Police Refuse To Confiscate Crowbar

[ironichope]

What is the name of your state? NJ

A victim recently reported a sexual assault and arrived home yesterday to find a crowbar conspicuously hanging over the stairwell she passes to enter her apartment. She called the apartment superintendent and requested removal of the crowbar. The accused faces allegations of sexual assault and for other reasons, a temporary restraining order is in place against the accused.

Later that night, the victim realized that the news reported a marine was murdered with a crowbar after reporting a rape, so the victim immediately went to the police who refused to confiscate the crowbar.

The restraining order forbids the accused from having anyone contact the victim. No one would know about the allegations and the victim's address without having spoken to the accused. Hence, the victim believes a crowbar conspicuously hanging outside her apartment is a violation of the tro, and that the police should confiscate the crowbar at minimum and arrest/detain the accused at best.

Any thoughts?

 

[CdwJava]

She called the apartment superintendent and requested removal of the crowbar.

So ... the superintendent has the crowbar now?

The accused faces allegations of sexual assault and for other reasons, a temporary restraining order is in place against the accused.

And the crowbar does not prove a violation of the R/O.

Later that night, the victim realized that the news reported a marine was murdered with a crowbar after reporting a rape, so the victim immediately went to the police who refused to confiscate the crowbar.

Why? Do you have reason to believe it is evidence of a crime??

At this point, all the crowbar would be is found property. So they can't really seize it as evidence. And since it's in the custody of the apartment management, there is really no easy way to seize it.

Hence, the victim believes a crowbar conspicuously hanging outside her apartment is a violation of the tro, and that the police should confiscate the crowbar at minimum and arrest/detain the accused at best.

The presence of the crowbar is not proof of anything ... except that a crowbar was left hanging on the railing.

Yes, they might be able to ask the accused if he was in the area or left a crowbar, but they couldn't arrest or detain him for this ... not unless they wanted to get sued. At best they could interview neighbors to see if anyone saw him in the complex or saw who put the crowbar on the railing.

While I understand the fear and the possibility it was meant as a signal, the police cannot just go around arresting people or charging crimes because of something that they THINK happened - they have to be able to show that something happened through establishing probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and that the suspect committed the crime.

Perhaps if you speak to the investigator looking into the sexual assault he or she might be interested in this tidbit.

- Carl

 

[ironichope]

Thank You

Thank you. All matters will be addressed in a Federal Action.

 

[CdwJava]

Thank you. All matters will be addressed in a Federal Action.

I'm curious ,,, what are the grounds of a civil action, and against whom? Based on their not colletcing a crowbar?

Doubtful.

If there is cause for action (likely a 1983 action) it would be something other than failure to seize what you believe might have been evidence.

- Carl

 

[tranquility]

Except for certain instances (like protecting a person who has been arrested and is in custody), the police don't have a duty to act. I've got to agree with Carl, what is your cause of action?