Judge won't let police officer witnesses to carry their guns in the courtroom

Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by Burgers Allday, Jan 11, 2016.

  1. nitesit(+ an e)

    nitesit(+ an e) Sheepdog

    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    6,285
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Location:
    North Alabama
    Judge Kopf ~~~~ Pfffftttt
     

  2. Jake Starr

    Jake Starr

    Messages:
    5,256
    Likes Received:
    1,136
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    His court his rules. When we serve papers at our jail, we have to lock up our weapons before entering. No different.
     
    clamcop369 likes this.
  3. nitesit(+ an e)

    nitesit(+ an e) Sheepdog

    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    6,285
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Location:
    North Alabama
    Not the same, Jake.
     
    razdog76 and TBO like this.
  4. officer196

    officer196

    Messages:
    3,004
    Likes Received:
    1,179
    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    No, not quite the same. Jail is a security issue and in the state of Texas in fact, its a crime.
     
  5. Ftttu

    Ftttu

    Messages:
    5,436
    Likes Received:
    4,345
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Location:
    Canyon Lake, Texas
    There are certain courts in my jurisdiction where we have to lockup our weapons in the bailiff's office before entering the courtroom to testify. It is a hassle but we have to do it.

    We're pretty sure it is a power thing and not a prejudiced jury/security thing since not every court is like that.
     
    TBO, IndyGunFreak and ancient_serpent like this.
  6. nursetim

    nursetim

    Messages:
    28,184
    Likes Received:
    44,101
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Location:
    liberalville N. M.
    Heck, even the duke would disarm while testifying in judge Parker's court.
     
    clancy likes this.
  7. merlynusn

    merlynusn

    Messages:
    4,466
    Likes Received:
    817
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    All federal courts are that way.

    The judge is a db. Its a power trip. Who do you think the first person shot would be? Thats right the uniformed and unarmed officer. Is the SO going to put its top marksmen in that courtroom? How many deputies are there. If there are two a lot of times 1 is unarmed since they are dealing with the in custody defendant.

    I would bet that should something happen then the officer would react and too late realize they dont have a weapon.
     
    Sharkey likes this.
  8. oldman11

    oldman11

    Messages:
    5,536
    Likes Received:
    2,830
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2012
    Location:
    Texas
    The judge should get rid of his sidearm that he carries under the robes also.
     
    nitesite10mm and OGW like this.
  9. ranger1968

    ranger1968

    Messages:
    12,028
    Likes Received:
    23,360
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Location:
    Wayyyyyy down South, shootin' stuff and Jeeping!
    That's how it is here as well; We are in a huge 5-county circuit, covering almost 6,000 square miles, and about 20 years ago the chief judge for the circuit took a US Marshal's Service security assessment that said that only bailiff personnel were to be armed and mandated that this was the recommended course of action for the circuit; some of the senior circuit judges went with it as it stood , but a few judges simply had every single LEO who came through the door declared a "bailiff" , so they could still carry; those judges said that they wanted every armed cop they could get in their court...of course, most of the judges are armed themselves.....
     
  10. fastbolt

    fastbolt

    Messages:
    26,126
    Likes Received:
    28,119
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Location:
    CA Central Coast
    Much ado.

    It's the judge's courtroom.

    If a local Sheriff, CoP or DA has a problem with such an order for a particular judge's courtroom, they can probably discuss it with the PJ for that court. If that judge is the PJ at that time, is it really worth the fuss to argue about it, in the greater scheme of things?

    In the meantime, if I had to testify in that courtroom, I'd certainly not knowingly disobey a sitting judge's order (nor even that of a pro tem). Nor would I act in any manner that seemed disrespectful of the court, or could be misconstrued as unprofessional or caused any sort of embarrassment to my agency. Why needlessly complicate your career and life?? Common sense.

    What's the point of this thread topic, OP? It's not like this is some rare event. (Tell me you're not just taking some weird glee or enjoyment in seeing LE treated "like everyone else".)
     
    clamcop369 likes this.
  11. Ohio Cop

    Ohio Cop

    Messages:
    6,759
    Likes Received:
    2,673
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2012
    Location:
    The Rust Belt.
    Concealed means concealed.
     
    RetailNinjitsu and OGW like this.
  12. ray9898

    ray9898

    Messages:
    17,293
    Likes Received:
    7,650
    Joined:
    May 29, 2001
    Location:
    Georgia
    Of course that is what he is doing.
     
    AngryBassets likes this.
  13. Burgers Allday

    Burgers Allday

    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2015
    I haven't thought about the issue a whole lot. Upon initial consideration, I share the concern that it could unduly influence a jury (or even a judge) in making credibility determinations. As far as the judge being in total control of the courtroom, I am less concerned about that as an abstract principle. For example, the judge might have the power to require that all police officers testify while wearing beanies with propellers on top, but that would be unwise and unfair and something that should be effectively overruled if it ever happened, notwithstanding the judge's power over her own courtroom.
     
  14. texmex

    texmex

    Messages:
    1,953
    Likes Received:
    1,734
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Location:
    Central Texas
    I don't mind leaving my gun off as long as I have an M67 in my pocket.
     
  15. Burgers Allday

    Burgers Allday

    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2015
    Seems like that might cause the judge to start having the bailiff frisk LEO's at the courtroom door.
     
  16. Chowser

    Chowser

    Messages:
    3,432
    Likes Received:
    1,652
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2003
    Location:
    South of Cleveland, OH
    Our county juvenile court is like that. Must lockup our duty guns. Needless to say, we're all concealing backups. Our muni court thought about doing this but we told our judges, fine. We'll stop ticketing and arresting people so we won't have to come to your court. He decided not to make it a policy to disarm us.
     
  17. Ftttu

    Ftttu

    Messages:
    5,436
    Likes Received:
    4,345
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2011
    Location:
    Canyon Lake, Texas
    Just like others above, our juvenile court makes us lock up our weapons in a gun box.

    Also, last month our station got gun boxes installed in the juvenile processing room, the front lobby and in our report writing/holding cells room. I was going to ask why they were being installed but I never got around to it since I was preoccupied with my impending departure. I heard unofficially that they want officers processing juveniles to disarm first.

    This more than troubles me if it is so. It would have been another reason I couldn't get out of thete fast enough.
     
  18. Lord

    Lord Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    2,000
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    On the one hand, the judge rules the courtroom...
    On the other hand... the whole "seeing witnesses testifying while carrying a gun" doesn't make any sense whatsoever, especially if LEO is in uniform. People are kinda used to seeing LEOs in uniform AND having a gun on their hip... so the judge's reasoning doesn't really hold water.
    Ultimately, however... the judge rules the courtroom...
     
  19. Burgers Allday

    Burgers Allday

    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2015
    I
    To try to explain the opposite perspective, when a judge allows a police officer to testify in uniform, then that doesn't really imply that the court trusts the police-uniformed witness any more than anybody else.

    However, when the judge allows the police officer to wear a gun (while not allowing other witnesses to have guns) then that does imply a degree of trust and confidence on the part of the court. It is that implicit message that that some judges consider to be unfair.

    The message the judge probably wants to send is: "We may trust this person with a gun outside of my courtroom, but when the police officer steps into this special place (that is, my courtroom), she gets no more trust than anybody else." It can encourage jurors to shift their mindset to be impartial in a way that they are not required to be out on the mean streets.