Cops REFUSE To Arrest Man Who Harassed Woman

[Music] welcome to audit the audit where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions this episode covers traffic laws private property and criminal confinement and was originally reported by the times of northwest indiana but was brought to our attention by lackluster's channel be sure to check out the description below and give them the credit that they deserve on june 12th 2020 amazon driver deja murphy drove down a half-mile driveway in lowell indiana to deliver a package property owner keith miller who believed that ms murphy was speeding drove after her and used his truck to block the driveway preventing her from leaving the property mr miller then approached ms murphy's delivery vehicle tried to open the door and ordered her to exit and show him her driver's license ms murphy called officer john 911 of the lake county sheriff's department responded to the call [Music] no bottom line is i need your id sure you're going to pull your truck in your driveway i'm going to get her information i'm going to do a report and we're going to go about our day i'm going to get my wallet from my office huh no you're not you're going to just give me your name and information oh sure i don't need i'm get in your truck get in your driveway okay thank you contact amazon thank you please fall forward can i do anything please hold forward i can't ask a question we're done i can't you're blocking her on my property on my property it's called criminal confinement okay i'm just asking you can i fill out a police report that's what i'm doing right now thank you that was my first question thank you appreciate it if you have a problem call amazon nope go forward i honestly haven't pull forward there's plenty of times places to call amazon and if they're speeding on the regular road then we can do something private property we can't do nothing about it officer marshall claims that because ms murphy was on private property at the time of her alleged speeding he is not within his authority to take any action against her traffic laws such as speeding often cannot be enforced on private property because of their limited applicability for example sections 9-21-5-1 and 9-21-5-2 of the indiana code outline the state's speeding laws stating that quote a person may not drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and that quote a person may not drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of the maximum limits according to section 9-13-2-73 of the indiana code the term highway refers to quote the entire width between the boundary lines of every publicly maintained way when any part of the way is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel in indiana when this description is compared to the definition of a driveway found in section 9-13-2-49 of the indiana code which states that a driveway is quote away or place in private ownership that is used for vehicular travel by the owner and those having expressed or implied permission from the owner but not by other persons it is clear that mr miller's driveway is not considered a highway under indiana law therefore ms murphy could not be charged with speeding for traveling quickly on the driveway however there are some situations where police officers in indiana can enforce traffic regulations on quote privately owned real property on which the public is invited to travel for business or residential purposes as explained in section 9-21-18-1 of the indiana code under sections 9-21-18-3 and 9-21-18-4 a county city or town and the owner or lessee of a shopping center or private business property can enter into a contract that empowers the police to regulate traffic and parking at the shopping center or private business property in accordance with local ordinances this process does not allow police officers to enforce the state traffic laws on private property but it does give them the authority to enforce specific local ordinances directed at the regulation of traffic and parking in these locations section 9-21-1-2 of the indiana code also includes a similar provision allowing local authorities to adopt by ordinance additional traffic regulations with respect to a private road within its jurisdiction upon the property owner's request the ordinance cannot conflict with state law and must require a contractual agreement between the local authority and property owner of the private road setting forth the terms and responsibilities of the additional traffic regulations to be filed at the county recorder's office as none of these situations apply to mr miller's driveway officer marshall could not take any actions to address ms murphy's alleged speeding because there is no applicable law regulating the speed of vehicles using mr miller's driveway put speed bumps up call amazon thank you sorry pull forward okay need your license because you call the police he called the police and i'm called here that's why i need your information that's all the information i need and he's upset because you were speeding i told him he couldn't do what he's doing and you're gonna go on your way and if you have any issues you and your company can stop delivering here okay how's that also he came to my door he came in my door opened me and opened the door told me get the hell out my door at the car okay okay no excuse for what he's doing and i'm upset with him not you okay just making sure no i'm not upset with you i didn't do anything ma'am i'm not upset with you whatsoever i'm upset with him because what he's doing is i can't explain it and tell them i do want because that's her ass you know what let's stop okay we're gonna do a report we're gonna go about our day it's harassment though everything's everything you know what that's correct there'll be a report on file although ms murphy tells officer marshall that she would like to press charges against mr miller for harassment mr miller's conduct would not be considered harassment under indiana law according to section 35-45-2-2 of the indiana code the crime of harassment occurs when quote a person who with intent to harass annoy or alarm another person but with no intent of legitimate communication makes a telephone call whether or not a conversation ensues communicates with a person by telegraph mail or other form of written communication transmits an obscene message or indecent or profane words on a citizen's radio service channel or uses a computer network or other form of electronic communication to communicate with a person or transmit an obscene message or indecent or profane words to a person because under this definition harassment cannot occur in person mr miller could not be convicted of harassing ms murphy however his conduct could result in convictions for several other crimes including as officer marshall suggested earlier to mr miller criminal confinement under section 35-42-3-3 of the indiana code quote a person who knowingly or intentionally confines another person without the other person's consent commits criminal confinement and under section 35-42-3-1 the term confined means to quote substantially interfere with the liberty of a person given this definition the statute is broad in scope and courts have concluded that preventing an individual from leaving a location can constitute criminal confinement for example in the 2017 case of hall versus state the indiana court of appeals upheld a criminal confinement conviction against an individual who closed the front door of a home placed his foot in front of it blocked the victim's departure from the back door by standing in front of it and told her that she was not free to leave similarly in the 2013 case of she he versus cohen the northern district of indiana determined that a victim's allegations that several defendants blocked the door and prevented her from leaving a store despite her request to be allowed to leave were sufficient to assert a claim for criminal confinement in addition to criminal confinement mr miller could also potentially be convicted of the crime of intimidation which according to section 35-45-2-1 of the indiana code occurs when an individual communicates a threat with one of several wrongful intentions including that another person be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act or of causing a vehicle to be evacuated the statute defines the term threat as an expression by words or action of an intention to among other things unlawfully injure the person threatened or another person or damaged property unlawfully subject a person to physical confinement or restraint or cause the evacuation of a dwelling a building another structure or a vehicle while the state would need to further investigate the specific facts of the case to determine which type of intimidation potentially occurred in this situation it is possible that a judge or jury could find mr miller guilty of intimidation if they believed his words and actions constituted a threat i'll go through the prosecutor's office it'll be on the report sir what's your name it'll be on the report it's marshall and tell your friend on the phone i'm not upset with you that's my brother oh you know what you know what everything's going on that's the only reason why everyone's fine we're here i don't need your brother telling me my job on what we need to do i think you need to get a hold of your supervisor at all we already already talked your supervisor because she was speeding down his road so it gives him the right or whatever no it doesn't give he's an idiot blocking her in acting silly because she's speeding call amazon let me get his plate number off his truck i still gotta give somebody my camera all right man there's the case number go ahead and report will be on file and go around our spa cars and going out okay have a good day reports on file i'm gonna try and get in touch with amazon only hopefully there's no charges for you doing what you did because she wants to press charges i'm okay with that well that's fine you know we'll be detected barrel in the future don't do it because we're racing all the way over here it wasn't an emergency it is an emergency when you're barricading someone from doing what they need to do or leaving how about i barricade you you'd be pretty upset [Music] if i told you you couldn't go somewhere and i wasn't a cop and i barricaded you and i knew i did if you drove somewhere silly and did something silly and i barricade you in and tell you you can't leave whether it's at walmart supermarket wherever private drive you'd be pretty hot even if you did wrong you don't do that if you want to call to make a complaint to us pull in your driveway call we'll make a complaint do i just need to call you and give you a plate number no the plate number it's on private property for one if you want to call and complain about it that's what i'm asking how would i do it the right way basically it's private property okay i can't enforce the speed okay okay on your property reckless endangerment none of it matters it's on my driveway bodily officer marshall explains again that he cannot enforce speeding laws on private property and mr miller asks whether the police could respond if ms murphy was committing reckless endangerment under section 35-42-2-2 of the indiana code quote a person who recklessly knowingly or intentionally performs an act that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person commits criminal recklessness based on this definition it is highly unlikely that simply driving fast on a driveway would be considered criminal recklessness however in the event that someone committed criminal recklessness or another criminal offense on private property the police generally would be within their authority to enforce the law and arrest the offender because unlike traffic regulations criminal offenses are illegal regardless of whether they occur on private or public property unless a specific location is an element of the crime for example section 35-43-2-1 of the indiana code defines the offense of residential entry which occurs when an individual quote knowingly or intentionally breaks and enters the dwelling of another person therefore residential entry cannot be committed on public property because by definition it must occur in someone's home whereas other offenses are considered to be criminal no matter where they take place states are empowered to issue criminal regulations that apply anywhere within their borders under what is known as their general police power in the 1954 case of berman versus parker the supreme court explained the police power as including quote all the legislative powers which a state may exercise over its affairs such as the ability to pass laws to protect the interests of public safety public health morality peace and quiet and law and order this police power allows states to regulate how private property is used as the supreme court explained in the 1980 case of pruneyard shopping center versus robbins where it stated that quote it is well established that a state in the exercise of its police power may adopt reasonable restrictions on private property and in the 1926 case of euclid versus amblerco which reasoned that quote in every ordered society the state must act as umpire to the extent of preventing one man from so using his property or rights as to prevent others from making a correspondingly full and free use of their property and rights accordingly the so-called police power is an inherent right on the part of the public umpire to prevent misuses of property or rights which impair the health safety or morals of others or affect prejudicially the general public welfare therefore although indiana's speeding laws do not apply to private driveways if ms murphy had violated any of the state's criminal laws the police could enforce them even on private property it's on your driveway it's private property okay if she hits you that's one thing i'm off i'm off to county road though it doesn't matter it's still an accident on private property we still have to handle it so quit trying to go around everything i'm trying to tell you with different scenarios one way or another we just keep asking these people to slow down well they're not so then you better figure out something else if you want to slow down because it's your property you're the one with a half mile long driveway and two of us are racing here speeding so we can take care of business over this when you have amazon you can call or you can call and complain to us and we could possibly follow through with amazon but at the end of the day it is private property there is plenty of numbers for amazon clearly once he finished speaking with both ms murphy and mr miller officer marshall left without making any arrests or issuing any citations after the incident ms murphy retained an attorney and submitted a letter demanding that the lake county prosecutors charge mr miller criminally on august 4th 2020 mr miller was charged in the lake county superior court with criminal confinement where a vehicle is used basic criminal confinement and intimidation as of the date of this episode the charges are still pending and the case is scheduled for a jury trial on january 24 2022 ms murphy and her attorney have also claimed that officer marshall should have arrested mr miller immediately however according to lake county sheriff's department attorney john kopak an internal investigation was conducted and it was determined that officer marshall did not engage in misconduct it is unclear whether ms murphy intends to pursue further legal action against officer marshall the department or mr miller overall officer marshall gets a c because although he remained within the bounds of his authority throughout the interaction he blatantly downplayed the gravity of ms murphy's claims refused to arrest mr miller despite having clear evidence of his commission of a crime and maintained a relatively hostile and confrontational attitude with everyone involved in the encounter within minutes of officer marshall arriving on the scene he concluded that there was enough evidence to arrest mr miller for the charge of criminal confinement but instead of carrying out his lawful duty he elected to give mr miller a stern talking to rather than placing him under arrest while officers are granted a considerable degree of discretion in regards to making an arrest his refusal to arrest mr miller after ms murphy made it abundantly clear that she would like to press charges was nothing short of unprofessional it is unclear why officer marshall did not arrest mr miller on the scene and it is difficult to discern his reasoning when his logic stemmed from anecdotal euphemisms like everything is everything and i can't explain it now ultimately mr miller was arrested but officer marshall's refusal to carry out his duty on the scene led to ms murphy being forced to hire an attorney to ensure that justice was served citizens should never be forced to hire a legal representative because a member of law enforcement neglects to take lawful action especially when the evidence of the alleged crime was personally witnessed by the responding officer mr miller gets an f for failing to contact the proper authorities before taking action against ms murphy detaining ms murphy without the lawful authority to do so and for wasting the city's time and resources to resolve an issue that was largely civil in nature mr miller mentioned multiple times that he has had ongoing issues with drivers speeding down his private roadway which means that he has had multiple opportunities to address the issue without resorting to illegally detaining the alleged speeders as officer marshall suggested mr miller could have placed speed bumps along his driveway contacted the company in question to make proper delivery arrangements or simply asked miss murphy to slow down when she made deliveries to his home but instead he chose to take the law into his own hands and likely committed multiple crimes in the process as a private property owner it was mr miller's duty to make all the necessary arrangements to ensure that whoever was entering his property did so in the manner that he deemed appropriate and he could have worked directly with the lake county sheriff's department to establish an enforceable speed limit on his road if he felt that speeding was such an issue on his property this encounter could have been avoided entirely if mr miller had carried out his due diligence as a property owner and this interaction highlights the notion that owning property does not grant citizens the unfettered right to police that property with reckless abandon ms murphy gets an a plus for remaining calm and collected despite being unlawfully detained by mr miller immediately calling 9-1-1 for help instead of resorting to physical resistance or violence and for following up this encounter with the proper legal action it is clear from the video that ms murphy had a legitimate criminal complaint against mr miller and despite officer marshall's condescending attitude she managed to keep her emotions in check and do what was necessary to temporarily resolve the issue as mentioned on many episodes of ata attempting to carry out justice on the street rarely ever produces significant results and ms murphy did a fantastic job of reserving her grievances for the proper venue it was relatively evident that officer marshall had no intentions of arresting mr miller but that did not deter ms murphy from acknowledging that mr miller's conduct was unlawful and taking the appropriate action against him and officer marshall i commend ms murphy for remaining calm despite being undermined and dismissed by officer marshall and for taking it upon herself to ensure that mr miller answered for his actions let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like us to discuss in the comments below thank you for watching and don't forget to check out my second channel for even more police interaction content [Music] you

Channel: Audit the Audit

Views: 849,980

Keywords: amagansett press, first amendment audit, 1st amendment audit, auditing america, news now california, sgv news first, high desert community watch, anselmo morales, photography is not a crime, san joaquin valley transparency, first amendment audit fail, walk of shame, news now houston, police fail, 1st amendment audit fail, public photography, auditor arrested, police brutality, highdesert community watch, pinac news, cops triggered, news now patrick, east hampton

Id: -uNde3L981I

Length: 22min 2sec (1322 seconds)

Published: Mon Oct 18 2021