Police standoff
 

Does anyone know what was going on Sunday morning on Bean Road in Moultonborough? Police had assault riffles out and surrounded a house about 3/4 of a mile up from route 25. This was between 10 and 11:30 in the morning. Traffic was not allowed to pass through. Not a huge police presence, maybe 3 or 4 Moultonborough cruisers and a couple of state troopers.

Someone stole the doughnuts

Might have been this - see link
 

Most interesting. Looks to be one of the village's best citizens. Rural NH in the winter is so much fun.

Really? Not that funny and an insult to all police officers who do their best to keep the public safe.

Got a family member who works VERY close with them daily...You wouldn't believe what they say and joke about concerning you and me.

First: That doesn't make it, or the disrespectful comment right.

Second: "Very close?" I was a police officer as was my brother (now retired) so a little closer than second hand information from a relative who has some hearsay claim .

We always treated the public with respect and expected the same in return. Although, sometimes, as in this case, people do let you down.

That's the nail on head there. That one little word that seems to have no place in society anymore. When my parents brought me up you were taught to respect cops. Yes sir, no sir ..............and there wasn't any problems. Now you see all this madness on TV and Youtube about how these punks treat the cops, disobeying orders and mouthing off, and its obvious they weren't raised correctly. Tough to be cop in todays world..............but it shouldn't be.

And then there was Ferguson,

Yup that's my point. No respect for law.

By "very close" I mean my daughter is one in Mass - nuff said about that, purposely didn't elaborate as I'm sure she wouldn't exactly want it announced over the air waves.

I wouldn't want to be a cop with today's kids growing up.

When I was a kid if you mouthed off to cops you were treated accordingly and then your parents would tell you you deserved it when you got home before you got grounded.

Another problem now is everyone is a lawyer in their own mind and needs to dispute everything because they've seen a 2 minute youtube video before.

If people had cell phones that could have recorded what cops used to do it would probably be shocking to a lot of you. Technology has revealed a lot of wrong doing by LEO's.

My parents taught me that respect was earned, not given.

Right now, in America, I think you have a large proportion of officers (and sometimes almost entire departments) that act unethically and break several laws and exploit their position. In these you also have a 2nd tier of officers who may not do anything outright illegal themselves but they are aware of things going on and do not report it or otherwise act to curb it. These officers are just as bad as the ones that are directly corrupt, because they enable it to continue.

Personally, I wouldn't be outwardly disrespectful to an officer whom I've never met before, but I will also say that person doesn't automatically get my respect just because of their job/title.

Cops and donuts are a long-running joke and it's typically not meant as anything disrespectful or cruel. If you are in law enforcement and you get "offended" by this, you might want to take a hard look at yourself and see if maybe you think you are entitled to a level of treatment that isn't exactly relative to your job.

"Right now, in America, I think you have a large proportion of officers (and sometimes almost entire departments) that act unethically and break several laws and exploit their position. In these you also have a 2nd tier of officers who may not do anything outright illegal themselves but they are aware of things going on and do not report it or otherwise act to curb it. These officers are just as bad as the ones that are directly corrupt, because they enable it to continue."

I would have disagree with this. There are always a few bad apples no one will dispute that but to say it encompasses a large portion is just not true. The cops get tried by the media now, often on incorrect information, and people suck it in like a sponge. If people acted civilly most of these issues never happen.

This can become a very chicken and egg sort of an argument.

You have things like the Stop and Frisk program in New York, which has been a documented failure and civil liberties infraction: http://www.nyclu.org/content/stop-and-frisk-data

Then you have other major Police departments that conduct similar programs, though often under no official name or program, but it's perceptible to the public. NYC has over a decade of data showing the ineffectiveness of this program, yet they continue with it AND expect "civility" by the public?

I also haven't heard many (any?) other major police departments publicly condemn this program, which makes them sort of a "supporter via silence".

There always have been, and always will be, those individuals who will simply have no respect for polite society or the public servants thereof. That is "part of the job" for police officers, just as most of us work at jobs that have some form of "horrible customer" that we have to tolerate and put up with for the bigger picture.

Police departments across the US are competing for government funding to buy armor and weapons they simply don't need, and then practically looking for an excuse to use these new toys. They lead the public to believe that this is necessary to "keep us safe", when again there is ZERO statistical data to support this.

And yet many officers and departments oppose the use of body cameras that would clear up these "incorrect" reports...

You could not be more wrong in so many ways. Your opinion is typical of a civilian who sees a trooper exceeding the speed limit without his lights and siren on and makes a snide remark or a donut joke, sure that the speeding is not justified. Many times the officer is attempting to catch up to a traffic violator and knows that if he activates his lights while far behind the other vehicle the subject may take off, which will cause an unnecessary chase. Other times he may be going to assist another officer and the situation requires that he hurry, but it would not be classified as an "emergency".

So many untrained civilians think they have all the answers as to how a police officer should do his job.

Don't need some surplus military equipment? Tell that to the San Bernadino police who used their Bearcat and another armored vehicle to approach the killers vehicle.

So while you can work at your job with your "horrible customer" you don't have to worry if he will pull out a gun or other weapon. Go out on your own at 3 AM and stop a car in a dark section of route 93 with 4 people inside who are suspects in a crime and see how much that feels like dealing with your "horrible customer". Good comparison, I'm sure it is exactly the same thing you face on a daily basis.

I think she wrote me a ticket last year.

You should have offered her a donut.

And your attitude is typical of a police officer who thinks their actions should never be questioned.

As for my job... I've worked with police, FBI and other organizations in the US. I've had fully automatic Uzi's waved at me in Tortola, I've been through crazy VERY non-tourist parts of Kingston, I've worked with security groups in Dubai and Abu Dhabi, threatened by street gangs in Sao Paulo, and countless other stories. I've assisted people under threat by Russian mobs, Japanese gangs and lots of other multi-cultural security cases. I know a thing or two about what I'm describing. I'll take 3AM on 93 in NH over several places I've been at 3PM on a Sunday.

I agree with you and 100% support the police. But I hate seeing this being thrown in civilians faces since this whole anti cop protest nonsense has started.

"So while you can work at your job with your "horrible customer" you don't have to worry if he will pull out a gun or other weapon."

As a police officer you willingly decided to put on that uniform and put yourself in that position knowing the circumstances you may find your self in can be dangerous. No one forced you to become a police officer and you collect compensation for that service. Don't want that risk become a desk jockey like the majority of us, like you said I don't want to have to worry about that horrible "customer" pulling a gun on me at a traffic stop, so I carry a pack of pencils and a calculator not a badge and firearm.

I agree 100%. And I promise to never come to your workplace and tell you how to use your pencils. I never said I did not enjoy the job which has a lot of personal rewards that come from helping people. My only objection is people who have no idea what they are talking about deciding that they know better than a trained, educated, experienced officer. Or people who criticize the actions of police officers without knowing what the circumstances are. Sure there are police officers who don't do things right but they make up less than 1% of the total.

It's hard to find an exact number online quickly, but there are roughly 700,000-800,000 sworn officers in the US (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_en..._United_States).

Let's say that "less than 1%" is half a percent, and say 750,000 sworn officers. That would be 3,750 officers who "don't do things right".

That is still a pretty big problem, wouldn't you agree? Especially when we don't seem to hear about police departments sweeping these people out.

Several police departments, like Boston, have "Anti-Corruption" units and a moderately large Internal Affairs group. You don't staff up for something like that to deal with a problem that affects "less than 1%" of your staff. When you hear about the cases that make it to the public media it is almost always about problems that have been going on for *years*. You're not hearing about a guy that messed up once, you're hearing about someone who has been a public menace for a very long time.

I'd also like to know where you got your less than 1% number from, because I'm pretty sure it's low by an order of magnitude at least.

I would expect not, Winnisquamer isn't a public servant (I presume) and his salary isn't paid for by taxpayer money. Police forces very much have an expectation of public scrutiny, the public is your "customer".

Why do you assume that people "don't know what they are talking about" just because they have a critical opinion? Do you feel that 3750 corrupt officers don't warrant concern?

Yet you didn't even get the meaning of the comment. In not waty did it infer that they "never be questioned". You totaly missed the inference of making an asumption based on a false set of data or total lack of knowledge.

20,000 service members said they had experienced at least one incident of unwanted sexual contact in the past year, representing nearly 5 percent of all active-duty women and 1 percent of active-duty men.

Only a few examples. So are you ready to condem the military for the acts of a smae percentage? Like the other professions, they are being addressed the best they can.

No, I got the meaning. I gave a specific example of a large scale police program (stop and frisk) that had disastrous results and resulted in public distrust of police. He ignored that and countered with a non-specific case of a speeding cruiser. He made a poor quality straw-man argument to try and distract from a direct example.


The topic was about police, not military, so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with those comments, unless you too just want to make strawman arguments and stray off-topic. You also inserted quotes, but they don't appear to be from this thread and they have no reference/link.

I never said anything about military, and I haven't "condemned" the police. I've merely said they shouldn't get bent out of shape about a donut joke, and that the police across the US have done plenty to cause public distrust. Since you're concerned about "getting the meaning" of comments, the way for police to win back trust would not be to make strawman arguments and refuse to confront things.

I'll ask you the same thing I asked TiltonBB after he made his "1%" comment... Do you think 3750 corrupt police officers in the US is something the public should simply ignore or accept?

It's also strange that after almost 6 months of inactivity you pop up on this thread with a poorly framed response on law enforcement. You wouldn't happen to have a personal bias, would you?

And so I guess we are not going to find out what the police standoff was all about. (the original question in this thread)

Took the words right out of my mouth. The forum has turned into a bitch session.

Answer most likely lies in post #3.

But that makes no sense. Why would Gilford police be responding to infraction in Moultonboro?

I believe the woman drove or brought herself to the Gilford Police station... Not positive though...

Dan

Again, post 3. She went to GPD station. GPD did not go to her. GPD and Belknap County Spec. Ops sounds like a multi-agency / mutual aid special response team or "swat". A full time swat team is not likely needed at any of the little lakes region towns. They enter in a mutual aid agreement to come together when a response is needed. The mutual aid agreement gives a Guilford officer powers in Moultonborough and the other way around when a special response is needed.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

So I guess we have made the determination that #3 is the correct answer?

How could it not be? It's all there but I'm a just a police detective...;)

The report states that the man had threatened her with a handgun while she was handcuffed and chained to the floor. However she was able to convince him to allow her out of the handcuffs and to relinquish the firearm, giving her enough time to get out of the residence and into a vehicle to escape.

So, she was let out of the handcuffs (and I guess chains), got the firearm, and got into an available vehicle to escape. Then she drove to the police department and told her story.

This is not your typical kidnapping story...must be more to it than what the report states.

zI pulled the info out of PDF from post 3, zRusty is correct, there is a lot to this story but this tells a fair amount:

Russell J. Holliday
DOB: 11/10/59
had threatened her with a handgun while she was handcuffed and chained to the floor. The female victim told investigators that Holliday was known to her. The female victim said she was able to convince Holliday to allow her out of the handcuffs and to relinquish the firearm, giving her enough time to get out of the residence and into a vehicle to escape. The female victim was able to escape and come directly to the police department and was put into the Gilford Police Department “Safe Room”, not knowing if Holliday was pursuing her, until officers were able to respond. Officers seized a loaded .22 caliber handgun that the female victim had taken from Holliday when she fled. Officers from the Gilford Police Department along with members of the Belknap County Special Operations Group went to the residence where the victim was held and did not locate Holliday. Officers located evidence consistent with the victim’s allegations. Holliday was located a short time later in Moultonborough, and his surrender to police was negotiated via telephone without incident. Holliday was charged with Kidnapping, Criminal Threatening with a firearm, Reckless Conduct and Felon in possession of a dangerous weapon; all of which are Class B Felonies. Holliday is a
convicted felon and has a lengthy criminal history spanning several years and states.

Holliday was held on $100, 000 dollars cash bail until his arraignment on January 4,2016 at 08:30 at the 4th Circuit, District Division, Laconia Court. Upon being arraigned, Holliday’s bail was maintained at $100,000 dollars cash.

Yeah, Holliday has been a bad boy in other states as well. Not a great person to know.:laugh: