Man trespasses at school ends up in psyciatric ward!

[Wizard777]

This just get more and more Bizarre. The Police say he's been charged with Trespassing on posted property and I have even heard reports that a judge revoked his bail. But according to Case Search he's not currently charged with anything. There are no open cases against him what so ever. His only priors are all traffic. Apparently the local KGB has disappeared him.

[pepper]

This just get more and more Bizarre. The Police say he's been charged with Trespassing on posted property and I have even heard reports that a judge revoked his bail. But according to Case Search he's not currently charged with anything. There are no open cases against him what so ever. His only priors are all traffic. Apparently the local KGB has disappeared him.

If it's true they're holding him with no bail thats over the top. Maybe they know stuff we're not privy to?

If his guns were legal and he didn't threaten anyone, he should get whatever comes with being on school property. Thats probably not a no bail crime typically.

I get taking a good long look into this guy, but they need to charge him or let him go.

[pepper]

On the other hand, it's easy for me to say that, as I don't have a child at that school.

[Informed Thinker]

From the January 6 article.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...,2337395.story

No weapons were found on Beaumont or in his car, but officials said they were concerned by statements he made, which they called "extremely unusual and alarming."

Police obtained a search warrant and found guns at Beaumont's home, including the AK-47 loaded with a 30-round magazine, an unloaded Uzi, two bolt-action rifles, three handguns and ammunition.
Beaumont's weapons were legally registered, police said, but the guns were taken by police as they investigate.

Tom Fleckenstein, deputy state's attorney for Anne Arundel County, said there was "no disqualifying prior that would prevent him from owning these firearms legally."

Beaumont was taken for an emergency mental health evaluation at Sheppard Pratt Health System, a psychiatric facility in Towson, Fleckenstein said. On Wednesday, a district judge revoked Beaumont's bond so he could be held for further mental health evaluation.
Fleckenstein said that "when he is done at the Sheppard Pratt," Beaumont will appear before a district judge.

The penalty for trespassing on posted property carries a 90-day maximum penalty, Fleckenstein said. Currently, he added, there are no additional charges against Beaumont.

Batten said Beaumont is being detained "on the mental health aspect that allows for law enforcement, who suspect that someone may be a danger to themselves or potentially to others, to hold them for safekeeping until such time that that person can be evaluated by medical professionals."

[Wizard777]

On the other hand, it's easy for me to say that, as I don't have a child at that school.

I'm sorry but I'm unaware of a I have a child at that school exemption to any law or civil rights. Having a kid makes them his equal in any Constitution.

Trespassing typically is not an arrestable offense more or less requiring bail. During normal hours of operation trespassing on school property usually results in a trespassing warning letter. Trespassing on private property usually results in a citation. Arrests are usually only made if you have been warned or cited and return to the property.

If you look up his record there is cite for Md Rules 16-1001 through 16-1011. That's resticted records that may not be released to the public. That could be because of the petition for emergency eval. But when the police are the petioner they get to bypass the judge and go straight to the emergency room. Also if the criminal charge of trespassing is considered to be related to the petition for an emergency eval and that's why they haven't put in on Case Search. Then that information may not be divulged by anyone and most of all it can't be included in a press conference or press release. So something is rotten in Denmark.

[Wizard777]

From the January 6 article.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/mar...,2337395.story

I already adressed that in an earlier post. The reporters either misunderstood or misrepreseted the police press release. The police press release says, "extremely unusual and alarming circumstances." They made the petition for an emergency eval because "his manner and demeanor seemed odd." That's no where near enough for an emergecy eval. BUT the police get to bypass the judge. So there is no oversight to ensure that they aren't acting out of their own paranoid delusions. Because perception plays a big part in thought processes the mind can be like a mirror. When two mirrors look into each other. How do they tell which of the two of them is actually cracked?

But the requirements for an emergency eval is that you believe they have a mental disorder. That must be based upon your personal observations. They must be a danger to themselves or others. A manner and demeanor seeming odd doesn't come anywhere near that. I think this whole psych eval is just a dirty trick to obtain a warrant that would be otherwise denied. Without this their probable cause to obtain the warrant would be that he trespassed on school property, he made no threats to the school staff or students and he owns legally registered weapons that they want a warrant to search for and seize. That warrant application should be laughed at. Not granted. Anything pertaining to Sandy Hook would be Irrelevant to their probable cause. They can only use things that he has done to establish their probable cause. Not anything Adam Lanza did at Sandy Hook. They are in the wrond state to be investigating anything about Sandy Hook. So they can't get a warrant to get the weapons that way. So they falsify a petion for emergency evaluation and use that as a predicate for the warrant to search for and seize the weapons. That's usually a no brainer. Here's your warrant.

[Informed Thinker]

I already adressed that in an earlier post. The reporters either misunderstood or misrepreseted the police press release. The police press release says, "extremely unusual and alarming circumstances." They made the petition for an emergency eval because "his manner and demeanor seemed odd." That's no where near enough for an emergecy eval. BUT the police get to bypass the judge. So there is no oversight to ensure that they aren't acting out of their own paranoid delusions. Because perception plays a big part in thought processes the mind can be like a mirror. When two mirrors look into each other. How do they tell which of the two of them is actually cracked?

But the requirements for an emergency eval is that you believe they have a mental disorder. That must be based upon your personal observations. They must be a danger to themselves or others. A manner and demeanor seeming odd doesn't come anywhere near that. I think this whole psych eval is just a dirty trick to obtain a warrant that would be otherwise denied. Without this their probable cause to obtain the warrant would be that he trespassed on school property, he made no threats to the school staff or students and he owns legally registered weapons that they want a warrant to search for and seize. That warrant application should be laughed at. Not granted. Anything pertaining to Sandy Hook would be Irrelevant to their probable cause. They can only use things that he has done to establish their probable cause. Not anything Adam Lanza did at Sandy Hook. They are in the wrond state to be investigating anything about Sandy Hook. So they can't get a warrant to get the weapons that way. So they falsify a petion for emergency evaluation and use that as a predicate for the warrant to search for and seize the weapons. That's usually a no brainer. Here's your warrant.

There is probably a CYA part to all of this with the police department and states attorneys office. No one wants to be the one who signed off on the the decision to let him go if they did and something happened or even if the press asked why was he released. Don't under estimate the role his father may have played in the process. The SRO at one school contacts the SRO at the fathers school or hears it over the police radio and the father says .............TY you Lord now I can get him some help.

[pepper]

I'm sorry but I'm unaware of a I have a child at that school exemption to any law or civil rights. Having a kid makes them his equal in any Constitution.

Trespassing typically is not an arrestable offense more or less requiring bail. During normal hours of operation trespassing on school property usually results in a trespassing warning letter. Trespassing on private property usually results in a citation. Arrests are usually only made if you have been warned or cited and return to the property.

If you look up his record there is cite for Md Rules 16-1001 through 16-1011. That's resticted records that may not be released to the public. That could be because of the petition for emergency eval. But when the police are the petioner they get to bypass the judge and go straight to the emergency room. Also if the criminal charge of trespassing is considered to be related to the petition for an emergency eval and that's why they haven't put in on Case Search. Then that information may not be divulged by anyone and most of all it can't be included in a press conference or press release. So something is rotten in Denmark.

Sometimes Wiz, you overthink stuff.

I realize there is no "I have a child at the school" exemption to any law or civil right. I'm just adding the idea that often these situations are looked at in an emotional way, and detachment or connection, even if not direct, can affect how we look at such situations..

My point is that it's sometimes easy to look at this crap in a clinical way, as 99.9 percent of us are spectators and not really directly affected. This stuff happens at other schools, in other towns.

I don't fear this guy showing up at my kids school after he's released, but the locals there with kids in that school might naturally feel differently.

He's an absolute moron and it's understandable that those folks in his community may have a different take on it, then you and I comfortably sitting several states away.

I'm not saying his rights should be denied, just offering a perspective that at the least should be considered as we judge these folks from miles away. If my kids at that school, it's an immediate concern if he's released. If I don't have a kid there, then it's much easier to champion his rights to be released.

[Wizard777]

Sometimes Wiz, you overthink stuff.

I realize there is no "I have a child at the school" exemption to any law or civil right. I'm just adding the idea that often these situations are looked at in an emotional way, and detachment or connection, even if not direct, can affect how we look at such situations..

My point is that it's sometimes easy to look at this crap in a clinical way, as 99.9 percent of us are spectators and not really directly affected. This stuff happens at other schools, in other towns.

I don't fear this guy showing up at my kids school after he's released, but the locals there with kids in that school might naturally feel differently.

He's an absolute moron and it's understandable that those folks in his community may have a different take on it, then you and I comfortably sitting several states away.

I'm not saying his rights should be denied, just offering a perspective that at the least should be considered as we judge these folks from miles away. If my kids at that school, it's an immediate concern if he's released. If I don't have a kid there, then it's much easier to champion his rights to be released.

Well pepper, I know where your coming from. Granted, Sandy Hook was a horrible tragedy involving the loss of many young and innocent lives. But there were even more kids that survived Sandy Hook and another thing that must survive Sandy Hook is the civil rights of every American. That old saying, those who would sacrafice liberty for security will have neither. How true that is. It starts off with sacraficing civil rights to be protected from the Adam Lanza's of the world. It ends with you being the person that the cops think has an odd manner or demeanor. Then you wonder who protects you from the protectors.

I truly understand what an insidious SOB Adam Lanza was. He did something that was absolutely atrocious that could only invoke powerful emotions. He also killed his mother and himself leaving no one for the public to focus their outrage on. They can't focus their outrage on his mother for not keeping her weapons out of his hands. They can't focus their outrage on him for killing those kids and teachers. So it's all coming out sideways. We're taking it out on each other. The left and the right are at each others throats. We can't respect or trust each other. We're willing to disobey our laws and throw the rights of others, never our own, right out the window. Baseless suspicion, irrationality, panic, hysteria, and chaos rule the day. For what he has us doing to ourselves and each other the druj and daeva are celebrating Adam Lanza. Deep within that darkness that is Ahriman they are throwing him one hell of a party. He's their man of the hour.

I understand that I'm craping on their parade when the cops are trying convince people that they stopped Adam Lanza. No they didn't. If they had something more on this guy. If I wasn't leading that parade. Then at the very least I would be on their bandwagon. If they found a weapon in his vehicle or he made threats to anyone. I would see this much differently. If they got an order of protection and he came within 499' 3/4" of that school. If they put him on a watch list or did surveillance and caught him leaving the house with those weapons. I wouldn't have a problem in the world with any of this. But you can't defend the indefensible. Most of all you cannot defend the indefensible when it's being done by people that are supposed to be the good guys.

[Airman]

~sigh~ I don't know why so many of you engage the admitted drug user in debate about things he doesn't understand.

Here are facts. The man entered a public school that is posted conspicuously "NO TRESPASSING". When encountered, he could offer no valid reason for being on school property. He was correctly arrested with trespassing on school property. There doesn't have to be a warning given on school property or posted property.

Second, he made no threats to himself or others until he was INTERVIEWED later by detectives. What he said to them has not been made public but it fell within the guidlines for an emergency petition. The doctors at the hospital agreed with the initial police assessment because they decided to transfer him to Shepard-Pratt Hospital for further evaluation.

BY law, the officers were bound to remove his firearms until he is certified by a psychiatrist as not a threat to himself or anyone else.

That is what this case boils down to. Nothing else. No secret police, no KGB. All done within the law and very public. Disregard the drivel you hear from the the admitted drug user among us.

[Saticon3]

~sigh~ I don't know why so many of you engage the admitted drug user in debate about things he doesn't understand.

Here are facts. The man entered a public school that is posted conspicuously "NO TRESPASSING". When encountered, he could offer no valid reason for being on school property. He was correctly arrested with trespassing on school property. There doesn't have to be a warning given on school property or posted property.

Second, he made no threats to himself or others until he was INTERVIEWED later by detectives. What he said to them has not been made public but it fell within the guidlines for an emergency petition. The doctors at the hospital agreed with the initial police assessment because they decided to transfer him to Shepard-Pratt Hospital for further evaluation.

BY law, the officers were bound to remove his firearms until he is certified by a psychiatrist as not a threat to himself or anyone else.

That is what this case boils down to. Nothing else. No secret police, no KGB. All done within the law and very public. Disregard the drivel you hear from the the admitted drug user among us.

Long time, no see here. Welcome back. Your solid, factual posts have been missed.

[Wizard777]

~sigh~ I don't know why so many of you engage the admitted drug user in debate about things he doesn't understand.

Here are facts. The man entered a public school that is posted conspicuously "NO TRESPASSING". When encountered, he could offer no valid reason for being on school property. He was correctly arrested with trespassing on school property. There doesn't have to be a warning given on school property or posted property.

Second, he made no threats to himself or others until he was INTERVIEWED later by detectives. What he said to them has not been made public but it fell within the guidlines for an emergency petition. The doctors at the hospital agreed with the initial police assessment because they decided to transfer him to Shepard-Pratt Hospital for further evaluation.

BY law, the officers were bound to remove his firearms until he is certified by a psychiatrist as not a threat to himself or anyone else.

That is what this case boils down to. Nothing else. No secret police, no KGB. All done within the law and very public. Disregard the drivel you hear from the the admitted drug user among us.

Airman, Long time no see. It's good to hear from you. I hope life has been treating you well.

We can only debate and form opinions on the information that is made available. If you can make that information available here. Then why can't the police make that information available in their press conference and press releases? When the police are saying that the made the petition because "his manner and demeanor seemed odd." I have to call, BS! As you know I think your manner and demeanor seem odd at the very least. But I don't file petitions on you even though I know you have a gun. As we have discussed in the past I also believe that you have a mental disorder. An Authority Complex more commonly known as the Father Complex. Sombody has some serious daddy issues. That is complicated by a superiority complex. That could possibly form a dangerous combination that makes you a danger to anyone that does not entertain your superiority or submit to your authority. You are a potential judge, jury and executioner.......with a gun. But I don't file petitions.

So I reiterate, Because perception plays a big part in thought processes the mind can be like a mirror. When two mirrors look into each other. How do they tell which of the two of them is actually cracked?

[Wizard777]

This is one of the problems with trespassing on government property even schools. There is a general perception that you have a right to access public buildings and property. The SRO was conducting an "investigation." He does not have to cooperate with that investigation or answer any questions. Even though it may behove him to provide a legitimate reason for being on the property. He as no legal obligation to do so. Also providing a legitimate reason for being on the property or a claim of legal right.That has no bearing on probable cause or an arrest for trespassing. A claim of legal right ONLY applies to wanton trespass. With trespassing a claim of legal right to be on the property is merely a defense to be presented at trial.

What I have been able to find on court decisions about Trespassing involve the differences between trespassing, waton trespass, and wanton trespass on government property. A lot of the cases are drug cases where an arrest for trespassing was used for a search and seizure. But there have been no real cases that purely address trespassing on government property. More specifically to answer the question, Does an immediate arrest for Trespassing without prior warning violate the democratic principle of Open Government. Were pretty big on that concept here in Maryland. Also the trespassing statutes provide no clear indication. If the Trespassing statute is good enough public and private property. Then why is there a need for seperate statutes for waton trespass on private property and wanton trespass on public property. They are essentially the same offense the only thing that really differs is who owns the property.

But the current interpretations and proceedures will stand until challenged.

[Wizard777]

Airman, When the police are involved in a situation that is going to seem prima facie bizarre and an extreme departure from the norm. It is absolutely critical to the public trust that they tell the truth the WHOLE truth and nothing but the truth. If there is information that cannot be released for legal reasons. Then you also have to make that known. Most importantly of all, those communications have to be devoid of ALL political consideration and spin. The Police are NOT a political entity. Nor should they ever be used as one. You guys have LEOBR to protect from political backlash in doing your very non political jobs. But if you guys are going to jump into the political arena with both feet like this. Then LEOBR needs to go and you can take the good with the bad just like anyone else in the political arena. In the political arena backlash can be par for the course. When you enter the arena voluntarily you deserve no protections from political backlash.

Now if what you are saying is indeed true. Then that is a horse of a different color. This being a cry for help that he is now receiving says that nicely in a non divulging manner. But going on the information released as released. I stand by every statement I made.

[The Astute Reader(tm)]

Because perception plays a big part in thought processes the mind can be like a mirror. When two mirrors look into each other. How do they tell which of the two of them is actually cracked?

It's you, Whizzer. Trust me.

[Wizard777]

It's you, Whizzer. Trust me.

Unlike the police with paranoid delusions of 9/11 and Sandy Hook. I'm always willing to entertain that possibility.

[Wizard777]

With Chief Tolliver allowing his Public Information Officer to jump into politics with both feet invoking nightmare images of 9/11 and Sandy Hook on a trespassing case with extenuating circumstances that are not entirely clear. I can't think of a more clear indication that he needs to be following Leopold out the door. The police cannot be involing themselves in politics in an official capacity like this. They haved to provide an equal protection of law to democrats and republicans, Pro gun control and pro second amendment, conservatives and liberals, and even us crazy moderates that look at both sides of everything to discover both the conservatives and liberals are wrong. They both have their valid points but from a purist perspective they're both wrong. If the police publicly weigh in on one side or the other of political issues. Then it won't be too long before the people are wondering if they got that ticket because they were speeding or because of their Obama or Ehrlich bumper sticker. Did they really do something wrong or are they just on the wrong side of the political fight? For as long as the police in their official capacity remain Apolitical. That will never be a concern more or less a valid issue.

[Airman]

Again, admitted drug user, you have no facts. Possibly just paranoid delusions from your recreational habits?

I have presented the facts just as they occurred and happen all the time. The police file many, many emergency petitions weekly all over the state of Maryland. They have valid, lawful reasons for doing so.

The police also have every right to present past incidents as examples of what could happen and as valid reasons and justification for what they have done. That isn't politics. Sandy Hook and 9/11 are not "political issues". They were CRIMES....something the police are very familiar with and perfectly qualified to speak about.

Too much of your "religious ritual" has certainly diminished your capacity to think clearly over time.

[Mom49of4]

~sigh~ I don't know why so many of you engage the admitted drug user in debate about things he doesn't understand.

Here are facts. The man entered a public school that is posted conspicuously "NO TRESPASSING". When encountered, he could offer no valid reason for being on school property. He was correctly arrested with trespassing on school property. There doesn't have to be a warning given on school property or posted property.

Second, he made no threats to himself or others until he was INTERVIEWED later by detectives. What he said to them has not been made public but it fell within the guidlines for an emergency petition. The doctors at the hospital agreed with the initial police assessment because they decided to transfer him to Shepard-Pratt Hospital for further evaluation.

BY law, the officers were bound to remove his firearms until he is certified by a psychiatrist as not a threat to himself or anyone else.

That is what this case boils down to. Nothing else. No secret police, no KGB. All done within the law and very public. Disregard the drivel you hear from the the admitted drug user among us.

I work in a school and since Sandy Hook we are expected to be more vigilant in regards to people visiting the building. Just this afternoon I stopped 2 women who simply walked by the main office and thought it would be okay to go on about their business.

They were coming in to pick up a sick student and were asked to wait while a teacher got the student.

While we do not have warning signs up we do have signs that inform visitors to go to the main office.

This man was wrong. I see no reason to justify his entering and walking the building.

[Wizard777]

Again, admitted drug user, you have no facts. Possibly just paranoid delusions from your recreational habits?

I have no facts? What I relied MOST heavily was the AA Co. Police's press conference and press release. As you say they provided me with "no facts." If Tolliver can't effectively manage to get facts out through a Public Information Office. Why would anyone believe that he can effectively manage an entire police department? He can't claim he didn't know. He took the lead on this. The SRO contacted Tolliver after they had release the guy. Anything after that Tolliver has the lead on.

I have presented the facts just as they occurred and happen all the time. The police file many, many emergency petitions weekly all over the state of Maryland. They have valid, lawful reasons for doing so.

No where in any official releases of information was it stated that he later made statements that would qualify for an emergency eval. You are a single unverified source of that information. Assuming that what you say is true. Keeping in mind that both the school and police are saying that he made no threats to the school, staff or students. Since you have not specified if those later statements were to harm others or himself. Then I will assume that he made threats to harm himself. But again you are a single unverified source of that information. The official reason given for the emergency eval was that "his manner and demeanor seemed odd."

Also I know many many people that would disagree with your statement on police filing many many emergency evals. I know far too many people that have had loved ones that obviously out of their mind threating suicide or to harm others. They have called the police trying to have the person Evaluated. They begged and pleaded with the police to take them for an emergency eval only to be told, sorry there's nothing we can do. But that's not just AA Co. It's also Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Eastern Shore, Western Mayland and Southern Maryland. Others have managed to get their loved one to an emergency room. They begged and pleaded with the Emergency Room personel to do an emergency eval only to be told, they have civil rights and we can't hold or treat them against their will. The worst part is neither the police or the emergency room personel told them that they can file the perition themselves or how to do it. So when I read that they have taken this guy for an emergency eval because his "manner and demeanor seemed odd." Yeah, my jaw hit the floor. Yes it did and, minus any official verification of your elaboration, still does look like they are using him as a political prop.

The police also have every right to present past incidents as examples of what could happen and as valid reasons and justification for what they have done. That isn't politics. Sandy Hook and 9/11 are not "political issues". They were CRIMES....something the police are very familiar with and perfectly qualified to speak about.

Did any of those crimes occur here in Maryland or is he a suspect in any of those crimes? If they were not trying to influence public opinion, which is indeed politics, then how does 9/11 or even Sandy Hook relate to this? I guess crashing planes into building was the worlds worst case of trespassing. Quick somebody call Guinesses! If this young man did indeed make threats to harm himself. Then this is nothing like Sandy Hook. Too bad Adam Lanza wasn't a threat to himself. Because if that goes unnoticed or unchecked. Then he shoots himself in the head and Sandy Hook never happens.

Too much of your "religious ritual" has certainly diminished your capacity to think clearly over time.

No my friend you are the cracked mirror. You think the police have a supreme authority that unquetionable.......especially when they can't get their story straight.