BG Carr's criminal record - are you satisfied with the explanation?

[RiverAux]

CAP NHQ has put out a release giving an explanation for our new National Vice Commander's past criminal record that has been a much discussed topic on some other web sites.  Since the issue is now officially in the open, I think it appropriate to discuss here:

The only relevant part of the release, which is basically a biographical article, is this:

Carr's record also includes conviction for a misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct, stemming from a June 1995 altercation with his teenage daughter. Carr served one day in jail and was placed in a "non-reporting status" related to one year of probation.  He also paid a $75 fine. This incident helped, Carr said, "turn his daughter's life around." 

http://www.capvolunteernow.com/news.cfm/carr_national_vice_commander_sets_record_straight_on_misdemeanor?show=news&newsID=8921

[Flying Pig]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

[Al Sayre]

I'm OK with the explanation of the incident.  What bothers me is the way it came to light after the election, and the failure to immediately address it by NHQ.  Yes, I understand it is personal and embarrassing, but the aftermath of the disclosure (or non-disclosure) was worse.  I'm sure we all did some stupid things years ago, but the best thing to do in a situation like this is to address it immediately and truthfully.

[RiverAux]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release. 

[SJFedor]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release.

Doubtful, as you need a CD clearance to be a Wing/Region Commander.

[BradM]

Why is he wearing metal Colonel's insignia? Was that allowed a few years back instead of the gray epaulets? And why does he have the CAP collar insignia instead of the U.S. ones? I'm just curious because I'm new.

[jimmydeanno]

The picture is him in the double-breasted corporate service uniform, prior to the latest phase-out changes.

[lordmonar]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release.

Doubtful, as you need a CD clearance to be a Wing/Region Commander.

I don't think that is true. 

You do have to submit a new finger print card and get a background check...but a Misdemeanor conviction for disorderly conduct is not in of itself a bar for membership or corporate officer appointment.

[MSG Mac]

I think the fact that he runs a Day Care center indicates that the State of Ohio and the local authorities do not consider him a danger to youth.

[Major Lord]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

"Serving" a day in Jail is a totally different matter than being booked and held in jail pending arraignment. This ordinarily means that he was actually sentenced to jail time, and released with his time in booking counting as punitive, with the remainder of the sentence presumably waived. You don't get sentenced to jail for a meaningless verbal altercation with a teenager. ( or running a stop sign, an infraction, not a misdemeanor or felony) He was probably booked because the officers involved did not think a potential domestic violence case should cited and released (849 B'd) BS meter twitching.......I lost the initial cite, but if someone has it I could order a court runner to go pull copies of the file if its not too old.

Major Lord

[lordmonar]

On the subject of "am I satisfied"....I think it is a good thing.  It is now out there and anyone who cares can ask for more information and/or make a complaint.

Should it have been announced before the elections?   As far as I know it was.  It happened before he was appoint to wing command and his appointment to region.  I would assume that it came up in the background check at that time and signed off by leadership.

No real need in my mind to remind everyone that he had this bobble.

I got a couple of tickets in my life.....do I have to disclose them every time I stand for a new staff position?

This is just grist for the mill of anyone who has an axe to grind with the National Commander.

[RADIOMAN015]

I'm OK with the explanation of the incident.  What bothers me is the way it came to light after the election, and the failure to immediately address it by NHQ.  Yes, I understand it is personal and embarrassing, but the aftermath of the disclosure (or non-disclosure) was worse.  I'm sure we all did some stupid things years ago, but the best thing to do in a situation like this is to address it immediately and truthfully.

This only involved his family members and no one else.  Frankly it's nobody's business.  He was on probation for a year (which most lawyers with a way ward teenager would try to get reduced to less time due to the issue with the kid pulling the strings on the dad).   Is part of the qualification package a list of questions that ask if one was ever arrested and convicted and what was the disposition?

Frankly  he served very well in CAP. for 15 years without incident.  Lets press on, BUT perhaps  a better screening questionaire is needed?
RM

[Major Lord]

Your are probably right, but its not a problem..... until its a problem. It would have been good to have pre-disclosed, but whats the use in our knowing? We effectively don't have any standing either way. If on the other hand, if a negative  situation involving a cadet ever arises, do you think that a reasonable person might ask if there had been cause to believe there was a potential problem? The official explanations sounds very much like " She got a good beating and it straightened her right out". Not the very best message to justify a criminal conviction.

Major Lord

[RiverAux]

This only involved his family members and no one else.  Frankly it's nobody's business. 

Well, that isn't a general principle that I would stand one.  One can do an awful lot to family members that most certainly is the business of others.  And once the police are involved it is definetely no longer a family matter no matter how minor.

[Flying Pig]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

"Serving" a day in Jail is a totally different matter than being booked and held in jail pending arraignment. This ordinarily means that he was actually sentenced to jail time, and released with his time in booking counting as punitive, with the remainder of the sentence presumably waived. You don't get sentenced to jail for a meaningless verbal altercation with a teenager. ( or running a stop sign, an infraction, not a misdemeanor or felony) He was probably booked because the officers involved did not think a potential domestic violence case should cited and released (849 B'd) BS meter twitching.......I lost the initial cite, but if someone has it I could order a court runner to go pull copies of the file if its not too old.

Major Lord

We are talking about the media.  Assuming they got it straight.  Serving vs spent a day in jail. If he got fined, he very well could have "served" one day in jail.
Very often people who are sentenced to one day actually only spend a couple hours in jail.  It not worth the liabilty to have them stick around. Book them in, fingerprint, print and get them out and then release them. Again, I am in CA, and this happened in OH.

However, in CA you dont cite and release via PC849.  PC849 is releasing with no pending charges.  Either you determine the crime did not occur, or in the case of a drunk or under the influence when you are just letting them sleep it off and you have no interest in forwarding it on to the DA.
You cite / release via PC853.6.  And being in an argument/altercation with your daughter is not a domestic violence.

[SJFedor]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release.

Doubtful, as you need a CD clearance to be a Wing/Region Commander.

I don't think that is true. 

You do have to submit a new finger print card and get a background check...but a Misdemeanor conviction for disorderly conduct is not in of itself a bar for membership or corporate officer appointment.

What I heard was that, since they're the corporate officer at the Wing/Region level, and have oversight and control of the CD program in their wing, they needed it. Idk.

[Major Lord]

Robert, you are right on the code, but my guess is that they did not originally book the guy on 415, 647, etc, and went with a higher charge, which was probably downgraded. Domestic violence allegations are the fastest way to jail around. Unless he acted out for the arresting officers, or there was some allegation of battery, I think its unlikely that they would have booked him for no real reason. Again, just speculation, but it could be easily cleared up by pulling the case record. I am not taking the position that he did anything wrong at all, but I am skeptical of all media, theirs and ours! If someone can point me to the jurisdiction, I will see if there is still a case file ( Misdemeanor files get purged, so it may be gone for good) FYI, I was once fined for 415, but I saw the error in my wicked rock and roll teenage lifestyle......

Major Lord

[EMT-83]

Kind of reminds me of a line from the movie The American President. The media runs a story about President Shepherd's girlfriend being at an anti-apartheid rally where an American flag was burned:

"Let me see if I got this. The third story on the news tonight was that someone I didn't know thirteen years ago when I wasn't president participated in a demonstration where no laws were being broken in protest of something that so many people were against, it doesn't exist anymore. Just out of curiosity, what was the fourth story?"

Nothing to see here folks, move on.

[Eclipse]

"I have drunk poison while he utter'd it."

[JohnKachenmeister]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

"Serving" a day in Jail is a totally different matter than being booked and held in jail pending arraignment. This ordinarily means that he was actually sentenced to jail time, and released with his time in booking counting as punitive, with the remainder of the sentence presumably waived. You don't get sentenced to jail for a meaningless verbal altercation with a teenager. ( or running a stop sign, an infraction, not a misdemeanor or felony) He was probably booked because the officers involved did not think a potential domestic violence case should cited and released (849 B'd) BS meter twitching.......I lost the initial cite, but if someone has it I could order a court runner to go pull copies of the file if its not too old.

Major Lord

Well... not really.  He could have been booked, held for several hours, plead No Contest in court and been sentenced to "Time served" which would be 1 day.

[flyboy53]

I would be more concerned about the agenda of the drum beater who brought the issue to light.

We are only hearing part of the issue and it would be improper to judge the General, especially when the iincident seemed to have no effect on his Security Forces career....which, by the way, would have been the harsher critic of his actions. Also, it obviously had no impact on his CPPT status.

Unless you been in those situations, as I have with a son with a difficult to manage mental illness, there is no room to find fault. Believe me when I tell you it's a long journey and participation in something like the CAP can be very theraputic.

[JeffDG]

Unless you been in those situations, as I have with a son with a difficult to manage mental illness, there is no room to find fault. Believe me when I tell you it's a long journey and participation in something like the CAP can be very theraputic.

I can imagine it can be therapeutic...my daughter's only 7, so no issues yet thank God!, but I can see that being around cadets who have voluntarily accepted a modicum of discipline into their lives could be very therapeutic after dealing with a troubled teen all the time.

[RiverAux]

We are only hearing part of the issue and it would be improper to judge the General, especially when the iincident seemed to have no effect on his Security Forces career....which, by the way, would have been the harsher critic of his actions. Also, it obviously had no impact on his CPPT status.

Although the story doesn't have his career timeline, assuming he went into the military after high school he probably would have already been retired when this incident occurred in 1995.  So, wouldn't have had any impact on his military career. 

[Flying Pig]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

"Serving" a day in Jail is a totally different matter than being booked and held in jail pending arraignment. This ordinarily means that he was actually sentenced to jail time, and released with his time in booking counting as punitive, with the remainder of the sentence presumably waived. You don't get sentenced to jail for a meaningless verbal altercation with a teenager. ( or running a stop sign, an infraction, not a misdemeanor or felony) He was probably booked because the officers involved did not think a potential domestic violence case should cited and released (849 B'd) BS meter twitching.......I lost the initial cite, but if someone has it I could order a court runner to go pull copies of the file if its not too old.

Major Lord

Well... not really.  He could have been booked, held for several hours, plead No Contest in court and been sentenced to "Time served" which would be 1 day.

Yeah...very true

[Johnny Yuma]

Ok, color me out of the loop, but just how/why did this come to light, another Ray Hayden witch hunt?

You wouldn't believe what constitutes Domestic violence these days. In some areas a 911 call for a family fight will result in someone going to jail as a matter of policy even if no one was touched. An ex-girlfriend whom you haven't seen in 30 years can rub her arm red, call the law and tell the cops you hit her. In many/most jurisdictions because a) you dated her and b) she has a red mark you're going to jail.

The pendulum has swung waaaaay too far the other way in regard to Domestic Violence and is too easy for people to use it against others as a weapon.

Axe to grind? Yepper. Falsely accused of 2 domestic battery charges on Christmas Day 2002. It took a year to get charges dismissed (without prejudice), another 2 years for statute of limitations to run out, several thousand dollars in legal expenses, untold days off unpaid dealing with the court system and a 3 inch file folder full of police reports where my "victims" vandalized my property, threatened to kill my wife (DV applies to anyone who's ever lived with you, not just wife and kids, even if it was 70 years ago) and other unpleasantness reported to my local gendarmes.

The only thing I can fault the man for is  not fighting the charges to the end, even if it was to make everything go away. In my case, the DA offered all sorts of deals that I turned down and demanded a trial, which never happened as they dropped charges nearly a year after the incident.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Johnny is right.  DV charges are the Feminists' nuclear option.  Yes, these laws are horribly and unjustly abused.  90 percent (my estimate, based on 25 years as a street cop) of all DV cases brought to court are either false or trivial.

But, since this happened in Ohio, I hasten to point out that under Ohio law co-habitation must have been within 1 year to qualify as DV, unless the parties are related.  (Which would have been the case in this allegation).

Frankly, and (full disclosure) I know BG Carr personally, I find the explantion credible.  This is a non-starter.

[JeffDG]

Sounds like the classic no good answer question "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

To me, this all sounds like someone saying "GOTCHA!" when they're jealous of success.  Key word I saw was "misdemeanor".

Can't remember where I saw this, but with the number of laws currently on the books, the average person commits 3 felonies a day without ever being aware that they've broken the law.

[Johnny Yuma]

Johnny is right.  DV charges are the Feminists' nuclear option.  Yes, these laws are horribly and unjustly abused.  90 percent (my estimate, based on 25 years as a street cop) of all DV cases brought to court are either false or trivial.

But, since this happened in Ohio, I hasten to point out that under Ohio law co-habitation must have been within 1 year to qualify as DV, unless the parties are related.  (Which would have been the case in this allegation).

Frankly, and (full disclosure) I know BG Carr personally, I find the explantion credible.  This is a non-starter.

Thanks Kach!

Kansas law makes it a domestic charge if the victim at any point in their life was cohabitated with the accused or had a family or romantic relationship. It's an incredibly big net.

[a2capt]

I find the explantion credible.  This is a non-starter.

Yeah, it's called a distraction. Someone else threw a distraction.. probably because they wanted the spot. ;-)

[GMat]

Obviously, National Headquarters has known for quite some time about this long-past situation that involved BG Carr. 

Let's all consider the discredited, non-member source that keeps masterfully "stirring the pot" on CAP leadership.  He most certainly has an axe to grind.  And that axe is titled: Reinstatement to Active Member Status, which went out the door with BG Carr's election.

[Flying Pig]

Keep in mind, this issue we are discussing  has absolutely NOTHING to do with domestic violence.

[flyboy53]

Keep in mind, this issue we are discussing  has absolutely NOTHING to do with domestic violence.

Wrong. It is every part of domestic violence, whether it be a child or a spouse. The issue is that it was only a misdeameanor. Therefore, one can assume several things; for example the lack of severity of the incident or the fact that the other party is partially responsible for the outcome.

The further issue is that charges such as this can be waiverable because different states have different levels of charges up to a felony for what may only be a misdemeanor in one jurisdicition.

An issue such as this is brought to everyone's attention early by NHQ to end speculation. I'm satisified. I've met the man, and have a great deal of respect for him. Keep in mind that through this dialog, we're on the fringe of making it a personal attack because it involves his family.

Besides, why now? It didn't seem to have a bearing on him as a wing commander or region commander. Therefore, it's noticed and brought to light by a drum beater who has an agenda that is ultimately distructive to the organization. So, can  we just drop this stuff.

[JeffDG]

The further issue is that charges such as this can be waiverable because different states have different levels of charges up to a felony for what may only be a misdemeanor in one jurisdicition.

I too am fully satisfied...I only have a quibble with your terminology...it's not waiverable, it doesn't require a waiver, only felonies require waivers.

[MSG Mac]

Haven't we beaten this horse to death yet???

[FlyTiger77]

Haven't we beaten this horse to death yet???

No horse is too dead to beat!

[HGjunkie]

[Flying Pig]

Keep in mind, this issue we are discussing  has absolutely NOTHING to do with domestic violence.

Wrong. It is every part of domestic violence, whether it be a child or a spouse. The issue is that it was only a misdeameanor. Therefore, one can assume several things; for example the lack of severity of the incident or the fact that the other party is partially responsible for the outcome.

The further issue is that charges such as this can be waiverable because different states have different levels of charges up to a felony for what may only be a misdemeanor in one jurisdicition.

An issue such as this is brought to everyone's attention early by NHQ to end speculation. I'm satisified. I've met the man, and have a great deal of respect for him. Keep in mind that through this dialog, we're on the fringe of making it a personal attack because it involves his family.

Besides, why now? It didn't seem to have a bearing on him as a wing commander or region commander. Therefore, it's noticed and brought to light by a drum beater who has an agenda that is ultimately distructive to the organization. So, can  we just drop this stuff.

Oh, here we go again, the cop is wrong I guess. 

No, your 100% wrong.  You dont know what your talking about.  It may be your personal definition, but not a legal one.  Again, the CAP legal experts have me shaking my head.  An altercation with your daughter IS NOT domestic violence.  Domestic violence is between a spouse, fiance, domestic partner or someone you have previously been romantically involved in.  Dont put your own view on a legal term that has a specific definition. 
We probably shouldnt spread that he was arrested or involved in a DV because CAPers dont know what they are talking about.

[bosshawk]

Where is Ned in this discussion: he is both a lawyer and a judge?  He could likely put an end to this endless(?) discussion. 

Let me ask another question of you who would perpetuate this discussion: are you one who lives in a glass house and throws stones?

[jimmydeanno]

^It might not be in his best interest to comment publicly about the situation, since he is a member of the BoG.  The explanation has been made, which was probably overkill in the first place.  The man has served CAP honorably for the past many years, already served in leadership positions, successfully, and has been vetted before.

I'm just surprised that we are still giving attention to that psycho nut job conspiracy theorist. 

[cap235629]

Keep in mind, this issue we are discussing  has absolutely NOTHING to do with domestic violence.

Wrong. It is every part of domestic violence, whether it be a child or a spouse. The issue is that it was only a misdeameanor. Therefore, one can assume several things; for example the lack of severity of the incident or the fact that the other party is partially responsible for the outcome.

The further issue is that charges such as this can be waiverable because different states have different levels of charges up to a felony for what may only be a misdemeanor in one jurisdicition.

An issue such as this is brought to everyone's attention early by NHQ to end speculation. I'm satisified. I've met the man, and have a great deal of respect for him. Keep in mind that through this dialog, we're on the fringe of making it a personal attack because it involves his family.

Besides, why now? It didn't seem to have a bearing on him as a wing commander or region commander. Therefore, it's noticed and brought to light by a drum beater who has an agenda that is ultimately distructive to the organization. So, can  we just drop this stuff.

Oh, here we go again, the cop is wrong I guess. 

No, your 100% wrong.  You dont know what your talking about.  It may be your personal definition, but not a legal one.  Again, the CAP legal experts have me shaking my head.  An altercation with your daughter IS NOT domestic violence.  Domestic violence is between a spouse, fiance, domestic partner or someone you have previously been romantically involved in.  Dont put your own view on a legal term that has a specific definition. 
We probably shouldnt spread that he was arrested or involved in a DV because CAPers dont know what they are talking about.

Well here it is considered Domestic Violence if the officer has probable cause to believe violence or threat of violence was used and:

You are now or once were married
You are now or once were related by blood OR Marriage.
You are now or once were cohabitating
You are now or once were in a substantial dating relationship

Though the interpretation can be vaguely applied, here in Arkansas most cops will pin a medal on you if you have to "exert control" on your child.  If a school principal can beat a child on the buttocks with a paddle (as they can in Arkansas) it seems rather silly for you to get arrested for smacking the wise@ss out of your own child.

YMMV

[HGjunkie]

Oh, corporal punishment... reminds me of Alabama. *shudders*

[Major Lord]

In California, where the crime (allegedly) occurred, the term "Domestic Violence" appears in the penal code only in so far as it applies to a cohabitant (spouse, girl/boy friend, Ex-anything, etc) so crimes against children are not technically DM. However, the Legislature refers to the full gamut of laws protecting family members as "Domestic Violence Laws" even though the penal statutes only apply to wife beaters, etc. (unless you are in a sexual relationship and sharing rent with your children, note: see "Alabama")

The Common Law on occasion defines  things differently  than penal law. To impeach a President for instance, requires crimes or "misdemeanors" . In Kalifornia, this would mean a crime punishable by up to one year in Jail and/or a fine. In the Common Law, a "Misdemeanor" is an wrong action, and is not a crime. Most legal definitions include violence against one's own resident children as "Domestic Violence" :

domestic violence
n. the continuing crime and problem of the physical beating of a wife, girlfriend or children, usually by the woman's male partner (although it can also be female violence against a male). It is now recognized as an antisocial mental illness. Sometimes a woman's dependence, low self-esteem and fear of leaving cause her to endure this conduct or fail to protect a child. Prosecutors and police often face the problem that a battered woman will not press charges or testify due to fear, intimidation and misplaced "love." Increasingly domestic violence is attracting the sympathetic attention of law enforcement, the courts and community services, including shelters and protection for those in danger.
See also: aggravated assault  assault and battery
[/i]

If it makes someone feel better to be called a "Child Abuser" ( 273. D PC) I can live with that,  as opposed to being merely a domestic assailant (273.5 PC)

Since no one here actually knows the facts of the case, its presumptuous for us to call anyone anything, we just know that our guy was sentenced  for a misdemeanor.

The larger question is not whether the crime in question should be a disqualification from  holding an important office at NHQ, but whether the membership has full confidence that NHQ acts prudently in all cases and that all their decisions are beyond reproach. I think the answers to these questions are self-evident.

Major Lord

[bosshawk]

I knew that there was something that I liked about Arkansas.  We certainly don't have it in CA.

[flyboy53]

Keep in mind, this issue we are discussing  has absolutely NOTHING to do with domestic violence.

Wrong. It is every part of domestic violence, whether it be a child or a spouse. The issue is that it was only a misdeameanor. Therefore, one can assume several things; for example the lack of severity of the incident or the fact that the other party is partially responsible for the outcome.

The further issue is that charges such as this can be waiverable because different states have different levels of charges up to a felony for what may only be a misdemeanor in one jurisdicition.

An issue such as this is brought to everyone's attention early by NHQ to end speculation. I'm satisified. I've met the man, and have a great deal of respect for him. Keep in mind that through this dialog, we're on the fringe of making it a personal attack because it involves his family.

Besides, why now? It didn't seem to have a bearing on him as a wing commander or region commander. Therefore, it's noticed and brought to light by a drum beater who has an agenda that is ultimately distructive to the organization. So, can  we just drop this stuff.

Oh, here we go again, the cop is wrong I guess. 

No, your 100% wrong.  You dont know what your talking about.  It may be your personal definition, but not a legal one.  Again, the CAP legal experts have me shaking my head.  An altercation with your daughter IS NOT domestic violence.  Domestic violence is between a spouse, fiance, domestic partner or someone you have previously been romantically involved in.  Dont put your own view on a legal term that has a specific definition. 
We probably shouldnt spread that he was arrested or involved in a DV because CAPers dont know what they are talking about.

No you're wrong. I do know what I'm talking about. In NYS such an incident is classified as domestic violence, expecially if it is the child that is the perpetrator. If you don't believe me, than I will gladly switch places with you because the outcome for my family has been a three-year ordeal in learning to live with a child classified as bipolar I.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I thought this occured in Ohio.

In Ohio a daughter is considered a "Family member" and an assault on such a person is classified as Domestic Violence

While comparison of state laws is interesting, especially to a law geek like me, the discussion has no bearing on the fitness of BG Carr.  As I have said before, I respect BG Carr as an officer, and I think a good choice was made.

[flyboy53]

I thought this occured in Ohio.

In Ohio a daughter is considered a "Family member" and an assault on such a person is classified as Domestic Violence

While comparison of state laws is interesting, especially to a law geek like me, the discussion has no bearing on the fitness of BG Carr.  As I have said before, I respect BG Carr as an officer, and I think a good choice was made.

I couldn't agree with you more. Nuff said. Let's all drop this subject.

[Krapenhoeffer]

I've met the guy. He's pretty decent, and he made a fine Region Commander.

Like I said, it obviously wasn't that bad, or else he wouldn't be in CAP right now. Seriously, it was his teenage daughter. They have a tendency to misbehave sometimes. And yes, that is an understatement.

[Flying Pig]

Keep in mind, this issue we are discussing  has absolutely NOTHING to do with domestic violence.

Wrong. It is every part of domestic violence, whether it be a child or a spouse. The issue is that it was only a misdeameanor. Therefore, one can assume several things; for example the lack of severity of the incident or the fact that the other party is partially responsible for the outcome.

The further issue is that charges such as this can be waiverable because different states have different levels of charges up to a felony for what may only be a misdemeanor in one jurisdicition.

An issue such as this is brought to everyone's attention early by NHQ to end speculation. I'm satisified. I've met the man, and have a great deal of respect for him. Keep in mind that through this dialog, we're on the fringe of making it a personal attack because it involves his family.

Besides, why now? It didn't seem to have a bearing on him as a wing commander or region commander. Therefore, it's noticed and brought to light by a drum beater who has an agenda that is ultimately distructive to the organization. So, can  we just drop this stuff.

Oh, here we go again, the cop is wrong I guess. 

No, your 100% wrong.  You dont know what your talking about.  It may be your personal definition, but not a legal one.  Again, the CAP legal experts have me shaking my head.  An altercation with your daughter IS NOT domestic violence.  Domestic violence is between a spouse, fiance, domestic partner or someone you have previously been romantically involved in.  Dont put your own view on a legal term that has a specific definition. 
We probably shouldnt spread that he was arrested or involved in a DV because CAPers dont know what they are talking about.

No you're wrong. I do know what I'm talking about. In NYS such an incident is classified as domestic violence, expecially if it is the child that is the perpetrator. If you don't believe me, than I will gladly switch places with you because the outcome for my family has been a three-year ordeal in learning to live with a child classified as bipolar I.

Then in all fairness, you and I are making arguments on apples vs oranges.  In NYS its DV.  In CA it not, in OH, who knows.

Major Lord.

Where did you get that definition?  Ive never seen it before.  Definitely not a legal definition for CA.  Looks like something out of an article.  But not the Penal Code

[JeffDG]

Why, exactly, does it matter if it is DV or not?  Is the offense somehow magically more serious if I live with the person...is it OK for me to go punch someone in the nose off the street, but if I do that to my brother, it's the end of civilization as we know it.

Regardless of everything else, the magic word is misdemeanor.

[lordmonar]

Why, exactly, does it matter if it is DV or not?  Is the offense somehow magically more serious if I live with the person...is it OK for me to go punch someone in the nose off the street, but if I do that to my brother, it's the end of civilization as we know it.

Regardless of everything else, the magic word is misdemeanor.

Misdemeanor.....disorderly conduct.  Does not matter what the orginal charge was....nor how/why the change was changed.  He was convicted, sentanced and served his time/paid his fine for disorderly conduct.

Dispite how some muckrakers want to spin it......that is all it is.  Let's move on.

[Flying Pig]

By JeffDG
Why, exactly, does it matter if it is DV or not?  Is the offense somehow magically more serious if I live with the person...is it OK for me to go punch someone in the nose off the street, but if I do that to my brother, it's the end of civilization as we know it.

Regardless of everything else, the magic word is misdemeanor.

Because family related / in the home violence is usually far worse and doesnt end.  Or in many cases I have been to, end in one of the two killing the other.
The law has recognized that the abuse continues vs just getting in a fight on the street and gonig your separate ways.  In the home, you cant escape your attacker.
I have been to Domestics and child abuse calls that far exceed a fight on the street, and after investigating you learn that it has been going on for years.  Often times, a fight on the street is just the fight you are dealing with.  DVs and child abuse, you usually walk away with a list of charges spanning beyond just the abuse and the list usually covers multiple acts over a long period of time.

In CA, if you punch your brother in the nose, its not DV.  With hitting your bro, Its treated no different than if you were strangers.  Your relationship doesnt have any bearing on the case at all.  If you puch your girlffriend or wife, its Domestic VIolence.  It can still be a misdemeanor though based on the level of injury.  Now....if your kid is over 18 and you punch your daughter in the nose, because she is now an adult, the relationship issue is over.  Its again treated no different than a stranger on stranger fight.  Ive run into a few adult kids that dont understand that their child abuse protections end at 18.  It becomes a simple misdemeanor battery. 

I tried to address it here, because people started throwing around the term domestic violence, so I attempted to make clarification that in many states, domestic violence means your a wife/husband beater.

[FlyTiger77]

  Let's move on.

+1

[bosshawk]

+2/  Some folks will argue just because they think that it is fun.

How about a uniform argument?

[JeffDG]

+2/  Some folks will argue just because they think that it is fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y&feature=player_embedded

[DBlair]

+2/  Some folks will argue just because they think that it is fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y&feature=player_embedded

LOL ...good call, as I was reading this, I was thinking of that exact same skit.