It looks like the cop-shop handled it to the OC'er's satisfaction, but there's something weird in the story nonetheless. The story says that the cops were aware of the 911 caller and that he is a "known SWATter," yet the audio of the 911 call had his name cut out, and is not found in the story anywhere. The story says the cops have bailed on trying to bring a criminal charge because they "can't prove criminal intent." They mention that right after mentioning that the unnamed caller is "thought to be mentally ill." Umm....what? They don't even know whether or not he's mentally ill and the mere suggestion that he is is enough to spare him criminal charges for multiple commissions of the same type of crime? Would Mr. Dickens' rights have been thusly protected if they thought him to be mentally ill when they pulled him over for a falsely reported crime? Would he have been on his way in 10 minutes with his weapon holstered and knife returned to his pocket if that were the "thought" of any of the officers who showed up in the six patrol units? I seriously doubt it.
However "professional" or nice the cops were to Mr. Dickens for those 10 minutes, they and the local DA are failing to protect his rights and safety, as well any other law abiding citizen who might fall victim to this unknown serial false reporter, and are derelict in their duties in that failing. Bob Owens of Bearing Arms should report that part of the story too, but instead, the whole story slobbered copious amounts of praise on the cops for their "professionalism" and didn't even mention that the DA or cops should be pursuing charges against the serial criminal. What's up with that?
Blues