Monroe County Sheriff R. Lutz -1

[Scutter01]

I could kick myself for not having started recording as soon as he approached me!

You should already have had the recorder running. Most cops are going to get upset if you start fumbling in your pockets during a stop. Especially if they already know you have a gun. I recommend a pocket recorder that will hold 10 or more hours, or one that will just continue running and only save the last 30 or 60 minutes. Slip it in a pocket and leave it running all day.

I tried to... had to drive home first and then spew it out here on the forum as it was the first thing opened on my computer once I woke it up.... from now on, I will press record before they ever even begin to speak to me!

I guess I should have specified "write it down somewhere other than the internet".

 

[GBuck]

I do not believe sheriff deputies have badge numbers. Next time, ask for his unit number. It should be the first letter of his last name followed by 3 numbers (LXXX). At least that is the way it was in Marion county a few years ago.

It's never been that way in Marion County. Ever.

Edit to clarify:
IPD/IMPD use the a,b,d, etc plus three numbers to signify their "unit number" unless it's a k9 officer, and then it is k_ _. The Letter involved is not based on their last name. Marion County Sheriff's Office uses S_ _ _. (all of these numbers, of course, can be shortened with higher rank.

 

[japartridge]

You should already have had the recorder running. Most cops are going to get upset if you start fumbling in your pockets during a stop. Especially if they already know you have a gun. I recommend a pocket recorder that will hold 10 or more hours, or one that will just continue running and only save the last 30 or 60 minutes. Slip it in a pocket and leave it running all day.



I guess I should have specified "write it down somewhere other than the internet".

This is true, should have dumped it in word first... well, I think I've maintained a level head during the discussion... so if I have to go over the thread in a deposition, I should be OK. Plus I corrected my mistake and apologized to everyone, including the office.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I believe either Martinsville officers are not allowed to vote in uniform either. It's not a law but a rule of the department. Maybe he was upset that you are entitled to do more with guns than he could while off duty?

 

[emsdial911]

Oh, forgot to mention... I am not 100% sure on the laws regarding secretly recording a LEO, but I have read stories of people who have done this and been arrested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK3u-C__4T8

I know this is Maryland, but just thought I would warn you just in case. Does anyone know if this law exists in Indiana (about illegal wiretapping)?

Nope, not illegal in Indiana. Talked to 2 of mybrother-in-laws. One an Attorney and one a LEO both said that as long as oneperson that is being recorded knows it IS legal and will hold up in court. Thatone person would be you.

 

[mtgasten]

subscribed for future details, hope everything goes well

 

[printcraft]

subscribed for future details, hope everything goes well

This.

 

[jeremy]

I have a feeling this thread might become ammusing...

 

[blamecharles]

Sounds like my encounter at speedway, only my officer admitted to being wrong. Am I being detained? That will end it as soon as he replies no. If he says yes well.

I still haven't had a response from IMPD on my complaint even though I asked for one in the complaint. Might go do another one now.

 

[Bunnykid68]

tagged

 

[japartridge]

No more updates on this topic until later tonight... going to the Drive In to see the Avengers!


I have most of my complaint filled out, going to go over it a few more times... may even share the form, not sure yet.

take it easy all.

 

[Andy219]

Tag...

 

[Indy317]

Any time you have an incident, you should always write everything down as soon as possible, while it's still fresh in your memory. The longer you wait, the more chance there is to misremember details.

Not only that, one should make sure they tell the truth about the events, and stay away from words and phrases that question if the person really is recalling events correctly. The OP should have never come here and made a blatant false comment without reviewing the recording first. The false recollection clearly made it sound as if the deputy was making a threat, and other posters made comments based on that false recollection. If MCSD gets a copy of this, the only thing they can really investigate is what was recorded. The OP already admitted he had trouble recalling specifics of one part of the event, how can any non-recorded part of the incident be taken as factual?

Everyone should be aware of IC 35-44-2-2(d)(5)

(d) A person who:
(5) makes a complaint against a law enforcement officer to the state or municipality (as defined in IC 8-1-13-3) that employs the officer:
(A) alleging the officer engaged in misconduct while performing the officer's duties; and
(B) knowing the complaint to be false
commits false informing, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if it substantially hinders any law enforcement process or if it results in harm to an innocent person.

Making an honest mistake isn't a violation of the law, but it will likely sink your complaint, depending on the size and scope of the underlying issue. I recall one complaint where the person used way to many phrases like: "Sorta", "Kinda", "May have", "I think", "I believe." Either things happened or they didn't. State the facts, just the facts. And by all means, don't type or say anything about what happened if the incident is recorded and you haven't listened, multiple times if need be, to the recording. For example, when a person claims an officer cursed them, and a recording shows no such language was used, their credibility goes out the window. If you don't know, don't even make reference to it. Saying something like "I think the officer cursed me." when a recording proves otherwise will just make it look like you're trying to throw mud and hope that something sticks.

Plus I corrected my mistake and apologized to everyone, including the office.

Doesn't matter. You already had one wrong recollection of events. Why should anything you write about now that isn't on the recording be taken as 100% factual?

 

[Caleb]

Another reason to carry a voice recorder

 

[KG1]

Not only that, one should make sure they tell the truth about the events, and stay away from words and phrases that question if the person really is recalling events correctly. The OP should have never come here and made a blatant false comment without reviewing the recording first. The false recollection clearly made it sound as if the deputy was making a threat, and other posters made comments based on that false recollection. If MCSD gets a copy of this, the only thing they can really investigate is what was recorded. The OP already admitted he had trouble recalling specifics of one part of the event, how can any non-recorded part of the incident be taken as factual?

Everyone should be aware of IC 35-44-2-2(d)(5)

(d) A person who:
(5) makes a complaint against a law enforcement officer to the state or municipality (as defined in IC 8-1-13-3) that employs the officer:
(A) alleging the officer engaged in misconduct while performing the officer's duties; and
(B) knowing the complaint to be false
commits false informing, a Class B misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if it substantially hinders any law enforcement process or if it results in harm to an innocent person.

Making an honest mistake isn't a violation of the law, but it will likely sink your complaint, depending on the size and scope of the underlying issue. I recall one complaint where the person used way to many phrases like: "Sorta", "Kinda", "May have", "I think", "I believe." Either things happened or they didn't. State the facts, just the facts. And by all means, don't type or say anything about what happened if the incident is recorded and you haven't listened, multiple times if need be, to the recording. For example, when a person claims an officer cursed them, and a recording shows no such language was used, their credibility goes out the window. If you don't know, don't even make reference to it. Saying something like "I think the officer cursed me." when a recording proves otherwise will just make it look like you're trying to throw mud and hope that something sticks.



Doesn't matter. You already had one wrong recollection of events. Why should anything you write about now that isn't on the recording be taken as 100% factual?

This is exactly the point I was trying to make after I had read the edited version and gave my advice about making sure that the facts were straight before a complaint was filed.

If the OP has pause to question his recollection of how this incident went down then i'm sure his complaint will carry less weight.

I was also one of those that made a comment early on based on the content of the original post before it was edited.

 

[jon5212]

The fact remains that once the OP produced his LTCH all questions should have ended, the officer should have shut his pie hole and let the law abiding citizen go about his business.

 

[Destro]

lmao...all you whining is gonna do is get the deputy an atta boy from the sheriff

 

[williamnewman1]

I'd make the drive for that

YEEEESSSSSSSSSSS , please do

 

[japartridge]

Holy crap peeps, I made a mistake. either way the Officer tried to intimidate me into concealing my sidearm, and either knowingly misquoted the law, or was simply ignorant. Regardless he was argumentative, and rude.

Did I screw up by not start recording as soon as I should have? Yes.

Did I not verify my recording before posting? Yes.

Was the officer still in the wrong? YES!!!

 

[Loganwildman]

Now I gotta make sure I have an app on my iphone for audio recording and that I can find it quickly when needed.....