1911Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Strange gunfight occurs at a car dealership in Greenville Texas

4K views 83 replies 36 participants last post by  guy sajer 
#1 ·
This is a odd case. A gunfight erupted at a Greenville car dealership when two men attempted to arrest a third man. All three are dead at this time. No one else appears to have been hurt either. What adds to the oddity is that two of the men claimed to be Federal Agents and waited several hours for the third man to arrive. That was when they attempted to arrest him and the gunfight erupted between them. The two men who claimed to be federal agents may actually have been bounty hunters, But right now information is quite sketchy about it all.

I would have thought that the manager, etc would have asked to see their ID's. Usually this is Federal Marshals or FBI types doing this kind of a thing and they would have readily displayed their ID's and badges. But apparently people just took them at their word about their identities.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/3-...n-Dealership-Greenville-Police-425417344.html
 
#4 ·
Unfortunately, there's no reason to suppose that journalism schools are cranking out any higher caliber of graduate than any other school. Illiteracy is fast becoming the new standard. Sad, truly sad.

As for the shooting, I don't know how anyone in a legitimate role would consider it a good idea to attempt a take-down in an area full of bystanders. If it's truly bounty hunters, then that's obviously not a good career choice for folks with little common sense.
 
#5 ·
I would have thought that the manager, etc would have asked to see their ID's. Usually this is Federal Marshals or FBI types doing this kind of a thing and they would have readily displayed their ID's and badges. But apparently people just took them at their word about their identities.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/3-...n-Dealership-Greenville-Police-425417344.html
Some of these guys have professional looking badges and ID's made and if someone doesn't read what's on them they could be fooled into thinking they are real law enforcement.
 
#6 · (Edited by Moderator)
As of this morning, the "two federal agents" were identified as two bounty hunters hired by a Minnesota fugitive recovery company. They identified themselves as Fed's to the dealership owner and were not asked to show ID and were allowed to wait in the showroom.
 
#7 ·
Well looks like to me the two idiots got what they deserved. The bail jumper on the other hand will never get his day in court. Just fortunate no bystanders were hurt or killed.

People at the Dealership are being criticized for not asking to see the identification however, they apparently lied when they walked in with a verbal identification.
 
#9 · (Edited)
I'm not sure what, if any, tactical mistakes these two made during the apprehension attempt- obviously it didn't end well.

Beyond that, theres no excuse for misrepresenting themselves as LEOs to the dealer management. Theres little justification for attempting to apprehend a suspect with a history of resisting in a business.

The dealer failed by not validating ID, and by allowing them to stay in the business (regardless of their status)...
 
#10 ·
Federal agents or not they would not be allowed to stay in our dealer for several hours.
They would be instructed to wait outside. You're not gonna use our private business as your stake out position.
And how a criminal wound up killing both of them shows lack of proper training on their part.
 
#14 · (Edited)
If two LE's walking in to a place of business in plain clothes don't badge someone when they arrive that would be a instant red flag, at least to me, but most people are instinctively respectful of law enforcement and take them at their word.
 
#21 ·
If they identified themselves as working for "U.S. Fugitive Recovery and Extradition," I can see how that could be construed as federal agents.

As I understand it, bounty hunters can get away with a lot more than most private citizens and in some ways more than Law enforcement.
 
#27 ·
As an aside, it would appear that claiming to be Feds was NOT a criminal act. The Federal statute requires one to 'demand or receive money, papers, documents, or something of value' or to use the claim of Federal authority to facilitate a search of a person, property, or vehicle.

Since they, based on available information, made no demands, nor used the percived authority to conduct a search, the did NOT violate the applicable Federal statute.
 
#31 ·
Heres the applicable section of the TX code:

Sec. 37.12. FALSE IDENTIFICATION AS PEACE OFFICER; MISREPRESENTATION OF PROPERTY. (a) A person commits an offense if:
(1) the person makes, provides to another person, or possesses a card, document, badge, insignia, shoulder emblem, or other item bearing an insignia of a law enforcement agency that identifies a person as a peace officer or a reserve law enforcement officer; and
(2) the person who makes, provides, or possesses the item bearing the insignia knows that the person so identified by the item is not commissioned as a peace officer or reserve law enforcement officer as indicated on the item.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the card, document, badge, insignia, shoulder emblem, or other item bearing an insignia of a law enforcement agency clearly identifies the person as an honorary or junior peace officer or reserve law enforcement officer, or as a member of a junior posse;
(2) the person identified as a peace officer or reserve law enforcement officer by the item bearing the insignia was commissioned in that capacity when the item was made; or
(3) the item was used or intended for use exclusively for decorative purposes or in an artistic or dramatic presentation.
(c) In this section, "reserve law enforcement officer" has the same meaning as is given that term in Section 1701.001, Occupations Code.
(d) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally or knowingly misrepresents an object as property belonging to a law enforcement agency.
(e) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.
I still don't see a violation of this statue (if one assumes that a FEDERAL LEO is considered a TX "peace officer" and this statue is applicable). Nor did they violate the applicable Federal law...

Even if we assume the TX statute applies to Federal employees, they dont appear to have violated it- they didn't :

1) the person makes, provides to another person, or possesses a card, document, badge, insignia, shoulder emblem, or other item bearing an insignia of a law enforcement agency that identifies a person as a peace officer or a reserve law enforcement officer; and
(2) the person who makes, provides, or possesses the item bearing the insignia knows that the person so identified by the item is not commissioned as a peace officer or reserve law enforcement officer as indicated on the item.
If there's another sectionthat I missed, please copy and paste it, and illustrated the violation.

If you have more factual information on what actually happened, I'd love to hear it... preferably with sources.

My opinion is based only on information thats been sourced here. Its subject to change if new facts develop.
 
#32 · (Edited)
Heres the applicable section of the TX code:



I still don't see a violation of this statue (if one assumes that a FEDERAL LEO is considered a TX "peace officer" and this statue is applicable). Nor did they violate the applicable Federal law...

Even if we assume the TX statute applies to Federal employees, they dont appear to have violated it- they didn't :



If there's another sectionthat I missed, please copy and paste it, and illustrated the violation.

If you have more factual information on what actually happened, I'd love to hear it... preferably with sources.

My opinion is based only on information thats been sourced here. Its subject to change if new facts develop.
37.11--(a) A person commits an offense if he: (1) impersonates a public servant with intent to induce another to submit to his pretended official authority or to rely on his pretended official acts;  or (2) knowingly purports to exercise any function of a public servant or of a public office, including that of a judge and court, and the position or office through which he purports to exercise a function of a public servant or public office has no lawful existence under the constitution or laws of this state or of the United States. (b) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree. - See more at: http://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-37-11.html#sthash.gHlHKpmc.dpuf


Need to read more than one part of the Code... Ok I cheated--had some help.. You still have no clue do you? IT IS AGAINST THE LAW to impersonate a LEO federal, state or local in Texas Period. Why cannot you accept that? You are unique in your thinking will give you that.
 
#33 ·
I'm still, based on the reportage, not at all sure they represented themselves as Federal Officers or US Marshalls. The company that hire them is U.S. Fugitive Recovery and Extradition. They could have properly identified themselves as agents of that company and the dealer employee mis-interpreted that as their being some form of federal agent.
In which case, the bounty hunters would not be at fault or guilty of misrepresentation. They should have been in possession of some paperwork describing their mission and that should come to light during the police investigation of the matter.
Bail bondsmen are the usual initiators of this kind of stuff and a bail agent has pretty broad powers in the capture of a skipper. Courts do not usually employ such people or agencies though, they issue a warrant and may turn if over to the US Marshall if interstate flight is suspected.
 
#34 ·
I'm still, based on the reportage, not at all sure they represented themselves as Federal Officers or US Marshalls. The company that hire them is U.S. Fugitive Recovery and Extradition. They could have properly identified themselves as agents of that company and the dealer employee mis-interpreted that as their being some form of federal agent.
I think that is very possible especially considering some of them wear badges.
 
#36 ·
If someone told me they were from,"U.S. Fugitive Recovery and Extradition" I would need to do a little research to know if they were federal agents or not. A good look at a shield would help some.

It was left unsaid, but it sounds as if the "agents" used the dealership to call the girlfriend back in on a ruse about her car. Methinks the dealership might have been duped.
 
#43 ·
From what I can see on a video posted on one of the news sites, the two individuals attempting to apprehend the fugitive are in a glass sales cubicle and are confronting him. The fugitive steps behind a desk and it looks like he grabs for a gun in his waistband but drops it. The two try to wrestle with him and he is able to grab his gun and while they are all huddled trying to grab for each other they all start shooting. It could well be that the two BHs shot each other in the melee. Bad situation that went really wrong.
 
#53 ·
HEY NOW! Didn't you read where DSK said name calling is not allowed here?
However while I've made a comfortable living doing it on 100% commission for almost 30yrs I would agree with you and have had to bounce some scumbags out of our store. I don't take it lightly when dirtbags try to mistreat our customers. They get tossed immediately without second thought.
 
#47 ·
Until I know more about the details of this unfortunate incident, I have sympathy at least for the two slain "bounty hunters" who were apparently trying to affect the apprehension of an armed and dangerous felon. "Rules" may have been broken and the wrong or inadequate tactics employed but, as far as I know, two innocent people were killed trying to take a bad guy off the street.
Much more information is needed before I make any judgements on the rightness or wrongness of the actions and behaviors of the victims in this case.
 
#50 ·
until i know more about the details of this unfortunate incident, i have sympathy at least for the two slain "bounty hunters" who were apparently trying to affect the apprehension of an armed and dangerous felon. "rules" may have been broken and the wrong or inadequate tactics employed but, as far as i know, two innocent people were killed trying to take a bad guy off the street.
Much more information is needed before i make any judgements on the rightness or wrongness of the actions and behaviors of the victims in this case.
+1911
 
#48 ·
They have a raw cell phone video clip posted on the internet showing the actual apprehension of the fugitive. At least until the gunshots started then everyone ducked. There were quite a few rounds fired too. It looks like they couldn't get the guy secured quickly enough and he was able to reach his gun.
I had some trouble getting the video to work, I think a lot of people were overloading the server at the time.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/raw-video-...alership-caught-on-cell-phone-video/444558991
 
#49 · (Edited)
Appears likely that the person with the cellphone/camera knew, in advance, that things might get interesting.

If so, this is an example of why it's probably best (for most people at least) to give wide berth (physical separation) from a developing unfriendly confrontation.

In regard to discussions in other posts, I don't know that there's solid evidence of criminal actions by the presumed bounty hunters. WCB might well be correct, pending other evidence. Maybe there was wrongful conduct; maybe there wasn't. If someone states that the two claimed to be Federal agents, does this ensure that this "someone" accurately understood and accuately repeated the pair's claims? People often fail to accurately quote another person's statements; they're often poor listeners and/or all too quick to mix their own interpretatations with the actual statements of the other person(s). But with all parties being deceased, it's probably a moot point. And the results are not much of an endorsement of the tactics/location chosen by the presumed bounty hunters.... but "yes", this is armchair quarterbacking after the dust settles.
 
#57 ·
Complacency, or the fact that they weren't that well trained to begin with. Not like the bounty hunters of America represent a confederation of highly trained, intelligent, and capable individuals who turned down far less satisfying work leading corporations into the new century to protect the masses from the seedy underbelly of crime.
 
#64 ·
One quick point as I have not gone through the whole thread. What the two "bail enforcement agents" said coming into the dealership and what the acting manager understood can be two very different things. "We are here to pick up Mr. .... on Federal Warrant #J24-204687 with copy of said paper. And the manager thinks Oh'''' Federal agents. What is said and what is implied can very much be two different things.
 
#66 ·
Yes but either way the mgr is a dipstick for allowing his owners private business to be used as a stakeout point. I can Guarantee with a capital G that if one of our mgrs agreed to let them do that real Feds or not he would not have a job today. By allowing those two to attempt to apprehend a wanted fugitive inside his showroom he put everyone's life in jeopardy. Extremely poor decision. I would have told them to conduct their business off my owners property. No way would they have been allowed to hang around inside.
Can you imagine the crap storm the owner would be facing right now if somebody innocent like a salesman or customer had gotten injured in the process? And I'm not even sure the fugitives family won't sue the dealer for letting those two buffoons do what they did. The first story says they lured his girlfriend back to the store with some sort of reason hoping he'd come back with her. So I'm wondering if they had a salesperson call her and say 'hey there's a problem with some of our paperwork. Can you come back and resign?' If a salesperson or employee was involved in this than they may be in trouble.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top