him outside at 7:50. After the witnesses came in our alley and took the license number from the front plate, the witnesses went out our alley, drove down 13th to Ridge, passing the now extinguished trees at 7:35, over to Elm and at the corner of Elm and Boulevard, reported that they were being followed by the suspect at 7:37. The 3rd “arsonist” followed them for a block and a half until the suspect turned onto 9th Street. They lost the first vehicle, they lost a parked vehicle and still had “never lost sight” of the suspect.
The “chase” described to me by one of the officers happened after my son’s truck was parked and he was in the house with me. Silly details.
I have a recording from one officer’s personal recorder. I don’t have the stomach to repeat it. 30 minutes of name calling, lies and verbal abuse. All of the officers participated.
When they couldn’t coerce a confession, they said they were going to make it expensive.
Its time to put up or shut up Mary.
You’ve made all sorts of rambling and incoherent accusations. You claim to have the audio from the officer. Put it up for all of us to hear so we can judge for ourselves. Don’t even think about using some sort of excuse because it can be done, if you really have a copy, and its been done here before. JoeVandal can walk you through it if need be. So let us hear the audio.
This is all public record.
The dispatch tape has been transcribed.
If you can tell me how to put the audio in a transferable file, I would be happy to send it to you. I tried to send it as an attachment and it didn’t work. I can play it on Windows Media Player.
I was able to listen to the 911 call you forwarded to me, I can post it easily via a flash player if you want Mary, just email me if you want it posted or not. It sounds like the officer’s personal recording would be more interesting. If you want that posted email it to me the same way and I can post it.
Joe, I don’t think it is right to post the witness’s name and address and phone number. Also the other tape has the officer’s names on it and posting them isn’t fair either.
Is there a way to redact the names, personal info on the tapes?
Who cares about the 911 call? It doesn’t prove or disprove anything about the alleged frame job Mary is claiming. I want to hear the audio recording she claims to have that the officer made.
To clarify. All the 911 calls do is show that it was a confusing situation for the officers going in. Thats pretty much status quo for any 911 call as the officers never have the whole story in any call they go to. So I really don’t care about that. At most it might help show that the witness’s misidentified the car. Big deal, her son wasn’t charged.
The crux of the issue is the allegations that Mary is making about the officers. And she says she has an audio recording that one from one of the officers recorders. That could be very illuminating to shed some truth on this concerning the demeanor of the officers and that of her son.
I doubt very seriously she has the officer’s recording, if there was one, this soon. Also, I would say a 91 Ford is similar in style to a newer ranger. I would call it late model if it wasn’t a full-sized Ford ranger like the 70’s models.
Ms Helburn, you have to admit the fact that your son was in the same area, at the same time (off by a few minutes you say), in the same type and color of vehicle as the suspect is very interesting. So, some cops were rude to your son…big deal. If your son want’s to make a complaint, with the PD, he can, not you. YOur attitude on this site tells me the investigating officers weren’t met with your best behavior either.
AA,
“Big deal, her son wasn’t charged.”
This is not a big deal to you.. until it happens to you, or perhaps to someone you care about. I’m hoping that by bringing it out, it won’t happen to someone else.
Burned up,
You can request the tapes through the prosecutor’s office. The 911 tape came with a transcription with time stamps and took one day. The other tape came in two days. It doesn’t have a transcription or time stamps.
Just file a written request so that they know exactly what you need.
I don’t know what the protocol is for how soon they are available. I’m certain that if they were needed for something important, they could be retrieved. From what I experienced, I wouldn’t be surprised that a person could get them in a few days. I didn’t realize that the officers had these or I would have requested them sooner. They are probably filed after each shift.
As fast these came, I’d say that they have a pretty good system.
Two of the four requested have been received.. and the speed was astounding….
In other words Mary since you are telling us to go request the tape ourselves, you don’t actually have a copy. Either that or the recording is actually very damaging to your son and very supportive of what the cops did and you don’t want people to hear that. The fact you are avoiding putting it up here, even though Joe could easily host a copy on this site, tells a lot more about the truth of what happened that night than any of the rambling nonsensical allegations you’ve made.
Prove I’m wrong. Put a copy of the officer’s recording up here. Your avoiding doing so shows you are not being honest.
AA,
“In other words Mary since you are telling us to go request the tape ourselves, you don’t actually have a copy.”
You, like many, seem to make wrongful assumptions:
1. I was not telling people to get the tapes of this event. I was giving the process of getting a tape should anyone ever need one relating to his own situation. The officers’ tapes of this may not be available to disinterested 3rd parties.
2. That calling me a liar wouldn’t have consequences to you.
3. That I would be goaded into publishing something that would not be in the Public’s interest with insults from an anonymous poster.
I invite you to come and listen to the tape, and then you can make a public apology for calling me a liar. Please call before you come. You have to sign an agreement to not disclose what is on the tape or the officers’ names or discuss what is on the tape.
Please bring a photograph identification and then you can sign your real name to the public apology that you post here.
To quote you, “Thats pretty much status quo for any 911 call as the officers never have the whole story in any call they go to.”
That sounds like an excuse for acting on erroneous information. In this case, they made the story up to fit what they were told and made no effort to get to the truth of the matter.
From your posts, you apologize for police malfeasance and you believe it is ok for police to act this way and damn the consequences to those involved. Would you have a different point of view if it had been you who was on the receiving end?
Do you have any honor? Or is coming here more effort than your honor is worth? Your apparent interest in the contents of this tape should be worth the 30 minutes it will take to hear it.
Your own words, “Its time to put up or shut up!”
Mary Helburn
If you have such damning evidence take it to the media. Or better yet, contact Larry Lyon and ask him how to file a tort claim against the city. Otherwise, stop the blather.
Ditto re: Mikes comment!
There has to be way to post the officer’s tape. If so then do it. If the officers are guilty of what Mary accuses them of doing, then their names should be heard, known, and condemned. If they are innocence, the same standard applies. Their names should be heard and applauded. At this point Mary, you need to either put up or shut up like everyone else says. Joe can help you post the tape. Either do that or let Joe hear it and let him post a comment on it. Most of us respect Joe’s opinion and trust his honesty. One way or another this should be resolved, because at this point the conversation is slowly dissolving into childish banter.
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark and it would seem to be Mary’s disintegrating story. Its clear at this point she can’t back up what she says and its clear her allegations shouldn’t be taken seriously. No wonder Officer’s McKenna, Killian, and Kaiser were not punished at all for this because its clear they did nothing wrong. Maybe Killian, if he ever reads this, should put up the copy himself since he’s the one who made the recording.
Oh, lots of people have inside info on this one, it seems, naming names of the officers involved.
I also was going to suggest that Mary send the recording to Joe and let him hear it and comment, because I also have some respect for his integrity and think I could live with his perspective.
Then I felt bad for putting him into this and making him have to take that extra step that I was unwilling to take myself…
Then, it occurred to me, that Joe kinda stuck his foot in this one by publishing this stuff in the first place…
so…
Joe, if you wouldn’t mind listening and posting your thoughts, I’d be glad to read them.
Guest_2634 : When ever you want to lose the badge and the gun and come question my mother’s integrity, then feel free to knock on our door. Cowards!
Guest_2634 : You yellow cops are sitting at a computer on tax payer dollars right now
Guest_2634 : This is Nate, son of Mary Helburn. I was the one accused of arson on the night in question. Any takers?
Well everyone, that last comment about sums it up, don’t you think?
Nathan, nothing is going to stop anyone from this site printing what you wrote and showing it to a judge or prosecutor. If you keep posting it’s going to be used against you in some way. You should be very careful egging someone on to a fight on a website. This isn’t a bar. I know you are angry about what has happened, and I hope the truth comes out in court no matter what it is. You could also risk you (and your mother’s) IP address being banned from posting on this site if the moderator sees your posts as inappropriate.
Your mother wanted to be heard and you are going to ruin it for her, much less yourself.
The Pre-Trial Conference will be held 2/21/08 at the Bonneville County Courthouse. I wonder if Mr. Nate will do as much huffing and puffing in Court that day as he has done on this site.
BTW….sounds like Nate is off his meds and should get back on them before he hurts himself or someone else.
People should realize that Nate is probably going through a period of mania. He is still responsible for his atrocious comments and threats….but take them with a grain of salt.
If that is Nate that posted the cops have now almost won by default. Whether this story is true or not. Nobody will care anymore because the poor victim appears to be a loud mouth punk.Sorry but that’s the way it goes. There were several here willing to sit on the fence until some solid evidence surfaced. Unfortunately for the Helburns, Nate’s contribution may doom any chances they had of the neutral people being willing to listen,
Hi outrageous comments said it all! And if in deed the cops went a little hard on him is quite understandable. I’m sure he was verbally abusive to them as well and with drug charges on his rap sheet, well enough said. This kid definately has issues and anything his Mom tried to do to smooth things over just flew out the window with his outrageous and immature comments.
Good luck nate….you’re gonna need it.
well looks like no one has the to chat back, so ban me. Looks like Idahofallz.com in not an ideferant website.
Ummm let’s see. Mary did email me the 911 call, indicated a technical roadblock to accessing the officer’s recording (as in may still send it to me when she gets the chance). I believe I understood that it is okay to publish both recordings so long as names address phone numbers are muffled. I can do this easily using the free Audacity and a free flash posting service. I just need 30 minutes to do it, so it’ll be later today tonight hopefully.
People should realize that Nate is probably going through a period of mania. He is still responsible for his atrocious comments and threats….but take them with a grain of salt.
I agree. As with the expressed concerns of another IFz user’s recent bout of strange comments, I hope folks keep this in mind if they want to respond to some of this person’s harsher statements. I imagine this will blow over and settle down on Wednesday.
Since some won’t have seen what Nate said or did. Here is a summary:
He came on the chat box, he did a lot of namecalling, he challenged everyone to fight, and he acted like a complete buffoon. He basically showed the world what kind of person he is. Any doubt I had about what happened that night is now resolved in my mind and I think the cops are basically exonerated at this point.
Guest, comment #71. I agree with your assessment of what went down today. But I do not agree with your assessment that the cops are basically exonerated at this point.
Someone who is ill and off their meds (as Nate appears to be) can act like a complete jerk and alienate everyone around. Not yet having heard the audio from the situation, I’m still on the fence about the conduct of the officers, although I’m sincerely hoping it was above reproach. But Nate’s conduct today does not mean that he acted this way on January 10 (although it’s possible).
And I agree with those who stated the obvious, that his conduct today was undermining what his mother was trying to do. Good for Joe to step in (yet another tiring function of a site moderator) and put a stop to the chat that was going nowhere fast.
Oh man, I missed all the fireworks.
I still hold out my challenge to Mary and now I guess Nate as well. Put the audio out here for all to hear. Nate has threatened violence to those on here who disagree so I really don’t think its prudent or wise for anyone to “go to their house” to listen to the audio given his threats. So I again challenge them to put the audio up for all of us to listen to. It’ll definitely settle it. And if it shows that Nate was behaving well and the officers were totally out of line I’ll be the first to apologize. I don’t think I have to worry though.
Nate,
Now all you has to do is challenge someone specific to a fight and you can be charged with another crime. “any takers” give us all a break Nate! Nobody want’s to fight you over something this trivial. Let’s stick to the facts; you are unwilling to produce the recording for one reason or another, probably because it’s not what you thought it would be or you don’t have it. Your mother has accussed the police of some serious things and now she cannot produce evidence she said she had. If your mother got a copy of it then it’s public record…let’s see it!
PS. This is fun to read now that you are involved.
Here you go:
* removed *
Huh? That just takes me to a website called Madelinesongs.
How about this then
I’m puzzled by Mary’s posts; did she forget, she is the one making the accusations here?? That she brought all of this up in the first place?
I think too many people called her bluff so she decided to bail on her quest for “justice”. That and the fact that her son showed up and went on a rampage calling the cops names and wanting to fight them and everybody else that questioned his Mommies integrity. They both realized it was a losing battle so they quietly dissapeared.
That kid definately has issues. And his poor Mom is the one who has to deal with all the public scrutiny. Oh well, such is life.
It IS a sad state of affairs if in deed the officers in question where out of line here and were trying to pin something on this kid. I certainly won’t stand for that in my city and will do everything I can as a taxpayer to make sure this type of thing never happens to another individual.
However with that being said, a word from the wise to Nate. Whenever you get in a situation where you have to deal with an officer of the law, whether its a simple traffic stop or what have you, ALWAYS give them the utmost respect. No matter what. (even if THEY are in the wrong) This way YOUR butt is covered and they’ll never be able to say you didn’t completely cooperate with them or their investigation.
Hopefully you’ll come away from this a little wiser and a little more humble and you’ll now focus on bettering yourself and your current situation.
I was thinking the next step for the Helburns is that of other people who have aired their laundry on this website, ie the Badinski (sp) clan. They are probably gearing up for a lawsuit against the City etc. $20 bucks says it’s in the works. I checked today and one hasn’t been filed yet but I’m sure it’s coming.
Still waiting for the officer’s tape recording.
I don’t think you’ll see it either ExPD. Once the Hellburns realized they would get no sympathy from this crowd, they high-tailed it outta here!
Joe has a copy of this… so he can attest to the veracity… I left off the last 5 minutes….Nothing that different from the rest of it…. The citation being written….
Tape of Officer Kiser from 7:50 until 8:20 January 10, 2008
The 911 tape has the witness reporting the license at 7:34 and the police arriving at 7:46. They knocked on the door at 7:50. Since the police were sent to the fire and redirected here, after they were given the address because of the license plate, it is hard to believe they followed anyone, but they said they did, over and over and over…
The trial is scheduled April 2. The prosecutor is going to see what the intent of the open container law was when it was written. Maybe, they just put that last part in for giggles…they didn’t really mean it. “Provided however, that an unsealed alcoholic beverage container may be transported in an enclosed trunk compartment or behind the last upright seat of a vehicle which has no trunk compartment.”
KL: Hi
MH: Hi
KL: Who owns the little black Ford pick-up?
MH. Nate.
K. Is he here?
M. Just a minute. What’s the problem?
K. Well, We need to talk to him abut a fire.
M. About a fire?
K. Yea
M. (As Nate comes up the stairs) You know anything about a fire?
N. A fire?
Inaudible.
K. Hello. You own a little black Ford Ranger? You own a little black Ford Ranger?
N. A Ranger, yea.
K Were you just driving it?
N. Yea I just came back from a friend’s house.
K Where at?
N ah H Street
K 8th street? (Remember the fireman saw the third truck turn onto 9th Street)
N Yes sir.
K Do you have some shoes by chance? Can you come outside and talk to us?
N. Sure.
M. Invites them in.. (Through gestures)
K. We’re fine. We’re wet.
M. That’s ok, I don’t scrub til May.
K. I think he went out the back door. (In a whisper) Nate was getting his slippers…
K What’s the address on 8th Street where you just came from?
N. I was on H. St, K Street is here. Midgie Mart’s here.. Up a block.
K. Oh, H Street, not on number 8th Street. The letter H?
N. No. Not on 8th street. I was on H street tonight. Absolutely.
K. H. Like in Henry?
N. Yeah, they got the H, I, J,
K. You were over at a buddies’ house and then came straight here?
N. Yeah, I went from his house to another buddies’ house, but all on that side of town.
K. And then you came here?
N. Yeah
K. I’ve got a witness that puts you over by Poitivin Park by the tree pile and there’s a fire over there. You don’t know anything about that?
N. In the?
K. Poitivin Park. Do you have id on you by chance?
N. I’m on probation.
K. With who
N. Bonneville Court, whoever.
K You don’t know who the probation officer is?
N. Unsupervised Probation
K. What for?
N. Going crazy the last few years..
K. What do you mean?
N. I’m Bi-polar, ADHD and PTSD, But I’m pretty proud of myself. This year, I didn’t go to the hospital or the cop shop.
K. Ok, That’s good, ok. Have you had anything to drink tonight?
N. Yes sir.
K. Are you supposed to be drinking while you’re on probation?
N. I’m on unsupervised probation.
K. Have you had anything to drink since you got home.
N. Yes sir.
K. Since you been home tonight. How long ago did you drink something.
N. About 10 minutes ago. Don’t tell my mom, but I’ve been doing shots of Gold Schlagger.
K. So you’ve had a shot since you got home?
N. Oh, yea.
K. One shot?
N.. No, more than that (laugh)
KS. You haven’t been home that long.
K. We followed you
KS. We were right behind you when you got here. You haven’t had that much t drink. Isn’t that right?
K. Be honest with us. You said.
KS. We were right behind you.
K. You said you were doing so good this year and now your are starting to lie to us.
KS. Now your’re lying
N. Now I’ll take back my id.
K. No no.
N. Ok
K. We’re doing an investigation.
N. What are you investigating?
K. So what was going on at Poitivin Park?
N. Where?
K. Poitivin Park, the park, just around the corner.
N. The quarter mile track?
K. Yea, that’s a good description.
N. I do that in the summer, I try to jog.
K. But you said a minute ago that you weren’t there, you were at a friend’s house on H. Street.
N. No. When the snow ‘s clear, I jog there.
K. What happened over at the park tonight?
N. You tell me.
KS. Might have something to do with the gas can in the back of your pick-up. Suppose?
Just throwing that out there.
K. 86329 Helburn, Henry, Edward, Lincoln, Boyd, Union, Lincoln, Nora
KS. Anything you want to tell us?
N. No
K. Didn’t light anything on fire over there.
N. No sir.
KS. You did. Somebody was following you who happens to be an off-duty fireman and then you turned around and tried to follow him and then you pulled off and ended up back home. We were right behind you or right behind this trail of people. You ended up home and we were there shortly after. That’s how we ended up here.
K. We were here moments after you were here. So you been doing shots in the house?
N. In my truck… on my property.
K So your shots are in your truck?
N. Yes sir.
KS. He’s got beer there.
K. So no alcohol in the house?
N. Yea, I have alcohol in my house.
K. So were you drinking in the house or in the truck.
N. I was drinking in the truck parked on my property. That’s not a DUI.
Inaudible?
N. ON your own property?
K. You drove to get here? Guess well have mcKenna come over and we’re gonna take this a full ride for arson.
KS. I think we should. We’ll put you on real probation.
K. Yea, 10-4.
KS If we really want Nathan, we can maybe even get you a rider out of this for you.
K. I’ve got a gas can in the back of this truck. We’ve got an intoxicated male that doesn’t want to talk to us.
N. I’m on unsupervised probation.
K. Yea, 438, you just passed it . Back up.
N. Since I’m not arrested, I’ll enjoy my last cigarette.
K. Hey, you can smoke. Why would you say it’s your last cigarette?
N. Cause if you’re taking me to jail, there are no smoking facilities. There is no smoking. Hey, if you want to give me a patdown.
K. Do you have any weapons we should be aware of?
N. No.
K. You don’t mind emptying your pockets out, go ahead and empty your pockets out for me. Must be a wallet in the front?
N. Wallet
K. Cool
N. Chapstick from my dentist, car keys, smokes, lighter, my friend’s number (pats pocket) besides the change.
23.14. K Let you chat with Officer Kiser. I’m gonna go talk to your mom for a while.
N. Ok.
K. Knocks on door. Can I talk to your for just a second? I just wanna come inside for a second.
N. Hey Mom, will you talk out here so I can hear you? I prefer you to talk out here. Mom, Mom, Mom.. (Killian comes inside and closes door.)
BACKGROUND NOISE COMING FROM FRONT PORCH
K. I wanna tell you something about what’s going on. We have a serious situation. Your son my be involved in an arson. How long has he been here.
M. Today?
K. Well just moments before I got here, he arrived. He’s trying to tell me that he’s been here all night that he’s been drinking downstairs. So he’s intoxicated right now. Highly intoxicated.
M. Yea and he’s bi-polar and he’s a nutcase.
K. I don’t doubt that, but the problem I’ve got is he’s trying to tell me that he’s been here all night long.
M. OK, Fine.
K. I know he hasn’t because an off-duty firefighter.. To the best of my knowledge we have fire in the park just south of here on 13th St where the trees are at and somebody lit them on fire.
M. Lit the trees on fire?
K. Uh huh and in the back of his truck is a gas can. So that’s where are right now.
M. He said he was over at a friend’s house.
K. I don’t doubt that he was, that he was. How long before he knocked on the door had your son been home.
M. Oh, he’s been in and out. I can’t even say. It takes 5 minutes to do the dishes. I really can’t say. I’ve been at the computer and time just goes by. He’d come up and talked to me a couple of times.
K. So he’s been in and out of the house all night long?
M. No.. No.. I mean he came home and he came in and went to the bathroom, and went downstairs and he came back up and we talked in passing then he just been.. He’s not been
upset at all. He doesn’t do crap when he’s not upset.
K. We have a fireman that followed him from the fire. Yea and then the fireman tried to follow him and got his plate number and your son decided to follow the fireman and the fireman got a little nervous and didn’t know what your son was going to do, trying to get violent or not, so the fireman stopped and tried to pull over.
M. Set the trees on fire?
K. Yea, that what it appears. I don’t know why he would but has he ever had an issue with light fires before?
M. No.. No.. He’s done some weird stuff, like. He self-mutilates.
K. Um hum
M. At this park over here?
K. Just over by the railroad tracks by 13th and 14th an Scott Place.
M. I guess if the guy saw him.. Trees on fire?
K Yea, appears he poured gas on the trees and lit them on fire. So it’s not a major deal, but the problem is he’s potentially DUI ;and also caused an arson so he’s in a little bit of trouble. So can I get your name?
M. My name is XXXX and I’m his mother.
K. Let me get my pad out of here. Is that his truck or is it yours?
M. It is his truck, but I pay the insurance.
K. OK What is your middle initial?
M. X
K. Last name?
M. XXXXXXX
K. Sorry to bother you tonight.
K. Ok, the same as his, XXXXXXX
M. My life is just hell.
K. Is he getting help? Is he doing better?
M. Oh yes, he went to the shrink yesterday and we were feeling so great because this was the best Christmas in about 5 years. He didn’t do anything stupid. It’s just constant.
K. What’s your birthday, mam?
M. Xx-xx-xxxx
K. And what is the phone number here?
M xxx-xxx
K. OK, and this is xxx. Well, we’re gonna go out and talk to him and by all means I’ll come back in and talk to you and let you know what’s going to go on before we do anything. Ok?
M. He also got a shoulder injury,
K. How old is that?
M. He got injured working on the Hilton down there and it’s been six months. He’s got a torn rotor cuff. Workman’s Comp… ugh..
K. Ok, ok. Before we go tonight, Ill let you know. I’m not saying the’s going to jail, but there’s a chance he might be.
M. Oh (gasp) If you take him to jail, he’ll probably be off his meds for 6 months..
K. Well maybe, maybe he needs to do something. Obviously, he needs help in many area, not just psychological, but maybe he needs to understand. I think he understands right from wrong. He’s smart.
M. He very smart.
K. Ok I’ll come back in and let you know.
M. What’s your name?
K. I’m officer Killian
M. Have you been here before
K. I don’t remember but it is possible.
M. You don’t recognize?. Laugh
K. I don’t recognize your son.
M. You don’t look all that familiar, but your name does.
K. By all means, I’ll let you Know what is going on.
M. I keep the steps clean so people can come in and out.
KILLIAN GOES BACK OUTSIDE. McKenna lead the conversation and he is talking much louder than necessary.
Mc. You were right around the corner t 13th and Placer. They said you were stopped there. The you pulled into an alley, stopped in an alley.
N. This alley? I pulled in and looked back at my truck and a police care was there. I’ve been in trouble with you guys before. Yea and I’m bi-polar, attention deficit and have post traumatic stress disorder.
Mc You pulled in the alley. You got out of your truck, you walked in your back door and the police were right there and you went out and talked to them.
N. No.
Mc. No? What happened?
N. It was a minute until you knocked on the door.
Mc What did you do until the minute you knocked on the on the front door.
N. I wondered why are the cops here?
Mc So you were in your apartment for a minute. Did you do anything during that minute.
N. I don’t have an apartment.
Mc You were in your house, excuse me.
N. My mom’s house.
Mc This is your mom’s house? What did you do when you walked in her house? change your clothes, Took off your shoes?
N. No , no, no, no. Kicked the snow off my shoes so I don’t track up my mom’s house. Then walked in to say hi to my Mom. Checked in with my mom. (Cut off by McKenna because letting him finish and tell what he’s been doing… doesn’t fit the story)
Mc. How much beer do you have in your mom’s house?
N. About 13- 14 beers.
Mc. Have you had anything since you got home?
N. Yeah.
Mc. Have ya? How much have you had to drink?
N. Gold Schlagger
Mc. How Much? He’s such a liar. You can’t lie dude. We were right here. You didn’t have anything.
Ks. He’s got open containers in his pick-up.
N. On private property.
Mc You remember the part about that about the driving part. We’ve discussed it already. What’s your first name.
N. Nathan.
Mc Here’s the deal, dude. Ok. I’ve got an off-duty fireman that sees your pulling away from the trees. Ok? Christmas trees, of all things, with no sentimental value to them. They’ve been thrown in a damn pile. There’s a little burn marks there and a little burn up the trees. Not a major crime. Alright? Sees you pulling away from it. We’re trying to figure out why your’re being so stupid to burn trees. Now you’re being so stupid going it wasn’t me. So you know what we could do? Nathan, It’s up to you. Right now I could snag you for a DUI.
N. No you can’t.
Mc Oh, trust me.
N. You can arrest me.
Mc absolutely. I can Tag you for open container. I could be a real dick about it, but I don’t want to be a dick about it, but I’ll tell you what. The point is, you’re looking at us going you know what you guys are stupid. We’re. Looking back at you going we’re really not stupid. We could make tonight a really bad night for you. Let’s clarify on why we’re trying to start a damn fire. Let’s figure out how to stop it. That’s what we want to do. We really don’t want to show up and be a bunch of pricks to you. But if I need to, I will. I have no problem with that. So why don’t you tell me why you would be stupid enough to try to set a pile of trees on fire?
N. I don’t start trees on fire. I come from “XXXXX” We get a little fire and it burns the whole place down.
Mc. Why would you be stupid to do that tonight, though.
N. I didn’t
Mc. You’re a liar. You’re a liar. An off duty fireman saw you pull away from it, dude.
N. Ok..
Mc. So the point is, it didn’t just magically start fifteen minutes ago. It started the minute you pulled away from it.
Kiser. There’s something in the back of your truck. What was that? Did you drop a tree off there?
N. No
Kiser. There’s something in the back of your truck. See where the snow’s been depressed.
N. Ye, yea, It got too heavy.
Kiser What did?
N. The snow in the back of my truck and its affecting my gas mileage. So tonight I … (interrupted by McKenna)
Mc Hysterical laughing…
Kiser Wow
Mc Really? You really want it to turn into a bad night.
Kiser. I think we really ought to run this guy all the way through.
Mc. Exactly. We’re obviously too stupid, we’re wasting our time here. Give me your id.
Ks.. I’ve got it.
Mc Really, thing about how stupid your want to be. I know that alcohol inhibits your thinking a little bit, but really, this s not a brainer. Ok? This is just being flat stupid on your part. You are about to cross that line and make this really frickin expensive, stupid mistake. Whether you get by with it or not, we’ll make it really expensive and real stupid for you. And then you’re gonna wake up in the morning in jail and go.. Wow that was really frickin stupid. That’s all you’ve gonna do. And about $2000 later, you’re gonna go, that was stupid. So you think about it while I run your id.
N. I’m on probation
Mc. Whose your probation officer?
N. Unsupervised
Mc. Unsupervised. You’re not allowed to drink on probation, either.
N. Nah. They didn’t not say anything about that.
Mc. They don’t have to say anything about that.
KS. That’s standard.
KS. What were you on probation for?
N. I went off on a tangent. I flipped out at the house.
KS. This house.
N. Yes sir. It’s my bad. I was drinking and I have a lot of problems and I punched some holes in the house and this and that.
Mc You woke up the next morning and went Wow, that was really stupid.
N. No.. (interrupted by McKenna)
Mc. You”re gonna do that again this time, aren’t you , Nathan?
N. I’m not gonna say anything. If you don’t want to let me speak. (Interrupted by McKenna)
Mc. It just seems that every time you speak, you lie, so I really don’t care if you do. See the common denominator is last time when you got arrested and were on probation, you were drunk, so the probation would tell you under probation you don’t want to drink.
N. Unsupervised.
Mc This time it won’t be
KS. We’ll see you’re highly supervised. See at the age of 31, you’ll have a mom that tells you what to do and a probation officer that tells you what to do.
N. Will you guys do me a favor and let me go in the house and get my video camera and let you give this lecture to me?
Mc. See we’re in charge… three officers laughing.
.N. You guys don’t have video cameras. You’re one of the last police jurisdictions in the United States. You have 6.
Mc. And we’re taking this lesson from you?
? yea you are….
Mc. This is like the last person….
? You are a bright star.
Mc You are, you are truly a bright star.
Mc Ok how many beers do you have in this car?
KS Bunches and bunches. He’;s got several open containers.
N. Are we goin in yet?
? I don’t know yet, just hang tight?
N. You think it is gonna warm up?
K. I don’t understand. No, I’m quite comfortable.
Mc. See, just so you understand. When you drive on a city street, which we know you did, and you been drinking which we know you have.
N. No I drank when I got here.
Mc. No you didn’t
Mc. See if you drank when you got here, then you would have had to have slammed a full bottle of beer or a whole bottle of whiskey and you have to wait 20- 30 minutes for it to process into your body for you to be slurring your words and be drunk like you are and that’s not physicall y possible. See the physiology of that is physically impossible for you to be instantly drunk. There is no way.
N. I got my degree in psychology.
Mc. It’s not psychology. Its physiology and your body can’t process alcohol that fast for you to be drunk. So we know you didn’t drink anything when you got here and we know that your intoxication level too multiple drinks and extensive time.
Kiser I found something better than just beer.
Mc. Oh sweet.
Kiser It’s liquor
Mc. That’s a misdemeanor, too
N. That’s what I slammed when got home.
Mc. That’s ’s a misdemeanor
Kiser It’s in the pick-up-up.
N. On Private Property
mc. You are dumber than a post, Nathan.
Kiser What’s that? what’s that? What are those pieces in there?
N. Gold, pieces of gold. Look at the seal. Gold Schlagger.
Ks. Huh?
Ks.. What’s it like
N. Cinnamon schnapps with gold in it.
Mc. So you pay extra for it so you can shit it out later, I guess.
N. There a story of a guy in Austria. He drank so much of it, he was allergic. Some people, they put on a ring and they get like a red mark. You’re allergic to the metal. Some guy in Austria drank so much of it he had allergy to the gold.
? Really?
? how much does it cost?
? It’s gold, it’s gold stuff.
? It’s gold leaf
Mc Ok Nathan I’m gonna issue you a citation for open container in the vehicle.
N. I’ll contest it.
Mc. I just want to give you one more shot if you want to tell us about the fire. Yea or no .. Simple.
N. What fire?
Mc Ok, what’s your phone number here Nathan
N…xxx-xxxx
N You can take a gram of gold and turn it into a sq. meter of roofing.
Mc A square meter of what?
N. Roofing
mc HE’s slurring his words because he’s intoxicated.
N. I switched over start speaking Thai to you guys.
Ks. You been to Thailand?
N. Ninoy
Ks where
N Patya, Bangkok
Ks. You were in Patya? So was I. In Bangkok, as well.
N. Why were you there.
Ks Navy
N. What did you do there.
Ks.. I was in the Marine Corps.
N. Embassy guard?
Ks. No
N. I was scared of you for a second. (Laugh)
K. You should be scared of him.
Mc. What year’s his truck?
K 91
KS. So what did you do in Thailand?
N. Had a good time all the time. Nah. I did a bit of work. English tutor, Thai boxing, I am a mechanic, I managed a junk yard for little bit. Mainly just had a good time. I have a lot good friends there. Moving back there pretty soon. I got married.
? Humm?
Killian: You might wanna move soon. I think your Mom is fed up with you.
? Dissatisfaction perhaps.
Killian. She said hell, it wasn’t dissatisfaction, it was pure hell.
? Have you ever thought about getting a house, growing up, getting a job???
I stopped at the box on Thursday evening and nothing was there, I stopped again tonight Saturday evening and got the disk, I just scanned and copied it to my desktop and listened to the first ten minutes when I saw this comment. It appears to be exact words for words of the audio file.
Thanks, Joe
I think you should get the best attorney in town and hire him to represent you for this case and then flush $4000.00 down the toilet. What’s the problem? This is not representative of what you described in the earlier posts at all. I thought the cops would have been torturing Nate the way you described it earlier. Mary you need to know that you are enabling Nate in his behavior and this is doing him harm. Is the PTSD from teaching English or from the junk yard? Don’t answer…
The transcript sounds like the tv shows where the cops ‘lean’ on the suspect, treat him badly, because they can and because they ‘know’ he’s guilty. It’s SOP.
On the other hand, I’m now fairly confident he was driving while under the influence, because no one has yet disputed that Nate was drunk, and I agree with the officers, you don’t get drunk instantly (or even in a few minutes…it takes time to process).
The odd thing to me, is they only cited him for the open container after threatening to do much worse. Seems to me they should have followed through or he’ll figure that cops talk tough but it’s all idle threats. It’ll just make him less cooperative next time (because I doubt this is the last they’ll see of him.)
I realize it’s a judgment call on their part. Maybe they softened up at the end because of Mary. But if so, I believe that to be a mistake. I don’t see him being scared straight by this encounter, and we already know that Mary’s convinced her son was unfairly targeted. Plus the evidence seems to be that she enables him.
Mary, I just don’t see from this transcript anything that would give you grounds for further action. I agree that reasonable, law-abiding folks would be upset if they were treated this way, but from the transcript it appears that Nate actually enjoyed the verbal sparring.
If someone else’s arson was the reason why Nate got the attention, that’s unfortunate, but all in all it appears he got away with drunk driving.
I’d be interested in hearing from Mary / Nathan about the case last year where Nathan did thousands of dollars of damage to Mary’s house which led to the police being called by Mary and him being arrested.
Or the case where Mary called police last year after Nathan was drunk and threatening violence against neighbors.
This whole dynamic is classic addict / enabler.
The entire recording is about 33 minutes, a large file size, so I’m not going to post it.
My OCD got the better of me, so I copied Mary’s transcript into Notepad and read it as I listened to the recording. I found a few things different, and I think those missing things were actually in Nathan’s favor.
This is what I think I heard:
KL: Hi
MH: Hi
KL: Who owns the little black Ford pick-up?
MH. Nate.
K. Is he here?
M. Just a minute. What’s the problem?
K. Well, We need to talk to him abut a fire.
M. About a fire?
K. Yea
M. (As Nate comes up the stairs) You know anything about a fire?
N. A fire?
Inaudible.
K. Hello. You own a little black Ford Ranger? You own a little black Ford Ranger?
N. A Ranger, yea.
K Were you just driving it?
N. Yea I just came back from a friend’s house.
K Where at?
N ah H Street
K 8th street? (Remember the fireman saw the third truck turn onto 9th Street)
N Yes sir.
K Do you have some shoes by chance? Can you come outside and talk to us for a minute?
N. Sure.
M. Invites them in.. (Through gestures)
K. We’re fine. We’re wet.
M. That’s ok, I don’t scrub til May.
K. I think he went out the back door. (In a whisper) Nate was getting his slippers…
K What’s the address on 8th Street where you just came from?
N. I was on H. St, K Street is here. Midgit Mart’s here.. Up a block.
K. Oh, H Street, not on number 8th Street. The letter H?
N. No. Not on 8th street. I was at H street tonight. Absolutely.
K. H. Like in Henry?
N. Henry yeah, they got the H, I, J,
K. You were over at a buddies’ house and then came straight here?
N. Uhhh, I went from his house to another buddies’ house, but all on that side of town.
K. And then you came here?
N. Yeah
K. I’ve got a witness that puts you over by Poitivin Park by the tree pile and there’s a fire over there. You don’t know anything about that?
N. In the?
K. Poitivin Park. Do you have id on you by chance?
N. Uh yeah sure, I am on probation.
K. You are? With who?
N. Bonneville Court, whoever.
K You don’t know who the probation officer is?
N. Nah, uh unsupervised.
K. Unsupervised. What for?
N. Going crazy the last few years..
K. What do you mean?
N. I’m Bi-polar, ADHD and PTSD, But I’m pretty proud of myself. This year, I didn’t go to the hospital or the cop shop.
K. Ok, That’s good, ok. Have you had anything to drink tonight?
N. Yes sir.
K. Are you supposed to be drinking while you’re on probation?
N. I’m on unsupervised probation.
K. Have you had anything to drink since you got home.
N. Yes sir.
K. Since you been home tonight. How long ago did you drink something.
N. About 10 minutes ago. Don’t tell my mom, but I’ve been doing shots of Gold Schlagger.
K. So you’ve had a shot since you got home?
N. Oh, yea.
K. One shot?
N.. No, more than that (laugh)
KS. You haven’t been home that long.
K. We followed you
KS. We were right behind you when you got here. You haven’t had that much t drink. Isn’t that right?
K. Be honest with us. You said.
KS. We were right behind you.
K. You said you were doing so good this year and now your are starting to lie to us.
KS. Now your’re lying
N. Ok, I’ll take back my id.
K. No you won’t, no.
N. Ok
K. We’re doing an investigation, so…
N. Ok, What are you investigating?
K. So what was going on at Poitivin Park?
N. Where?
K. Poitivin Park, the park, just around the corner.
N. That quarter mile track?
K. Yea, that’s a good description.
N. I do that in the summer, I try to jog.
K. But you said a minute ago that you weren’t there, you were at a friend’s house on H. Street.
N. No I say When the snow ‘s clear, I jog there during the summer.
K. What happened over at the park tonight?
N. You tell me.
both officers laugh
KS. Might have something to do with the gas can in the back of your pick-up. Suppose?
Just throwing that out there.
K. 86329 Helburn, Henry, Edward, Lincoln, Boyd, Union, Lincoln, Nora
KS. Anything you want to talk to us about?
N. No
K. Didn’t light anything on fire over there?
N. No sir.
KS. No?
N. No sir.
KS. You did. Somebody was following you who happens to be an off-duty fireman (pauses and clear throat) and then you turned around and tried to follow him and then you pulled off and ended up back home. We were right behind you or right behind this trail of people. You ended up home and we were there shortly after. That’s how we ended up here.
K. We were here moments after you were here. So you been doing shots in the house?
N. In my truck… on my property.
K So your shots are in your truck?
N. Yes sir.
KS. He’s got beer there.
K. Oh ok, so no alcohol in the house?
N. Yea, I have alcohol in my house.
K. So were you drinking in the house or in the truck.
N. I was drinking in the truck parked on my property. That’s not a DUI.
Inaudible?
N. ON your own property?
K. You drove to get here? You just told me you did, we had people following you.
KS: It doesn’t matter where you drink at.
K: That’s fine.
K: Oh we’ll have mcKenna come over and we’re gonna take this the full ride for an arson.
KS. I think we should. Think that’ll put you on real probation.
K. Yea, 10-4.
KS If we really want Nathan, we can maybe even get a rider out of this for you.
K. I’ve got a gas can in the back of this truck. We’ve got an intoxicated male that doesn’t want to talk to us.
N. I’m on unsupervised probation.
K. Yea, 438, you just passed us . Back up.
N. Since I’m not under arrest yet, I’ll enjoy my last cigarette.
K. Hey, you can smoke. Why would you say it’s your last cigarette?
N. Cause if you’re taking me to jail, there are no smoking facilities. There is no smoking. Hey, if you want to give me a patdown.
K. Do you have any weapons you you we should be aware of?
N. No.
K. You don’t mind emptying your pockets out, go ahead and empty your pockets for me. Must be a wallet in the front?
N. Wallet
K. Cool
N. Chapstick from my dentist, cuz I’m really chapped
K. K
N. car keys, uh smokes, lighter, my friend’s number (pats pocket) besides the change.
K: Let you chat with Officer Kiser. I’m gonna go talk to your mom for a minute.
N. Ok.
K. Knocks on door. Can I talk to your for just a second? I just wanna come inside if I can.
N. Hey Mom, would you prefer to talk with them where I can hear you?
K: Yes, Ma’am.
N. No, I would prefer you to leave my mom alone. (Killian comes inside and closes door.)
BACKGROUND NOISE COMING FROM FRONT PORCH
K. Lemme tell you something about what’s going on. We have a serious situation. Your son my be involved in an arson. And I’m just… How long has he been here?
M. Today?
K. Well just moments before I got here, he arrived. He’s trying to tell me that he’s been here all night that he’s been drinking downstairs. So he’s intoxicated right now. Highly intoxicated.
M. Yea and he’s bi-polar and he’s a nutcase.
K. I don’t doubt that, but the problem I’ve got is he’s trying to tell me that he’s been here all night long, and I know he hasn’t because an off-duty…
M. OK, Fine.
K. An off-duty firefighter..
M. What happened?
K. Well to the best of my knowledge we have fire over in the park just south of here on 13th St where the trees are at and somebody lit them on fire.
M. Lit the trees on fire?
K. Uh huh and in the back of his truck is a gas can. So that’s where we’re at right now.
M. He was over at a, he said he was over at a friend’s house.
K. I don’t doubt that he was, that he was. How long before I knocked on the door had your son been home?
M. Oh, he’s been in and out. Pause, mumbling. I can’t even say. It takes 5 minutes to do the dishes. I really can’t say. I’ve been at the computer and time just goes by. He’d come up and talked to me a couple of times.
K. So he’s been in and out of the house all night long?
M. No.. No.. I mean he came home and he came up, he came in and went to the bathroom, and he went downstairs and he came back up and we talked in passing then he just been.. He’s not been
upset at all. He doesn’t do crap when he’s not upset.
K. We have a fireman that followed him from the fire. Yea and then the fireman tried to follow him and got his plate number and your son decided to follow the fireman and the fireman got a little nervous and didn’t know what your son was going to do, if he was going to get violent or not, so the fireman stopped and tried to pull over.
M. Set the trees on fire?
K. Yea, that what it appears happened. I don’t know why he would, has he ever had an issue with light fires before?
M. No.. No.. He’s done some weird stuff, like. He self-mutilates.
K. Um hum
M. Where, at this park over here?
K. Just over by the railroad tracks by 13th and 14th and Scott Place.
M. I just have this weirdest feeling, I guess if the guy saw him.. Trees where on fire?
K Yea, appears he poured gas on the trees and lit them on fire. So it’s not a major deal, but the problem is he’s potentially DUI ;and also caused an arson so he’s in a little bit of trouble. So can I get your name? We’re going to have to do a report and..
M. My name is XXXX and I’m his mother.
K. Let me get my pad out of here. Is that his truck or is it yours?
M. It is his truck, but I pay the insurance.
K. OK What is your middle initial?
M. X
K. abd Last name?
M. XXXXXXX
K. Ok, same as his. Sorry to bother you tonight.
K. Ok, the same as his, XXXXXXX
M. My life is just hell.
K. Is he getting help? Is he doing better? Has he had moments?
M. Oh yes, he went to the shrink yesterday and we were feeling so great because this was the best Christmas in about 5 years. He didn’t do anything stupid. It’s just constant.
K. What’s your birthday, maam?
M. Xx-xx-xxxx
K. And what is the phone number here?
M xxx-xxx
K. OK, and this is xxx, right Well, we’re gonna go out and talk to him and by all means I’ll come back in and let you know what’s going to go on before we do anything. Ok?
M. He also got a shoulder injury,
K. Mm-hm, how old is that?
M. He got injured working on the Hilton down there and it’s been six months. He’s got a torn rotor cuff. Workman’s Comp, all kind of hell..
K. Ok, ok. Before we go tonight, Ill let you know. I’m not saying the’s going to jail, but there’s a chance he might be.
M. Oh (gasp) If you take him to jail, he’ll probably be off his meds for 6 months..
K. Well maybe, maybe he needs to do something. Obviously, he needs help in many areas, not just psychological, but maybe he needs to understand that… I think he understands right from wrong. He’s smart.
M. He very smart.
K. Ok I’ll come back in and let you know.
M. What’s your name?
K. I’m officer Killian
M. Have you been here before
K. I don’t remember but it is possible.
M. You don’t recognize?. Laugh
K. I don’t recognize your son.
M. You don’t look all that familiar, but your name does.
K. By all means, I’ll let you Know what is going on.
M. I keep the steps clean so people can come in and out.
KILLIAN GOES BACK OUTSIDE. McKenna lead the conversation and he is talking much louder than necessary.
Mc. Were you right around the corner? That’s 13th and Placer. They said you were stopped there. Your truck was stopped there and you were there.
N. Mmm, n…
Mc. Then you pulled into an alley, stopped in an alley.
N. This alley? I pulled in and then I looked back at my truck and a police care was there. I’ve been in trouble with you guys before. Yea and I’m bi-polar, attention deficit disorder and have post traumatic stress disorder.
Mc So you pulled in the alley. You got out of your truck, you walked in your back door and the police were right there and you went out and talked to them.
N. No.
Mc. No? What happened?
N. I give it a minute until you guys knocked on the front door.
Mc What did you do for the minute you knocked on the on the front door.
N. I wondered why are the cops here?
Mc Ok, so you were in your apartment for a minute. Did you do anything in that minute?
N. I don’t have that apartment.
Mc You were in your house, excuse me.
N. My mom’s house.
Mc. Right, this is your mom’s house? What did you do when you walked in her house? change your clothes, Took your shoes pff?
N. No , no, no, no. Kicked the snow off my shoes so I don’t track up in my mom’s house. Then walked in to say hi to my Mom. Checked in with my mom.
Mc. How much beer do you have in your mom’s house?
N. About 13- 14 beers.
Mc. Have you had anything to drink since you got home?
N. Yeah.
Mc. Have ya? How much have you had to drink?
N. Gold Schlagger
Mc. How Much? He’s such a liar.
someone else: You are.
Mc. You can’t lie dude. We were right here. You didn’t have anything.
Ks. He’s got open containers in his pick-up. They may be closed.
N. On private property.
Mc You remember the part about that about that? The driving part. We’ve discussed it already. What’s your first name.
N. Nathan.
Mc Here’s the deal, dude. Ok. I’ve got an off-duty fireman that sees your pulling away from the trees. Ok? Christmas trees, of all things, with no sentimental value to them. They’ve been thrown in a damn pile. There’s a little burn marks there and a little burn up the trees. Not a major crime. Alright? Sees you pulling away from it. We’re trying to figure out why your’re being so stupid to burn trees. Now you’re being stupid, going “it wasn’t me”. So you know what we could do, Nathan?
N. It’s up to you.
Mc. Right now I could snag you for a DUI.
N. No you can’t.
Mc Oh, trust me.
N. You can arrest me for a DUI.
Mc Sure, absolutely. I can Tag you for open container. I could be a real dick about it, and I don’t want to be a dick about it, but I’ll tell you what. The point is, you’re looking at us going you know what you guys are stupid.
N. (Inaudible, but clearly denying this statement.)
Mc. And we’re looking back at you, going guess what Nathan, we’re really not stupid.
N. (Inaudible, but clearly denying this statement.)
Mc. We could make tonight a really bad night for you. Let’s clarify on why we’re trying to start a damn fire over there and figure out how to stop it. That’s what we want to do. We really don’t want to show up and be a bunch of pricks to you. But if I need to, I will. I have no problem with that. So why don’t you tell me why you would be stupid enough to try to start a pile of trees on fire?
N. I don’t start trees on fire. I lived in, I come from “XXXXX”, Wyoming. We get a little fire, the whole place burns down.
Mc. Why would you be stupid to do that tonight, though.
N. I didn’t
someone else: You’re a liar.
Mc. You are, You’re a liar. An off duty fireman saw you pull away from it, dude.
N. Ok..
Mc. And as soon as you pulled away, the flames started. So the point is, it didn’t just magically start fifteen minutes ago. It started as soon as you pulled away from it. Kiser. There’s something in the back of your truck. What was that? Did you drop a tree off there?
N. No
Kiser. There’s something in the back of your truck. See where the snow’s been depressed.
N. Ye, yea, It got too heavy.
Kiser What did?
N. The snow in the back of my truck and its affecting my gas mileage. So tonight I … (interrupted by McKenna)
Mc Hysterical laughing…
Kiser. Wow
Mc Really? You really want it to turn this into a bad night.
Kiser. I think we really ought to run this guy all the way through.
Mc. Exactly. We’re obviously too stupid, we’re wasting our time here. Give me your id.
Ks. I’ve got it.
Mc Really, think about how stupid your want to be. I know that alcohol inhibits your thinking a little bit, but really, this is not a brainer. Ok? This is just being flat stupid on your part. You are about ready to cross that line and make this really frickin expensive, stupid mistake. Whether you get away with it or not, we’ll make it really expensive and really stupid for you. And then you’re gonna wake up in the morning in jail and go.. Wow that was really frickin stupid. That’s all you’ve gonna do. And about $2000 later, you’re gonna go, that was stupid. So you think about it while I run your id.
N. I’m on probation
Mc. Whose your probation officer?
N. Unsupervised
Mc. Unsupervised. You’re not allowed to drink on probation, either. This is going to be bad!
N. Nah. They didn’t not say anything about that.
Mc. They don’t have to say anything about that.
KS. That’s standard.
Mc. That’s standard, that’s probation.
KS. What were you on probation for? What did you do, you said you did something?
N. I went off on a tangent. I flipped out at the house.
KS. This house?
N. Yes sir, this house. And it’s my bad. I was drinking and I have a lot of problems and I punched some holes in the house and this and that.
Mc So you woke up the next morning and went Wow, that was really stupid.
N. No.. (interrupted by McKenna)
Mc. You”re gonna do that again this time, aren’t you , Nathan?
N. I’m not gonna say anything. If you don’t want to let me speak. (Interrupted by McKenna)
Mc. It just seems that every time you speak, you lie, so I really don’t care if you do. See the common denominator is last time when you got arrested and were on probation, you were drunk, so the probation would tell you under probation you don’t drink because ….
N. Unsupervised.
Mc This time it won’t be
KS. We’ll see to it that you’re highly supervised. See at the age of 31, you’ll have a mom that tells you what to do and you’ll have a probation officer that tells you what to do.
N. Will you guys do me a favor and let me go in the house and get my video camera and let you give this lecture to me?
Mc. See we’re in charge… three officers laughing.
N. You guys don’t have video cameras.
Someone: What do you need a video camera for?
N. You’re one of the last police jurisdictions in the United States. You have 6.
Mc. And we’re taking this lesson from you?
? yea you are….
Mc. This is like the last person….
? You are a bright star.
Mc You are, you are truly a bright star.
Mc Ok how many beers do you have in this car?
KS Bunches and bunches. He’s got several open containers.
? Yeah he’s got a couple.
N. Are we goin in yet?
? I don’t know yet, just hang tight?
N. You think it is gonna warm up?
K. I don’t understand. No, I’m quite comfortable.
Mc. See, just so you understand. When you drive on a city street, which we know you did, and you been drinking which we know you have.
N. No I drank when I got here.
Mc. No you didn’t
Mc. See if you drank when you got here, then you would have had to have slammed a full bottle of beer or alco… or a whole bottle of whiskey and you’d have to wait 20 minutes, 30 minutes for it to process into your body for you to be slurring your words and be drunk like you are and that’s not physicall y possible. See the physiology of that is impossible, you couldn’t have drank it that quick for you to be instantly drunk. There is no way.
N. That’s fine I got my degree in psychology.
Mc. Okay well it’s not psychology. Its physiology and your body can’t process alcohol that fast for you to be drunk. So we know you didn’t drink anything when you got here and we know that your intoxication level took multiple drinks and extensive time.
*** note this time is 22 minutes, 40 seconds after officers knocked on door. ***
Kiser. Actually, I found something better than just beer.
Mc. Oh sweet.
Kiser It’s crack liquor
Mc. That’s a misdemeanor, too
N. Gold Schlagger, that’s what I slammed when got home.
Mc. That’s’s a misdemeanor
Kiser It’s in the pick-up-up.
N. On Private Property.
mc. You are dumber than a post, Nathan.
Kiser What’s that? what’s that? What are those pieces in there?
N. Gold, pieces of gold. Look at the seal. Gold Schlagger.
Ks. Huh?
Ks.. What’s it like?
N. Cinnamon schnapps with gold in it.
Mc. So you pay extra for the told so you can shit it out later, I guess.
N. There a story of a guy in Austria. He drank so much of it, he was allergic. Some people, they put on a ring and they get like a red mark. You’re allergic to the metal. Some guy in Austria drank so much of it he had allergy to the gold.
? Really?
? how much does it cost?
? It’s gold, it’s gold stuff.
N. It’s gold leaf.
Mc Ok Nathan here we go. I’m gonna issue you a citation for open container in the vehicle.
N. I’ll contest it.
Mc. I just want to give you one more shot if you want to tell us about the fire. Yea or no .. Simple.
N. What fire?
(inaudible)
?. Wasting everyone’s time…
(Police radio chatter)
N. Is a pickup in an accident, cuz of the ice? Or?
? When there’s DUIs?
? Yeah
? Ho, ho, ho, tis the season.
N. Yeah
Mc. Certainly is. Ok, what’s your phone number here Nathan
N…xxx-xxxx
? Gold Schlagger, real gold flakes it says
N. You gott remember, you can take a gram of gold and turn it into a sq. meter of roofing.
Mc A square meter of what?
N. Roofing
(back and forth as multiple people say the same word, “roofing”)
mc HE’s slurring his words because he’s intoxicated.
N. No, ROOFING.
N. I switched over start speaking Thai to you guys.
Ks. You been to Thailand?
N. Ninoy
Ks where
N Patya, Bangkok
Ks. You were in Patya? So was I. In Bangkok, as well.
N. What’d you di you there.
Ks Navy
N. What did you do there.
Ks.. I was in the Marine Corps.
N. Embassy guard?
Ks. No
N. I was scared of you for a second. (Laugh)
K. You should be scared of him.
Mc. What year’s his truck?
K 91
N. Uh yes sir.
KS. So what did you do in Thailand?
N. Had a good time all the time. Nah. I did a bit of work. English tutor, Thai boxing, I am a mechanic, I managed a junk yard for a little bit. Mainly just had a good time. I have a lot good friends there. Moving back there pretty soon. I got married.
? Humm. Hmmm.
Killian: You might wanna move back soon. I think your Mom is fed up with you.
? Dissatisfaction perhaps.
Killian. She said hell, it wasn’t dissatisfaction, it was pure hell.
? Hey have you ever thought about like, getting a house,
K. Growing up?
? and moving out of your mom’s place, and getting a job and…
( The rest is just the cops telling Nathan what they think he should do with his life. A citation is issued, the cops make remarks about him breaking the law, and take something with them because it’s illegal (presumably the gold schlagger) and said they would “get rid of it”.
I don’t know what to think. The cops were being aggressive and were being jerks, but I don’t know that they were crossing any lines.
They said a few times they were doing an investigation, but it was quite clear they already convicted Nathan in their minds. Did they check into any other similar vehicles in the same area? I didn’t hear anything about that. When they kept after him it was clear they were trying to get a confession out of him, not investigate the truth. Ding against those cops.
At one point the cops hassled Nathan about intentionally slurring his speech to act like he was drunk, but his speech sounded slurred the entire time. Note the early instance of the cops mistaking Nathan saying “H” for “8″ th street? Ding against the cops.
I don’t know that Nathan enjoyed verbally sparring with the cops, they seemed to enjoy the sparring a lot more, especially with their three to one advantage. He sounded to me like he had an idea of his rights and was not going to let them railroad him, and it was obvious they were trying to nail him for something. I think Nathan was being cooperative and generally friendly and helpful most of the time.
It is strange that the officers were first all bunched up over the tree fire, harangued him about being stupid to light the fire, then they completely dropped it and chased the container issue. To me that indicates a lack of confidence on their part that they could prove he lit the fire. Ding against the cops.
The cops kept twisting his words around, and repeatedly used his mental issues against him. Ding against the cops.
One cops said there were “bunches” of open containers in Nathan’s vehicle, then another said there were “a couple”. Which was it? Ding against the cops.
Nathan never denied the gas can, and he never expressed surprise that the gas can was there. Ding against Nathan.
Nathan said “what fire?” near the end after all the conversation in which he knew what they were talking about. I would consider that to be argumentative, a truly innocent person probably would have said something like, “no, I had nothing to do with that fire, I did not start any fire, I don’t know why that gas can was in my truck, etc.” BIG ding against Nathan.
The cops kept berating Nathan about if and how much he had to drink. Nathan indicated he took a couple shots of the gold schlagger. They argued that he did not have enough time, and said he had to drink a whole bottle to get as drunk as he was, the physiology of it.
As a former drunk, I can believe Nathan on this one. It doesn’t take more than three seconds to take a quick two or three shot swig from a bottle. A drunk can and will slip that swig past anyone in a heartbeat. This is purely subjective, but he sounded to me like he had taken two or three swigs, nothing more and nothing less. I think this was another ding against the cops.
This raises another issue, they seemed to verge on accusing him of drunk driving, but they never performed field sobriety tests on him, never had him blow the breathalyser. Why not? Ding against the cops.
I think the issue of whether someone can drink on unsupervised probation should be answered. If they cannot, then I think the case is closed, he shouldn’t have had it. If they can, then it’s another ding against those cops because they were beating him over the head with it. If they had their information wrong on it, and they should have known better, then they were the ones lying to get the confession.
So is it okay to drink or not on unsupervised probation?
Regarding Guest’s comment 89, the previous cases are irrelevant. I understand we Idahoans have little capacity to understand and appreciate mental illness, but it means that a lot of things can happen out of a person’s control when they are off their meds. Please take issue with the merits of this case.
Burned Up,
I have presented a transcription of tape. Your comments are completely irrelevent to the subject.
What happened that night? The witness gave a false report. The police acted on it because of undue credibility because of the person’s position with the City.
The internal investigation was cursory. The officers had been exonerated because they were acting on their “best knowledge” at the time. The evidence of wrong-doing coming from a non-police officer was completely discounted. The tapes of the interrogation were heard after the exoneration.
The question of the planted evidence..”Why are you concerned about that when he wasn’t charged with arson?”
I think that can be answered by something one officer said, “Whether you get by with it or not, we’ll make it really expensive and real stupid for you.”
Here you have the police acting as judge and jury. They tossed out all conflicting evidence. They have the power to do this to anyone if you let them.
I’m sure all here have heard of wrongful convictions because exonerating evidence was withheld.
Why was this officer so intent on creating a false reality of what the impressions in the back of the truck were from? Why was he so opposed to hearing the truth? It is only a few slippery steps from tossing conflicting evidence to creating false evidence in trying to make a case.
Notice the language the same officer uses in introducing the presence of a gas can.
KS. “Might have something to do with the gas can in the back of your pick-up. Suppose?
Just throwing that out there.”
Sounds a little tentative, doesn’t it? When he didn’t sink the hook, he didn’t follow up on it. Why do you suppose?
Defending oneself against false accusations is relatively easy because one knows the truth.
Defending against true allegations is a different matter. If one is in a position of power and the system is set to support its own infallability, we have a problem. The rule of law being is given lip service when we see special treatment for authorities.
We have to have authorities who know the rules and abide by them.
Well, Joe, the extra bits just reinforce to me that the situation took multiple cops off the street to swagger and verbally abuse a drunk man who may or may not have been involved with an arson. When I first read it through, I was reminded of the interrogation scenes on TV, where the cops use sarcasm, humiliation, and verbal abuse on their suspects. I figured it was standard operating procedure for cops, to break the suspect and get a confession. I then let my bias toward the obviously drunk driver and the enabling mommy take over and blind me to the real story.
If I were Mary I know I’d be upset to hear this kind of treatment of my son, even if he had been doing something wrong (like driving drunk and maybe starting a fire).
I read both of Steve Roos’ novels. In them, the cops do some rough talking but I don’t think they go that far. Does our new police chief know that his officers treat suspects in this way? Is it okay with him? If this is supposed to be normal, why didn’t his novels show that kind of talk?
Also, if this is normal, and I’m ever a suspect, I’m gonna need a change of underpants and an attorney, because even if I’m innocent I’m going to think I’m in bad trouble. I certainly don’t want to be treated this way, even if the police feel I’m guilty of whatever they’ve come to see me about.
However, other than some training for the police to treat suspects as human beings, what are we looking to accomplish? I don’t want this behavior to be condoned, but I don’t want to tie their hands so that they have to tippy toe around afraid of a lawsuit for not being very respectful of the suspect.
There are cops and ex cops that comment here. Is this normal? Is this acceptable police procedure? If you think someone is a dirtbag, or have previous experience with them and they were dirtbags before, is it okay to posture, humiliate, and threaten them now?
I truly would like to hear from someone who has some previous law enforcement experience on this one, if they can give a candid assessment of this situation as printed, being fair and open minded. Pretend the suspect is someone you care about…what would you think?
I see absolutely nothing wrong with how the cops talked to him. The Idaho Falls Police, being the cheapskates they are, have failed to buy mind reading devices for their officers and as such the officers don’t know if someone is lying to them or telling them the truth. So they have to go off their instincts.
Its very obvious that Nathan was being a jerk, which many people are when they are drunk, and being a jerk is often a defense mechanism for people who are being caught in lies. Again, the police do not have mind reading devices. I saw numerous things Nathan said in the transcript that set off my BS detector. So the Officers VERBALLY leaned on him. Boo freaking hoo! Thats their job. Should they just walk away anytime someone denies doing a crime? The bad guys of the world will love that seeing as that what some of you seem to expect. If your innocent its unfortunate but unless your charged with the crime your being accused of then its really no big deal at the end of the day unless you have a victim complex (as the Helburn’s obviously do). Because let me remind you all since this keeps getting lost – HE WASN’T CHARGED WITH ARSON.
And yes, if your on probation you aren’t supposed to drink. That true of supervised and unsupervised.
And yes its obvious that Nathan drove drunk here based on the circumstances. Its also obvious that the cops wouldn’t be able to arrest on it because of they didn’t catch him driving. In some of your worlds that means I guess the cops shouldn’t have even talked about it. In mine I’m glad the cops chewed him out about it since he could kill someone driving drunk.
Great job by the cops in this case.
I agree with Guest. The police did nothing wrong in this matter. They also continued to talk with Nathan about his actions that night. The only thing that I think they should have done was have one officer talking to him during the event….there were too many distractions and other added comments that gave Nathan the ability to avoid direct questions and engage in banter. They also could have taken Nathan downtown to talk to him about the matter as well and in an arena where he would have been out of the weather and out of his element as well. It would have made for a better investigation. Otherwise, there was nothing wrong with the interactions. If this is the worst example Mary can come up with then I am not worried about the IFPD.
PS- All misdemeanor court orders have a standard condition of the probation sentence (supervised or unsupervised) to not consume alcoholic beverages. The way the orders are configured, this condition is pre-printed on the form, so it applies in all cases. Looks like if the Prosecutor wanted to they could file a violation on him and return him to court to serve some jail time.
If their instincts are that he is lying, (and they feel they have the right guy) then the proper procedure should be that they arrest him. However, they ‘leaned’ on him to try to get a confession in the face of having little or no evidence. To me that is why we have all these innocent folks going free after being exonerated by dna evidence, years later. Some of them also confessed, in the face of the police pressure.
I expect them to use their instincts, their gut feelings, and their vast experience to catch bad guys. I don’t want to tie their hands and dictate what kinds of things they can say. But again, do they have to go to that extent? And it didn’t even work, so either their instincts are bad or their interrogation techniques failed (why, were they too SOFT??? I think not, I trust Joe on this one, he heard the tape.)
I don’t think that Nate was innocent. I also felt my BS detector going off, and I’m fairly confident that he was a drunk driver. But I still don’t want to be treated like that even if the police think I’m guilty of a crime. I’d like to be treated with respect by the police, even if I am a suspect.
I’ve never been on any kind of probation, but I don’t know that it can be said that it’s common knowledge that you can’t drink while on unsupervised probation. If it was a violation, why didn’t they arrest him for being drunk?
Kemo, are you out there, and what say you on this?
It is common knowledge because they receive a copy of the order after they have signed it. The police are not empowered to arrest on a probation violation. They could bring the information to the prosecutor and the prosecutor can go get a warrant. Otherwise, for folks on supervised probation, the police usually call the probation officer and let them deal with the person.
Why no audio still? You were willing to post the audio of the 911 call on youtube but not this? Something smells fishy. Transcripts are often worthless because tone of voice and inflections can tell you a lot about whether someone was serious, joking, being rude, etc. Joe says Officer McKenna was talking louder than necessary. Does Joe know Officer Mckenna and thus know that McKenna always talks about twice as loud as necessary even in casual conversation. Some people are just that way and sometimes when I’ve talked to McKenna I’ve wished I had earplugs – he is just a very loud and boisterous person.
I agree with the person who wants details on the prior cases. They don’t prove guilt or innocence in this case but they could go along ways towards showing what is typical behavior by Nathan when he is drunk and / or off meds.
People on probation can’t drink as has been stated. Also, apparently some aren’t aware of this but cops cannot arrest someone for probation violations unless the violation is a crime in and of itself. Nathan is an adult so being drunk is not a crime, its just a violation of probation. The only person who can arrest for a simple violation is the probation officer and if Nathan was on unsupervised probation he doesn’t have one. If he had been on supervised probation the cops would no doubt have called the probation officer out to arrest Nathan. Basically unsupervised probation is useless.
I could nitpick little things I think the cops could have done better in their interrogation but overall I see nothing in the transcript that makes me feel like they did a bad job. They were dealing with a drunk jerk who obviously had driven drunk and had an open container. And he was suspected in an arson. They investigated the arson and part of an investigation is trying to get a confession and as someone stated earlier few ever admit immediately they did a crime so cops pushed on.
I’d say this is a good job by the cops and that the Helburns need to stop whining and blaming everyone else for their problems. Especially when Nathan brings those problems on himself by getting drunk and getting off his meds. And his mother by being an enabler who allows Nathan to do these kinds of things repeatedly without consequence like making him be an adult and live on own, if the earlier post is to be believed.
BTW, anyone familiar with bi-polar meds can tell you that you are absolutely not supposed to take alcohol with them (it says so right on the bottle) because of the bad interactions they have with one another. There are lots of bi-polar people in the world who function well and hold down good jobs. My dad for one. Its all about being responsible, taking your meds, not mooching off society, and not blaming everyone else for your problems.
Joe, “the previous cases are irrelevant” (from post #92). What is this? Of course they are relevant! We can’t study this in a steril environment, some people are, but we can’t. The police have to take Nate’s past behavior into consideration when dealing with him. I’m sure the police have dealt with Nate many times in the past and from what it sounds like they will deal with him many more times. Nate is the one in trouble here and some people posting here are feeling bad that he got the 3rd degree. Maybe next time he decides to drink and drive, which I’m sure will be soon, someone can post there address and he can drive around their neighborhood. I’m sure that Nate’s neighbor was out in his black 91 Ford Ranger starting a fire the same time Nate was driving around in his black 91 Ford Ranger drinking. They should travel together next time and save gas…to start more fires of course.
Out of all the countles TV shows displaying the good cop bad cop scenario; is it really suprising to see our officers do the same?
In a perfect world it would be nice to be treated with respect if you were the suspect. Of course that street goes both ways. I’m sure the police would love to be treated with respect from every person they wrote a ticket to, all the way down to the person they are arresting for drunk driving.
However, this isn’t a perfect world and as stated previously people aren’t completely honest. I would like to think if you didn’t commit a crime why would you confess under alleged police threats or harsh tone of voice. But to truly say it was because the police pressured them; only the suspect would know that and why they pled guilty when they really weren’t.
Figured this thread deserved a bump in light of today’s news.
If you haven’t seen the news you can go check out the story on any of the local news websites. Mary Helburn, the author of this thread, was found murdered today. Her son, Nathan, also a contributor in this thread is the prime suspect and his whereabouts are unknown.
Their names are brought up several times in this thread so I’m not revealing anything that isn’t already known.
Wow, I remember this discussion/debate now! Incredible. I suppose facts of her murder will come to light pretty soon. I was in IF and Ammon tonight and the city was literally crawling with city and county cars. Thanks for giving this a bump anonymous!