- 03 Mar 2023 03:11
#15266889
I think this is unfair, involved excessive force, and was overly harsh. I even find the prosecution of this woman a little fascist and totalitarian (although others may have differing opinions or not care).
Woman convicted of felony for not complying with police, leaving after eviction notice
A woman has been convicted of two felony charges just because she did not follow the orders of police when police had showed up after her mother had previously given her an eviction notice to leave the property (6 months prior).
(But the police in this story had not shown up to do an eviction, so that aspect isn't really so directly relevant)
On May 30, police responded to the house after dispatchers received multiple calls reporting gunshots coming from the area of the home. Public Safety officers and the Kalamazoo Metro SWAT Team went to the house and tried to execute a search warrant, but the two sisters did not heed commands coming from a sound amplifying speaker to come out of the house.
After several hours of waiting, police used an armored vehicle to ram the front door of the house and twice threw tear gas grenades into the house.
The sisters then exited from the back of the house, and one of the officers began walking towards them. With the sisters about 10 yards away, the officer pointed his light at them and screamed commands to stop, show their hands, and get on the ground. The officer says that the two were whispering back and forth but could not tell what they were saying.
Another officer joined the first officer and they say the girls were not complying with the orders, the girls were standing, had their arms down to their sides, and could be heard chanting.
The first officer testified that he screamed at the two for "two to three minutes" to comply, but they did not. It's unclear if the length of time was actually that long.
Because the sisters did not comply with police commands, the police fired rounds of a non-lethal weapon. Both sisters were struck once in the thigh and fell to the ground.
At that point the sisters were taken into custody without any more problems.
Both women claim that they did not fire any guns, but did hear two separate volleys of gunfire that day coming from east of their home.
The woman was found guilty on October 14, 2015, of two counts of "resisting" and "obstructing" police, both classified as felonies under the law. (Under the country's federal law this automatically results in certain lifetime losses of rights, for example it becomes a crime if that person has gun; whereas the state of Michigan only removes those rights for 3 years after the end of completion of the sentence, for more minor felonies)
The woman had already spent 163 days (over 5 months) in the county jail before the sentencing hearing, and was sentenced to serve one year of probation (with credit for time already spent in jail) and to pay more than $1,700 in court costs.
Something that may have been an additional factor, police did find 27 guns in the house, most of which were loaded. This was not illegal, and the guns may have belonged to the two brothers who had also been living in the house. (The two brothers had been involved in an incident 16 days prior where they had been shot at by police after a lengthy vehicle pursuit)
The woman also seems to have likely been obsessively paranoid, and tried to claim to the court that she did not realize the people who were outside were police. She said she never heard any announcements about a search warrant and that she did not see police labels on any of the vehicles. She said that when she exited the back of the house she heard officers announce themselves as police, but still questioned whether it was police officers giving commands because a bright light was being shined on her and she could not see behind the light. It was dark outside and raining.
The woman's defense attorney argued that she did everything she was asked to do after police used non-lethal force against her and argued that she never resisted police or threatened them. (The attorney also said her client had no prior criminal history)
This sounds like the law enforcement officers were angry this woman "did not comply", and so referred the incident for criminal prosecution. It also created a legal excuse to confiscate all the guns.
The issue in the courtroom seemed to center on the claim that the woman should have known or had probable reason to believe the people outside were law enforcement officers.
Kalamazoo County Judge Paul Bridenstine said during the sentencing hearing that her behavior was "extremely dangerous."
"You put yourself and many others at risk ... by not complying with law enforcement.
"Resisting" and "obstructing" police is a felony punishable by up to two years in prison, in Michigan.
Sister of Portage man killed by police found guilty in May standoff - mlive.com, October 14, 2015
https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/20 ... led_b.html
Sister of Portage man killed by police gets probation in May standoff - mlive.com, November 9, 2015, Rex Hall Jr.
https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/20 ... d_b_1.html
The mother, Christine Pelletier had tried unsuccessfully to get her four children, all adults, who were living together, to leave the house that she owned.
(It can be very expensive and difficult for young adults to be able to move out these days)
The prosecutor even asked the judge to order that the two sisters not be allowed to have any contact with each other during their probation (this would have prevented them from sharing the same house), but fortunately the judge did not order it. Just another prosecutor trick trying to make the defendant's life unnecessarily difficult.
This is a transcript of part of the sentencing hearing:
Judge Bridenstine: "Miss Pelletier, is there anything you want to tell the court before I impose sentencing?"
Michelle Pelletier: "I don't believe you actually heard very much of the facts. When I was on the witness stand, I was starting to explain various things that had taken place. I was cut off. I wasn't allowed to ever share those things. So I don't feel like I was given a fair trial."
response from judge: "When I sentence you miss I'm concerned about punishment, rehabilitation, protection of society, and deterrence. You stand before the court having no prior history whatsoever. What I heard in court during the [2-hour] non-jury trial, what you stated to the court satisfied the court at that time that your behavior was criminal, by not complying. Despite the fact that you mentioned in court here your thoughts about what was happening in the community that particular night, what you said, you didn't understand what was going on, what you didn't see, things of that nature... It was clear to me that there was enough of a law enforcement presence that you should have behaved differently.
As far as you comments today about being cut off, the court is bound by the rules of evidence, you can't simply allow someone to take the stand and talk on any issue that they want to talk about, in a criminal trial."
Listen to Michelle Pelletier during sentencing - YouTube, MLive
Woman convicted of felony for not complying with police, leaving after eviction notice
A woman has been convicted of two felony charges just because she did not follow the orders of police when police had showed up after her mother had previously given her an eviction notice to leave the property (6 months prior).
(But the police in this story had not shown up to do an eviction, so that aspect isn't really so directly relevant)
On May 30, police responded to the house after dispatchers received multiple calls reporting gunshots coming from the area of the home. Public Safety officers and the Kalamazoo Metro SWAT Team went to the house and tried to execute a search warrant, but the two sisters did not heed commands coming from a sound amplifying speaker to come out of the house.
After several hours of waiting, police used an armored vehicle to ram the front door of the house and twice threw tear gas grenades into the house.
The sisters then exited from the back of the house, and one of the officers began walking towards them. With the sisters about 10 yards away, the officer pointed his light at them and screamed commands to stop, show their hands, and get on the ground. The officer says that the two were whispering back and forth but could not tell what they were saying.
Another officer joined the first officer and they say the girls were not complying with the orders, the girls were standing, had their arms down to their sides, and could be heard chanting.
The first officer testified that he screamed at the two for "two to three minutes" to comply, but they did not. It's unclear if the length of time was actually that long.
Because the sisters did not comply with police commands, the police fired rounds of a non-lethal weapon. Both sisters were struck once in the thigh and fell to the ground.
At that point the sisters were taken into custody without any more problems.
Both women claim that they did not fire any guns, but did hear two separate volleys of gunfire that day coming from east of their home.
The woman was found guilty on October 14, 2015, of two counts of "resisting" and "obstructing" police, both classified as felonies under the law. (Under the country's federal law this automatically results in certain lifetime losses of rights, for example it becomes a crime if that person has gun; whereas the state of Michigan only removes those rights for 3 years after the end of completion of the sentence, for more minor felonies)
The woman had already spent 163 days (over 5 months) in the county jail before the sentencing hearing, and was sentenced to serve one year of probation (with credit for time already spent in jail) and to pay more than $1,700 in court costs.
Something that may have been an additional factor, police did find 27 guns in the house, most of which were loaded. This was not illegal, and the guns may have belonged to the two brothers who had also been living in the house. (The two brothers had been involved in an incident 16 days prior where they had been shot at by police after a lengthy vehicle pursuit)
The woman also seems to have likely been obsessively paranoid, and tried to claim to the court that she did not realize the people who were outside were police. She said she never heard any announcements about a search warrant and that she did not see police labels on any of the vehicles. She said that when she exited the back of the house she heard officers announce themselves as police, but still questioned whether it was police officers giving commands because a bright light was being shined on her and she could not see behind the light. It was dark outside and raining.
The woman's defense attorney argued that she did everything she was asked to do after police used non-lethal force against her and argued that she never resisted police or threatened them. (The attorney also said her client had no prior criminal history)
This sounds like the law enforcement officers were angry this woman "did not comply", and so referred the incident for criminal prosecution. It also created a legal excuse to confiscate all the guns.
The issue in the courtroom seemed to center on the claim that the woman should have known or had probable reason to believe the people outside were law enforcement officers.
Kalamazoo County Judge Paul Bridenstine said during the sentencing hearing that her behavior was "extremely dangerous."
"You put yourself and many others at risk ... by not complying with law enforcement.
"Resisting" and "obstructing" police is a felony punishable by up to two years in prison, in Michigan.
Sister of Portage man killed by police found guilty in May standoff - mlive.com, October 14, 2015
https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/20 ... led_b.html
Sister of Portage man killed by police gets probation in May standoff - mlive.com, November 9, 2015, Rex Hall Jr.
https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/20 ... d_b_1.html
The mother, Christine Pelletier had tried unsuccessfully to get her four children, all adults, who were living together, to leave the house that she owned.
(It can be very expensive and difficult for young adults to be able to move out these days)
The prosecutor even asked the judge to order that the two sisters not be allowed to have any contact with each other during their probation (this would have prevented them from sharing the same house), but fortunately the judge did not order it. Just another prosecutor trick trying to make the defendant's life unnecessarily difficult.
This is a transcript of part of the sentencing hearing:
Judge Bridenstine: "Miss Pelletier, is there anything you want to tell the court before I impose sentencing?"
Michelle Pelletier: "I don't believe you actually heard very much of the facts. When I was on the witness stand, I was starting to explain various things that had taken place. I was cut off. I wasn't allowed to ever share those things. So I don't feel like I was given a fair trial."
response from judge: "When I sentence you miss I'm concerned about punishment, rehabilitation, protection of society, and deterrence. You stand before the court having no prior history whatsoever. What I heard in court during the [2-hour] non-jury trial, what you stated to the court satisfied the court at that time that your behavior was criminal, by not complying. Despite the fact that you mentioned in court here your thoughts about what was happening in the community that particular night, what you said, you didn't understand what was going on, what you didn't see, things of that nature... It was clear to me that there was enough of a law enforcement presence that you should have behaved differently.
As far as you comments today about being cut off, the court is bound by the rules of evidence, you can't simply allow someone to take the stand and talk on any issue that they want to talk about, in a criminal trial."
Listen to Michelle Pelletier during sentencing - YouTube, MLive
- By Istanbuller
- By KurtFF8