Monday, November 12, 2012
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Friday, September 14, 2012
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
PPD Sgt Fox Retires
Quote from NewsandSentinel.comJuly 25, 2010
By JODY MURPHY - NewsandSentinel.com
PARKERSBURG -More than three decades as a city police officer is long enough for Lt. George Fox. The longtime officer will take off his badge for the last time Monday, ending a 38-year career with the city, 33 as a police officer.
READ NewsandSentinel.com ARTICLE
Monday, July 2, 2012
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Monday, May 21, 2012
Parkersburg PD "Dog Poop Investigation"
by Staff Writer
PARKERSBURG, WV - This video clip is from May 2008. Having problems with a dog we named
"Scratch" cause it was always scratching,pooping and no cleanup, and
barking continually and trying to bite us through the fence during lawn-work. We put a security camera up and noticed the dog's owner
continually peeping in our windows. These are the same verbally
abusive,violent morons that are harassing the homeowner in the
Parkersburg City Police Cease and Desist video where they are slandering
and using profanity on the homeowner. In this segment he says,"Don the
camera is pointed right here"-as he looks into the window. Shortly
after this, the peeping tom calls Parkersburg Police Dept. and says the
security camera is videoing a child in his bedroom and officer Ben Ward
searches the mans house and tells the owner to remove the camera
immediately or be arrested. A Federal judge later determined Ward
had "no probable cause "to search the house in regard to a security
camera inside a house. Ward has to prove that the owner voluntarily
consented to let him search yet the homeowner complained to numerous
agencies including the PPD that Ward used threats and lies to enter the
house.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Parkersburg Police Officer sues McDonalds
PARKERSBURG, WV - Parkersburg Police Department, Officer Matthew Board, sues local McDonalds alleging there was blood on his french fries. CLICK HERE FOR ENTIRE STORY
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Friday, April 6, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
The Officer Santa Clause Incident Summary Judgment
by Greg Miller - Investigative Reporter
PARKERSBURG, WV - A federal lawsuit was filed against Ben Ward of the Parkersburg, WV Police Department and other officials. The Plaintiff allege an officer went to the Plaintiff's home, knocked and announced himself as "Santa Clause". According to an investigation conducted by the Police Complaint Center, the Officer Ben Ward, aka Santa Clause, without permission and search warrant entered into Mr. Libert's dwelling to search the home. Ward ordered Libert to take down a surveillance camera used as a security device to protect Libert's home.
The Federal Court issued a Summary Judgment of the law suit in favor of Parkersburg Police Department.
Here are the facts that have been observed by a legal professional concerning issues with the judge's Summary report:
The Federal Court issued a Summary Judgment of the law suit in favor of Parkersburg Police Department.
Here are the facts that have been observed by a legal professional concerning issues with the judge's Summary report:
- Opening the door alone is not "permitting" the police officer to enter. The home occupant must ask the officer to come in but he reserves the right to limit the area the officer can occupy.
- If there was a consent to search, the occupant can limit the scope of the search or revoke the search at anytime.
- The search was conduct through infliction of duress that can lead up to the level of coercion.
- The phrase "the plaintiff failed showed a genuine issue" is a subjective statement.
- Having a camera does not rice to the level of an "emergency situation", an emergency situation is something that could be of intimidate harm to someone or something.
- No consent was given to the search. Officer Ward did not request consent, rather, used is position to "demand" a search.
- The plaintiff can only act under the knowledge of what a reasonable person would believe concerning his Constitutional rights and compliance with governmental authorities.
- In any case, if an altercation would occur at the plaintiff's home/property, the Castle Doctrine would be a strong defense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)