Setting a new standard for stupefied

By Doug Page | Wednesday, March 10, 2010, 04:13 PM

If he was trying to be inconspicuous, the driver of the Ford pickup was a failure.

It was 3 o’clock on a Friday morning when the Englewood officer spotted the pickup northbound on Main Street. What attracted the officer’s attention was the truck was driving on its right front rim. The tire was flat and shredded.

The officer quickly stopped the pickup, noting the driver pulled over the curb. When he approached the pickup, the 21-year-old driver appeared “stupefied”, and there was a strong odor of alcohol wafting from the truck cab.

“What’s going on?” the officer asked.

“My truck started shaking,” the driver responded.

Asked if he had an idea why his truck was shaking, the driver replied, “Vibrations.”

Taking into account the driver’s appearance, slurred and thick speech, uncoordinated movements and brilliant response, the officer concluded the driver “was one of the most obviously intoxicated drivers I had witnessed in 18 years as a police officer.”

When asked if he had been imbibing, the driver giggled and allowed he’d had five or six beers.

At the conclusion of the field sobriety tests, the officer said, “You’re way too drunk to be driving.” To which the driver responded with a laugh, “We both know that, don’t we?”

The driver was cited for drunken driving and taken to the county lockup.

Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment More: Cop reports we love

No, we are not as dumb as you are

By Doug Page | Tuesday, March 2, 2010, 02:22 PM

We do not often read about master criminals in police reports. Master criminals don’t often get caught.

Instead, we are treated to people who believe they are the rocket scientists of the criminal world.

Case in point is the woman stopped for speeding by Englewood police in the dark hours of a Wednesday morning. She told the officer she did not have her drivers license with her, but offered the first five digits of her Social Security number, claiming she could not remember her last four digits — something about getting those numbers confused with her daughter’s Social Security number. She gave a name and birth date.

Asked where she was coming from, she named a nearby grocery store and pointed to the back seat filled with grocery bags — and two open cans of beer. (Brilliant!) Asked if she had been drinking, the woman said absolutely not. (Perhaps she was letting the beer breathe on the drive home so she could decant and quaff the rare vintage on arrival).

The officer returned to his cruiser and checked his computer using the information given by the woman. (Note to master criminals: police cars now come equipped with computers. Thought you might be interested.) The officer could find no exact match. So he pulled up the drivers license photo for the name the woman had given him. (Yes, master criminal, computers can be used to view pictures). Not the same woman.

The officer returned to the woman’s vehicle and asked about a black purse nestled amongst the grocery bags in the back seat. Was that her’s? No, she responded, it belongs to the vehicle owner’s girlfriend and, no, she did not know the girlfriend’s name. (Right).

Long story short, officer asks for the purse, and discovers an ID for one person and a checkbook for another. The woman driver says she has no idea who those people are. The officer puts her in the back seat of his cruiser and goes to work on the computer and contacts dispatch. Within minutes, the ID is traced to a woman who was assaulted and robbed of her purse several days earlier.

Tracing the credit cards from the stolen purse, the officer discovers they’ve been used at several big box retailers. A search of the vehicle finds another check book in another name and several receipts from department stores. Checking the receipts against the check books, the officer concludes the items purchased were paid for by checks from both check books.

The woman driver maintains it’s not her purse though she is unable to explain why the business card of her probation officer is found in the purse.

Finally the woman admits she’s been lying all along. (I’m shocked, shocked I say). A quick records search shows the woman has no drivers license but quite a record for forgery and drug offenses.

She was taken to the county lockup on suspicion of forgery, receiving stolen property and obstructing official business.

I suppose if you’re staring at a return trip to the state pen, you’ll try any lie no matter how obvious. But these would make a politician blush.

Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment More: Cop reports we love

Perhaps he didn’t know there were witnesses

By Doug Page | Tuesday, February 23, 2010, 02:56 PM

Englewood police were sent to one of the city’s busier intersections just after dark on a Tuesday evening. There in the right-turn lane they found a young woman in tears, standing next to her car.

“He tried to kill me,” she told officers. According to the woman, another car had been tailgating her for several blocks, trying to pass her. At the red light, she said, the driver of the following vehicle got out of his car and starting pushing on her car. She told police she got out of her car to get his license number and call police. It was then, she said, the man hit her several times in the head with his fist.

The man return to his car, she said, and ran into her with his vehicles.

Two witnesses confirmed the woman’s story, gave police the license plate of the man’s car and directed them to a nearby parking lot where they saw the car pull in. A medic was called to treat the woman’s apparent minor injuries. The two witnesses said the woman did not appear to have provoked the attack in any manner.

While one set of officers were questioning the woman, three other officers went looking for the other driver. They found the car where witnesses said it might be and walked into the neighboring business to ask if anyone had been driving the vehicle.

A gentleman stepped forward and told officers: “It was me. I know what this is about.” He was asked to step outside to tell his side of the story.

According to the gentleman, he was following a vehicle that was “brake-checking” him. (No, I don’t know what that means, but I am sure a gentle reader will be able to lift my veil of ignorance.) The gentleman also said the vehicle he was following tried several times tried to force him into on-coming traffic.

When stopped at the red light, the gentleman said he got out of his car and slapped the spoiler on the back of the car in front of him, asking the driver — who he said was male — what he thought he was doing. (Police and witnesses disagree with the gentleman on this point. The driver was clearly female. Go figure).

The gentleman went on to say, the driver got out of his (her) vehicle, called the gentleman a nasty name and warned him “to get back in his car before he (she) called his (her) homies to take care of him.” The gentleman then said “the guy (gal) made an aggressive fighting lunge toward him” causing the gentleman to return to his car and drive off.

Review of the traffic camera footage at the intersection showed the woman driver “pushed aside” by the gentleman’s vehicle. The alleged assault did not occur within the area where the camera was aimed, according to police.

The gentleman was arrested on suspicion of felonious assault and taken to the county lockup. Prosecutors approved the charge and the matter was sent directly to the grand jury, which has yet to hear the case.

However, it did occur within the sight of the two witnesses. Perhaps the gentleman was unaware there were two witnesses to back up the woman’s story.

Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment More: Cop reports we love