Woman claims police terrorized her

10/14/07
Woman claims police terrorized her

Lawyers claim North Port Police officers were overzealous in their actions


NORTH PORT -- A woman who last year was the victim of mistaken identity by police has demanded the city pay her $225,000 for psychological trauma.

"Due to the negligence of the North Port Police Department and its overzealous officers, Faith Holman was terrorized, battered, humiliated, and falsely imprisoned," said her attorney, Michael L. Beckman of the Fort Myers law firm of Viles & Beckman.

On May 25, Holman, 59, was running some errands when seven North Port Police officers, responding to a 9-1-1 call, pulled her over, and at gunpoint made her kneel on the ground and cuffed her.

The police were acting on a call made by a man who identified himself as Ronnie Thomas. According to the 9-1-1 tape, Thomas said he saw a Hispanic or Italian man parked in a white BMW across from a local restaurant with a gun in his lap. He even spelled out the license plate as "S-M-O-O-C-H-Y."

However, Thomas' memory became fuzzy when the dispatcher asked him where he lived and what his phone number was. On the tape, he told the dispatcher he was new to the area, and did not know his own address. He also avoided telling dispatch his phone number when asked. Instead, he told the dispatcher that he borrowed a phone from a woman at a nearby gas station.

After pulling Holman, a white female, over, police ordered her to walk backwards toward them. Then one officer grabbed her arm, cuffed her, and quickly removed her to a police vehicle. The other officers, still with guns drawn, carefully approached the vehicle and then searched it. When they found nothing, the police immediately released Holman.

Beckman said Holman still has flashbacks whenever she sees a police officer behind her, and her life has changed, suffering from psychological trauma.

Beckman's partner, Marcus Viles, alleged that police violated state law and the U.S. Constitution.

"Faith Holman should feel that she is safe and secure when police are present," Viles said. "She can now no longer count on the police for protection."

"While she was being forced to kneel on the ground with guns pointed close to her head, she could hear the clicking noise as the officers ****ed their firearms and (she) feared for her life," Beckman wrote in the demand package. "She thought of her child, whom she had just been speaking to on her cell phone as the incident unfolded, and wondered if she would ever see him again."

In the demand package sent to the city, Beckman claims that North Port violated Holman's civil rights pertaining to false arrest and unlawful imprisonment.

North Port Police Capt. Robert Estrada said in an interview last year, and again recently, that the officers involved followed the department's standard operating procedure for the type of call they responded to.

"Officer safety is the first concern on any call where there may be a gun," Estrada said during an interview last year. "After I spoke with (Lt. Stephen) Lorenz, he said he did realize once the driver was a woman, the situation may not be what it seemed. However, he still had to eliminate any threats to both the woman (Holman) and his officers."

Estrada said police tried to help Holman understand what happened to her.

Lt. Kevin Sullivan tried to locate any vehicle with different combinations of "SMOOCHY" and did not find one. Lorenz, who was one of the officers pointing a gun at Holman, explained to her why the officers reacted the way they did, and tried to locate the 9-1-1 caller. He ran the name "Ronnie Thomas" in a records search and found it was a common name with many hits.

During the past year, Estrada said there have been two changes made to their procedures when force is used or threatened.

Any officer who uses or threatens to use force must complete a use of force form, Estrada said. He added this includes guns, Tasers, batons or pepper spray. This addition to the policy came when police started carrying tasers.

The second change was made due to the Holman incident. Estrada said that police and dispatch now will identify the caller, including sending an officer to meet with the caller, for any calls that are unusual, as in the Holman case.

North Ports Risk Manager Steve Gailbreath said he does not think there is any liability or merit to Holman's claim.

"There are times when the city is wrong, but this is not one of them," Gailbreath said.

However, Beckman disagreed, and in his demand package, he states that police violated several Florida Statutes in stopping Holman. He claims there was no circumstance to reasonably indicate that Holman had committed or was committing a crime. Beckman also claimed police had no probable cause to believe Holman committed a crime or to warrant placing her in handcuffs.

Viles said that he has several options if negotiations with the city fail, including a federal civil rights lawsuit.

"We are hoping the city will negotiate and settle this, resolving the issue without a lot of expense to the taxpayers," Viles said.

You can e-mail George McGinn at gmcginn@sun-herald.com.


By GEORGE McGINN

Staff Writer

Was the car the lady was driving bearing the tag smoochy? If not, the city better get ready to pay out. No crime without a victim or a complainant.

"Beckman said Holman still has flashbacks whenever she sees a police officer behind her, and her life has changed, suffering from psychological trauma. "
Oh my, says Mrs. Beckman, (what am I supposed to say here Mr. Holman?..oh yeah) I watch Adam-12 on tv and It makes me cower and cry now" (How was that Mr. Holman? ) (You did just fine there Mrs. Beckman, but remember, you need $225,000 to be able to look at a police officer and feel good about it) Oh Mr. Holman..you know what I like! Don't forget my 33% Mrs. Beckman!

This is a perfect example of why we should not respond to the BS compaints with no one that wants to meet. If it is not worth you time why should we go then? Perfect example: A suspect has the right to face their accuser in court.

"While she was being forced to kneel on the ground with guns pointed close to her head, she could hear the clicking noise as the officers ****ed their firearms and (she) feared for her life,"


Do guns make clicking noises, and do police officers **** their guns? I was under the impression the guns were already loaded with 1 in the chamber and in de****ed double-action mode.

Yes you are correct, she is lying that is why, no one ****s their guns. Just another crazy person looking for money.

While some is being fabricated, being forced at gunpoint to kneel is pretty scary for people who:

1. Aren't around guns all the time like most non LEO's
2. Didn't do anything wrong
3. Aren't told what is going on

I wasn't there, so obviously can't be sure, but what a luxury-car driving lady did to cause the officers to make her kneel at gunpoint escapes me. It should have been quickly obvious that she was alone and unarmed. But as I said, I'm not going to second guess a qualified LEO.

[Old Guy]

While some is being fabricated, being forced at gunpoint to kneel is pretty scary for people who:

1. Aren't around guns all the time like most non LEO's
2. Didn't do anything wrong
3. Aren't told what is going on

I wasn't there, so obviously can't be sure, but what a luxury-car driving lady did to cause the officers to make her kneel at gunpoint escapes me. It should have been quickly obvious that she was alone and unarmed. But as I said, I'm not going to second guess a qualified LEO.
Then why are you on this site? Shut the f#$K up if you don't know what the hell you are are talking about...

While some is being fabricated, being forced at gunpoint to kneel is pretty scary for people who:

1. Aren't around guns all the time like most non LEO's
2. Didn't do anything wrong
3. Aren't told what is going on

I wasn't there, so obviously can't be sure, but what a luxury-car driving lady did to cause the officers to make her kneel at gunpoint escapes me. It should have been quickly obvious that she was alone and unarmed. But as I said, I'm not going to second guess a qualified LEO.

You say "Im not going to second guess a qualified LEO"....Well you already did exactly that.

Maybe you need to re-read the article. The woman was pulled over because a caller accused the driver of having a firearm in her lap. The caller made it seem like a very serious and potentionally dangerous situation was taking place. Unfortunately we arnt mind readers and couldnt tell the call was a prank right away.

When North Port PD located the vehicle that the caller was refereing to they didnt just walk up to the driver and say "hey whats going on?". We arnt going to put ourselves in unnecessary risk when there is reasonable fear that the driver is armed and dangerous, as described by the caller...

Once the woman was ordered out, found to be unarmed and not a danger, she was released.

What do you expect us to do? Walk up to the driver of a car who is allegedly armed and dangerous and put our lives in unnecessary risk? In the responding officer's minds the person was armed and dangerous.

We are trained professionals. This woman's safety was never in jepordy. She was not treated inappropriately. The artcle talked about unlawfully handcuffing her, battering her, falsely arresting her and so on. This lady doesnt know what shes talking about.

We can handcuff anybody for safety concesrns. So long as we can articulate why there is a concern for safety (In this case the caller advised there was a gun involved).

She was not battered. She was not struck, she was lawfully detained.

She was not arrested. She was charged with no crime. She was DETAINED and handcuffed for safety concerns. Once it was determiend there was no threat, there was no gun, that the call was a fake, she was released. She has no basis for a lawsuit. Its sad that this type of nonesense is even entertained.

Tell me this. Had the call been a real one, and the officers did not react the same way. What do you think could have happened? Do you think the armed and dangerous person could of gotten away? Do you think that the person could of hurt or killed someone had they gotten away? If police didnt use any concern for personal safety they probably would of ended up dead. And we cant protect anyone if we are dead.

Im sure that the general public would be outraged had the situation been real and the responding officers did not make every effort to take the person of fthe street as safely as possible for all.

People like you that try to monday morning quarterback need to get a life. Especially when the people who are quarterbacking dont know what the hell theyre talking about.

Also, I never realized that people in luxery cars never committed crimes...Thanks for the heads up though. Ill be sure to avoid the law abiding rich people in luxery cars.

BE AWARE, THE ATTORNEYS THAT ARE BRINGING THIS LAWSUIT ARE PULLING ALL OF OUR "USE OF FORCE" REPORTS AND BEING AMBULANCE CHASERS, CONTACTING THOSE INVOLVED IN THE REPORTS TO SEE IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SUE. THESE ATTORNEYS ARE SCUM.

You say "Im not going to second guess a qualified LEO"....Well you already did exactly that.

Maybe you need to re-read the article. The woman was pulled over because a caller accused the driver of having a firearm in her lap. The caller made it seem like a very serious and potentionally dangerous situation was taking place. Unfortunately we arnt mind readers and couldnt tell the call was a prank right away. Why don't you try re-reading the article. The complaint was of a Hispanic or Italian man parked in a white BMW across from a local restaurant with a gun in his lap. Not a white female. Oh let me guess the PD thought he was hiding in the truck.

When North Port PD located the vehicle that the caller was refereing to they didnt just walk up to the driver and say "hey whats going on?". We arnt going to put ourselves in unnecessary risk when there is reasonable fear that the driver is armed and dangerous, as described by the caller...

Once the woman was ordered out, found to be unarmed and not a danger, she was released.

What do you expect us to do? Walk up to the driver of a car who is allegedly armed and dangerous and put our lives in unnecessary risk? In the responding officer's minds the person was armed and dangerous.

We are trained professionals. A chimp can be trained to, and with better logic to it's thought process as well. This woman's safety was never in jepordy. She was not treated inappropriately. The artcle talked about unlawfully handcuffing her, battering her, falsely arresting her and so on. This lady doesnt know what shes talking about.You are the one who has no idea of what you are talking about. You are using an example that is meant for a situation of clear and present danger. The person in question did not meeting the discription of the possible suspect in the least.

We can handcuff anybody for safety concesrns. So long as we can articulate why there is a concern for safety (In this case the caller advised there was a gun involved). With a non-white male. not a white female. Keep hammering on that bit of bull and maybe you will believe it yourself.

She was not battered. She was not struck, she was lawfully detained.I thought you said she was held for her safety? So which line of bull is it?

She was not arrested. She was charged with no crime. She was DETAINED and handcuffed for safety concerns. Oh is that what you are calling the restricting the movements of some who you do not consider a suspect? Please you are doing nothing but digging the hole the PD is in even deeper. Once it was determiend there was no threat, there was no gun, that the call was a fake, she was released. She has no basis for a lawsuit. Its sad that this type of nonesense is even entertained.

Tell me this. Had the call been a real one, and the officers did not react the same way. What do you think could have happened? Do you think the armed and dangerous person could of gotten away? Do you think that the person could of hurt or killed someone had they gotten away? If police didnt use any concern for personal safety they probably would of ended up dead. And we cant protect anyone if we are dead.

Im sure that the general public would be outraged had the situation been real and the responding officers did not make every effort to take the person of fthe street as safely as possible for all.

People like you that try to monday morning quarterback need to get a life. Especially when the people who are quarterbacking dont know what the hell theyre talking about.
Worse yet is someone like yourself who is supposed to know the rules of law but are totaly clueless in implementing such.

Also, I never realized that people in luxery cars never committed crimes...Thanks for the heads up though. Ill be sure to avoid the law abiding rich people in luxery cars.

Last if the whole situation was done with no problems then why did the PD feel it was necessary to institute two new SOP's dealing with felony stops?
How about to CYA after the horse has already gotten out of the barn.
I hope for the city's sake that you were not invovled in this incident. If so your contempt for the general public will realy go over well on the stand if you testify.
You are a defense and civil ambulance chasing attorney's dream come true.
This was just another over reaction by the Barney Fife's of the NPPD.
The odds have finaly caught up to the Gung Ho's on the PD and now it is going to cost the city some bucks. Unfortunately I am one of those who will be ponying up the bucks.

She wasn't a man, like the one the caller said had a gun. That might be a problem in court.

I understand that you guys were flustered because you had to let a cop off with a verbal warning instead of a UTC to go to this call. That doesn't excuse you from having to think.

Men are generally larger, hairier and smellier than woman. If that isn't enough for you to determine the suspects sex, keep this in mind. Men have penis's.

Stick to parking enforcement and leave the real police work to the SCSO.

Let me first start by saying you clearly know nothing of the law. And Ill explain it to you step by step since you have such a difficult time understanding it.

Why don't you try re-reading the article. The complaint was of a Hispanic or Italian man parked in a white BMW across from a local restaurant with a gun in his lap. Not a white female. Oh let me guess the PD thought he was hiding in the truck.

You're a quick one. Yes the complaint was of a Hispanic or Italian man in a BMW; however, its not always so easy to identify the sex of a driver by looking at the silhouette of a head from the rear of a car. When the officers found the vehicle in question they used officer safety. Also keep in mind that the information that officers get isn’t always correct. Witnesses mix things up. We also have to remember that callers often don’t give the entire situation to the dispatcher and often are incorrect with information and descriptions they give over the phone. The officers, even if they were able to immediately identify the sex of the driver through the rear window, have no idea who else was in the car and did not have all the facts. Once they had all the information and discovered the incident was a prank she was released. I could list an entire slew of possibilities that could have been. The bottom line is the officers didn’t know what exactly was going on and treated the situation as though there was an armed person inside a white BMW with the license plate SMOOCHY. We cant become complacent just because the initial description wasn’t what was given. Cops understand; no, cops HAVE to understand that situations change from when they are given over the radio to when we arrive. We need to be prepared to expect the unexpected. I for one don’t want to see any more cops in Florida, or anywhere for that matter, get shot. Clearly you don’t understand that part do you? Something tells me you’ve been on the wrong side of the law before.

A chimp can be trained to, and with better logic to it's thought process as well.

Obviously youre a self proclaimed expert on everything. Clearly you are not nor have you ever been in the law enforcement field. You watch news talk shows and cops and now you’re an expert right? Obviously you have a personal vendetta against law enforcement.


You are the one who has no idea of what you are talking about. You are using an example that is meant for a situation of clear and present danger. The person in question did not meeting the discription of the possible suspect in the least.

I feel like I’m beating a dead horse here. What does it take for you to understand that at the time of the stop there was reason for fear of danger. A citizen stated that there was an armed person in the car. Yes the PERSON described did not meet the description given; however, the car did. Ill repeat that the cop often cant tell who, how many, or what sex the driver is by looking at a silhouette. Try re-reading the above post you troll.


With a non-white male. not a white female. Keep hammering on that bit of bull and maybe you will believe it yourself.

Maybe you don’t think a potentially armed person is dangerous but I believe the large majority do. AGAIN...We as cops need to remember that things change between the time we make contact and when the complainant made the call. We aren’t going to order the driver out of the car, have her walk backwards toward us, then say "okay cool, you’re free to go since you’re female" What we will do is handcuff the person and check for weapons or other dangers. If we simply let the woman go and it turned out that there actually was more to this the public would be outraged and I am sure that you would then be saying that NPPD doesn’t know how to investigate anything and are piss poor cops. You actually make me sick.


She was not battered. She was not struck, she was lawfully detained.I thought you said she was held for her safety? So which line of bull is it?

Your above statement goes to show that you know nothing of the law. A police officer can detain anyone in the course of an investigation. If a law enforcement officer tells you to "not move" or "stay there" that is considered a "detention". It is a detention with or without handcuffs. Law enforcement officers can handcuff someone if there is reason to suspect danger or a safety concern. In this situation there was a fear that the driver could of been involved with a person carrying a weapon. She was detained (ordered out of her car by the officers) and then handcuffed (for safety concerns given the fact that there was a report of weapons being inside the car). The cops at the time, didn’t know if this woman was possibly involved with the person carrying a gun. All they knew is that there was apparently a gun in the car she was driving. They used reasonable means to protect themselves had there actually been a weapon.

She was not arrested. She was charged with no crime. She was DETAINED and handcuffed for safety concerns. Oh is that what you are calling the restricting the movements of some who you do not consider a suspect? Please you are doing nothing but digging the hole the PD is in even deeper.

No jack a**, she was detained for an investigation and she was handcuffed for safety concerns. We don’t half fast these things. Safety is paramount. Last thing we want is to assume this woman, who is traveling in a car that was reported to have a firearm inside, is not a danger and then have her start firing off rounds or pull a knife on us. Bottom line is we don’t know until we investigate.

People like you that try to monday morning quarterback need to get a life. Especially when the people who are quarterbacking dont know what the hell theyre talking about.
Worse yet is someone like yourself who is supposed to know the rules of law but are totaly clueless in implementing such.

Partner you're the one who is clueless. You THINK you know the law but obviously dont know the first thing. I hope you enjoyed this little 101 lesson in law.

Last if the whole situation was done with no problems then why did the PD feel it was necessary to institute two new SOP's dealing with felony stops?
How about to CYA after the horse has already gotten out of the barn.
I hope for the city's sake that you were not invovled in this incident. If so your contempt for the general public will realy go over well on the stand if you testify.
You are a defense and civil ambulance chasing attorney's dream come true.
This was just another over reaction by the Barney Fife's of the NPPD.
The odds have finaly caught up to the Gung Ho's on the PD and now it is going to cost the city some bucks. Unfortunately I am one of those who will be ponying up the bucks.

Next you will be telling me you pay my taxes. If you want I'll give you back your 10 dollars in taxes that the county alloted to my pay for the year. Actually I dont work for NPPD but for another agency. Its people like you that think they know the law and Monday morning quarter back everything they see. People like you fail to recognize that not everything is all so black and white. Unfortunately cops have to live with the reality that the world is gray. That there’s always 3 sides to a story and that many things are never what they might seem. We have to remember this to keep ourselves and the citizens we serve, safe. If we fail to remember that we would be totally ineffective. You don’t know the very first thing about law enforcement.

See's it for what it is is a jack ass that uses every opportunity he can to blast this department. He was probably the bully in school who got beat up by someone's sister and called to make a complaint to the police and they laughed at him. So now he pukes his venom onto this forum. Ypu are right though, he doesn't have a clue as to what it's like being a cop! Oh yeah, Jack ass, the death rate of Florida police officers this year so far is the highest it's been since the 70's!

[Ghost of 3101 NPPD]

Been awhile since I have posted here, and I can not think of a better time then to respond to what has been correctly labeled as a Fife.

The last thing anyone (including the public) needs is a class taught by an over reactive dreadnought. You stopped riding the line of officer safety and caution and crossed over to paranoia like many others of the NPPD.
That makes you and others of your ilk not a protective member of society by a liability waiting to happen.

Your idea of law enforcement is to cut yourself off from the main sector of society and limit your entire life, (social, work, family) to that of your job.
That alienates you from how the other (majority) members of this community (and society in general) interact.

So please excuse and forgive this lowly member of society (an LEO with more time then you) if I do not kiss the royal hand of a self important, pompous wannabe LEO with delusions of grandeur.

I posted the following sometime ago and am doing so again so that it might just sink in.


Just remember that after you are done doing the cop job (retired or whatever), that you have to live here when you are done. And like elephants people have long memories and will remember if you treated them like dirt.
For those that eat, breath and live the job 24/7, I recommend reading "The New Centurions" by Joseph Wambaugh.

Retirement or the leaving of law enforcement for whatever reason, and it's loss of power is no less of a withdrawal then drugs.
Some departments have pre-retirement programs that gradually wean an officer off such power and the job in general. Such as desk work, training, and other non-enforcement positions. North Port does not have such a program.
It is a proven fact that a very large number of officers suffer one or several of the following within the first 5 yrs. of leaving the job.
Heart attack, stroke, debilitating depression, drug and alcohol abuse, or suicide.

Stop looking at the PD through rose colored glasses, and remove the tattoo of the badge off your chest.


Get a grip, get a life, or get out of LE. That is if any of you can really call yourself that.

Who in the hell are you talking about?

Been awhile since I have posted here, and I can not think of a better time then to respond to what has been correctly labeled as a Fife.

The last thing anyone (including the public) needs is a class taught by an over reactive dreadnought. You stopped riding the line of officer safety and caution and crossed over to paranoia like many others of the NPPD.
That makes you and others of your ilk not a protective member of society by a liability waiting to happen.

Your idea of law enforcement is to cut yourself off from the main sector of society and limit your entire life, (social, work, family) to that of your job.
That alienates you from how the other (majority) members of this community (and society in general) interact.

So please excuse and forgive this lowly member of society (an LEO with more time then you) if I do not kiss the royal hand of a self important, pompous wannabe LEO with delusions of grandeur.

Get a grip, get a life, or get out of LE. That is if any of you can really call yourself that.

You seem to place yourself on a pretty high pedestal. Do you always insult your brother LEOs in an open forum? You say you have more time than me, congragulations to making it that far; however, that doesnt mean you are right.

This was not paranoia, this was reasonable safety steps taken to a potentially dangerous situation. I have made my point in my other posts so obviously Im not going to change your opinion. But I would venture to say you are within the minority here.

I for one have completely come to understand that our service is for the public. That being said I dont think we should let ourselves become complacent, because when we do we will get hurt or worse, killed.

Let me ask you this. Had the driver turned out to be a Hispanic male do you think the responding officer should of simply walked up to the window and make himself a much easier target? Or do you think the responding officers should have made a felony stop like what was done? I know none of this w ould of been considered paranoia or over reaction had the situation not been a prank.

Say the driver even was a female and the officers could have seen that at the time of the initial stop, and she did have a gun and was somehow involved with the person that was described by the caller?...Would you still think the officers did wrong had they acted the maner in which they did?

I cant see how you, an apparent LEO with sooo much experience as you say can not see why the officers reacted the way they did.

Who the F@ck are you talking about?

Who the F@ck are you talking about?
Dude you need to read the other posts in this threat to understand..

I'm talking about that maniac Ghost of 3101! He seems to have someone in mind. If you ask me, he's unhappy about losing his job.

[nppdx86]

I'm talking about that maniac Ghost of 3101! He seems to have someone in mind. If you ask me, he's unhappy about losing his job.

So it seems... I agree>>> :devil:

[Ghost of 3101 NPPD]

I'm talking about that maniac Ghost of 3101! He seems to have someone in mind. I wish you at least had a half a mind, then I may know what it is you are talking about. If you ask me, he's unhappy about losing his job. Here we go, again! :roll: :roll: Another Jr. detective drawn an erroneous incorrect conclusion.
If you want to play detective then go over some of my old post for why I left the NPPD (No Professional Police Department) and it should be easy even for you to come to the correct conclusion.

Speaking of detective work, I have not seen or heard from Kevin S. in awhile. That is other then him being quoted in the paper about everyday. I keep forgetting to ask him about the follow up on and old case of his that he was working for a long time.
Ask him if his stolen Sig P225 PD issued service weapon and personal S&W .357 were ever recovered.

One of the CCS0 deputies who worked the original case asked me about it sometime ago and wondered how it turned out.
Let me know the status on that if you would, thanks.

Later people, and as always, keep those cards and letter coming.

leave your phone number and we'll have him call you

[Ghost of 3101 NPPD]

leave your phone number and we'll have him call you

Or you could just have him Email me by going to my profile, or the bottom of any of my post where it says Email, clueless one. :roll: :roll:

[Old Guy]

I believe Kevin's wallet and gun belt were found out in zone 4 several years later by someone walking in the woods. I do not believe the weapons were recovered. It's hard to prevent someone kicking in your front door and robbing your house when you are across the state at the LEO Olympics.

[Ghost of 3101 NPPD]

I believe Kevin's wallet and gun belt were found out in zone 4 several years later by someone walking in the woods. I do not believe the weapons were recovered. It's hard to prevent someone kicking in your front door and robbing your house when you are across the state at the LEO Olympics.

The gun belt was not taken, it was still hanging on the bathroom door of the bedroom.
It was not last night that I remembed that Cindy found the .357 under a towel next to the bed while we were still there waiting for the CCSO.

Kevin Emailed me today telling me that the .357 was not taken and said that he contacted the SO about the case sometime back to check on the status.

Well in typical CCSO fasion guess what? They could not find any record of the case.
Like Kevin said in his email, "Imagine that!"

I emailed him back about remembering that the gun was not taken and I could not edit the post to reflect the change. (HELLO ADMIN, TURN ON THE EDIT THANK YOU!)

As I told Kevin in my email, I still remember three of us going to the house just after Cindy got home and found the front door kicked in.
She called Kevin and he had her call the CCSO and then he had her call the PD to have one of us stay with her till the SO showed up.
Three of us got there in about 5 mins and found Cindy at the end of the driveway with Kilo.

Poor Kilo, those *******s beat the hell out of him and forced him into one of the bedrooms on the west side of the house after they broke in. I am suprised that they did not go back and shoot him when they found the Sig.

Since the SO had not showed up yet we got permission from Ray to secure the scene and had the house checked in about 10-15 mins. When it was secured we contacted dispatch to tell the SO we were there and the house was secure.
Now the CCSO new that they were reponding to the B&E of a police officers home, and at the time of the call it was not known if anyone was still inside.

Now you do the math, but approximately 20 mins went by before the SO was notified that the house was secured by.

20 MINS HAVE PASSED SINCE THE DISPATCH OF A BURGLARY POSSIBLY IN PROGRESS AT A POLICE OFFICERS HOME WAS GIVEN, AND NOT ONE CCSO UNIT HAS SHOWED UP.

It still took the SO 10 mins to get there after we told them we were there.
That is 30 mins after the initial dispatch was given out.

Guy, in my email to Kevin I told him remembering talking to him in Orlando and telling him what was and was not missing after he told us what and where to look.
I remember it was Kevin, John, Dale and Billy and maybe someone else who went to Orlando, but I thought it was for PBA golf Tournament.

Hey did you get my PM?

The CCSO deputy would have got their sooner but he got pulled over for speed by one of the many cop citers in you agency.

[Old Guy]

Ghost, I got it and just responded. I thought there was some type of leather that was found because I remember looking at something that was old and weathered but it may have been just the wallet. I remember Kevin looking at some of the cards in the wallet that he had not seen in a long time. I thought he was in Jacksonville and had to take a bus back, or something like that. My memory is going as are other things. :wink: