09-23-2012, 10:50 AM
Kelena,
There's far more to the incident and aside from trespassing, assault etc. (the persons were told several times in the past that they were not allowed on the property) which the police said there were no signs posted thus trespassing did not occur (I believe that a direct verbal request to stay off ones property is just as good and perhaps better than posted signs). There were actually two middle aged men involved, only one did the grabbing pushing, etc and the other made verbal threats to burn down the victim’s house, etc. Atop that, the driveway gate had been ripped off the hinges and knocked to ground between the time a witness entered the premises and locked the gate behind him and within minutes after the incident the gate was found broken down (The police said since there was no witness to who broke the gate, the suspects could not be charged with it). Only one of the men was taken into to custody and I have also learned that he had outstanding warrants for his arrest atop all of this.
It really seems odd to me that both men weren't taken into custody and that the police appeared to do everything they could to casually dismiss each event.
Here's the kicker... according to the police, if they had not had a witness (which at first, two of the officers did not think there was a witness and were saying they could do nothing. Yet the third officer was questioning the witness alone which later allowed them to arrest one of the men for the grabbing shaking and pushing etc of the victim) they would not have arrested either man and only recommended that the victim file for a TRO on Monday when the courts open. There's something very seriously wrong with this situation and it's something that needs to be taken before the prosecutor’s office. If the victim had no witness… she would have been left high and dry by the police with only the recourse to file a TRO when the courts open.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
There's far more to the incident and aside from trespassing, assault etc. (the persons were told several times in the past that they were not allowed on the property) which the police said there were no signs posted thus trespassing did not occur (I believe that a direct verbal request to stay off ones property is just as good and perhaps better than posted signs). There were actually two middle aged men involved, only one did the grabbing pushing, etc and the other made verbal threats to burn down the victim’s house, etc. Atop that, the driveway gate had been ripped off the hinges and knocked to ground between the time a witness entered the premises and locked the gate behind him and within minutes after the incident the gate was found broken down (The police said since there was no witness to who broke the gate, the suspects could not be charged with it). Only one of the men was taken into to custody and I have also learned that he had outstanding warrants for his arrest atop all of this.
It really seems odd to me that both men weren't taken into custody and that the police appeared to do everything they could to casually dismiss each event.
Here's the kicker... according to the police, if they had not had a witness (which at first, two of the officers did not think there was a witness and were saying they could do nothing. Yet the third officer was questioning the witness alone which later allowed them to arrest one of the men for the grabbing shaking and pushing etc of the victim) they would not have arrested either man and only recommended that the victim file for a TRO on Monday when the courts open. There's something very seriously wrong with this situation and it's something that needs to be taken before the prosecutor’s office. If the victim had no witness… she would have been left high and dry by the police with only the recourse to file a TRO when the courts open.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.