This is a good example of why you can't rely on the police force for protecting yourself. Sad story.
....and it took the cops 40 minutes to arrive after she called 911 from her cell. She was killed before she was able to give her address. It really didn't make much difference, but why did it take them so long to get there? Drive time was a factor, but not that much.
For LEO types or people in the know in hurr....what are the processes that the police have to take to locate a person based on cell phone signals?
Nothing short of her or her BF physically holding a gun when her ex burst through the door would have stopped this from happening, but curiosity has got the best of me on this.
Her ex blew his head off just about in another friends drive way about a mile and a half from my folks place later that night.
Wow- a sad story.
I fully believe women know when they are with psycho.
"If you ever try to leave me, I will kill you..."
Unfortunately if that is the case and they leave the nut- these women should be armed.
even optimal police response times in suburban areas are 6-10 minutes.
It *generally* works like this (keep in mind some places have better systems than the one we had). Someone calls 911 and doesn't give an address. If it's a land line phone, the hard address shows up in dispatch's computer system. If it's a cell, they'll get a "hit" for an address in the general area. I had quite a few calls like that on my last department where they would dispatch me to a general area for a call, but the dispatcher would always be sure to tell me that the address was coming off a cell tower hit or ping. In some cases, the tower hit was quite a distance from where the person may have actually been. Other times the hit would show up as an intersection or general area, but you wouldn't have an actual address. Without an actual address, there isn't much you can do besides canvas the general area and hope someone flags you down. I'd get calls at intersections that had four or five apartment complexes at them, but no physical address or apartment number. If it was what was generally considered a "BS" call, we weren't going to go door to door on a few hundred apartments to try and find someone. The dispatcher would also try to call the cell number back, but many times the number would not work (like an old phone that only allowed 911 call outs) or would be turned off.
Best case scenario was that the person would get their 911 call out and then a neighbor or other person would call in a second complaint with a better address. Without that, we had no clue where to go and neither did the fire department, EMS, etc. They used to run an ad campaign that said something like "always know your location, 911 needs to know where to go". You aren't helping yourself if you dial 911 freaking out trying to get help and then have no clue where you are at. I know some circumstances prevent that sometimes, but oh well.
The other thing people need to realize is this - unless there are what are referred to as "exigent circumstances", we really couldn't do too much anyway. There have been many incidents in the news lately similar to the one you talk about. Someone calls 911, disconnects, and is then found murdered. Even if I show up at the right address, if I don't hear any sounds of struggling coming from inside, someone screaming "help he's trying to kill me", see something through a window, etc. - I can't just kick the door in (4th Amendment violation). There was a case out here about a month or so ago where this happened. Two cops show up, don't hear or see anything from the house/apartment, and then the woman's family finds her dead in the bathtub two days later. They're suing the cops now saying it was there fault, but it was completely normal the way it was handled. If you get a 911 hangup/disconnect, you don't just break into the address it came from - it doesn't work like that. Obviously if you hear or see signs of distress, that changes things and you can make entry. Either that or we would talk the fire department into making entry because their standards for forced entry were lower than ours.
Hope that answers your question somewhat
There are several states where if a person who is either charged with or convicted of domestic violence, the police are supposed to confiscate any registered guns they have. Obviously there are some clear limitations to this, the guns have to be registered, and in most states its voluntary. But the reason is that in cases where the abusee goes to the authorities, and the abuser owns a gun, homocide is astronomical. Without the gun the abusee has more time to escape. Its not clear that this is a similar situation, it seems like the ex had some serious other mental health stuff going on. Its heartbreaking. And it doesn't sound like the cops could have done anything even if they were at the door.
BLB were you close to her?
Sent from the bar at the restaurant at the end of the universe.
Na, I didn't know her very well. There were 91 people in my class, but we were both on opposite ends of the outcast spectrum. Her ex showed no propensity for violence prior to the event. I guess he just went all out. They had a teenage daughter as well. Her ex was my mother-in-law's Culligan man if that counts for anything.
I don't disagree with what he said, but it's odd that in one part of the country a sheriff may have been removed for similar comments that a handgun safety course instructor in another part of the country probably still teaches.
His statements were:
You don't carry unless you're willing to draw.
You don't draw unless you're willing to fire.
You don't fire unless you're ready to kill.
I don't disagree with any of this, and I seriously disagreed with the opposition this sheriff got for his programs. But then again, there is still a lot of backwards thinking in said county, and unfortunately it's seeped into local politics. Not my county, not much we could do about it.
When I took my concealed carry course, our class was 60/40 female/male. I had some excellent eye candy for company.