quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
Just to clarify. Is the victim the social worker who went to the home of a convicted sex offender???

According to the link I posted, yes, more than once.

“The victim told a detective in her role as a social worker that she had seen Allswang four or five times before Friday's appointment. She said that she had met him at the house on Larkspur Trail previously but other people, including family members, were usually present.”

Wow an amazing lack of judgement and probably training.

^^^The next two sentences bolster your assertion:

“ She told detectives that her role was to help Allswang function in society, such as getting a job and how to behave during a job interview.

People that work with Allswang warned her that he was previously charged with sexual battery.”

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
So at 4:15 am deputies responded to the house and did not see or hear anything other than victim's car in driveway. Please note in the second article, the suspect had covered all the windows so no one could see in.

At 7:32 am deputies returned to the house and heard a scream. At this time the suspect dragged victim into a closet where the suspect hid with victim with a knife to her throat. At the same time, the victim's phone was pinging elsewhere. At this point, for deputies this is a potentially a classic barricaded suspect with a hostage. I say potentially because at this point there is no visuals on suspect or hostage or contact with suspect or hostage.

At 9:35 hours SWAT enters, searches the house, finds suspect and victim hiding in closet, and shoots suspect in the head (who was holding knife at victim's throat). 8 hours from the time the victim was reported missing. 2 hours from when deputies heard scream inside house, which is about the right amount of time for SWAT to arrive, plan, and deploy with a Search Warrant.

First linked article was extremely bias, jumping on the anti-police bandwagon. Second had a good time line and much more useful information.

What changed between 7:30 and 9:30, what created the exigency?

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
So at 4:15 am deputies responded to the house and did not see or hear anything other than victim's car in driveway. Please note in the second article, the suspect had covered all the windows so no one could see in.

At 7:32 am deputies returned to the house and heard a scream. At this time the suspect dragged victim into a closet where the suspect hid with victim with a knife to her throat. At the same time, the victim's phone was pinging elsewhere. At this point, for deputies this is a potentially a classic barricaded suspect with a hostage. I say potentially because at this point there is no visuals on suspect or hostage or contact with suspect or hostage.

At 9:35 hours SWAT enters, searches the house, finds suspect and victim hiding in closet, and shoots suspect in the head (who was holding knife at victim's throat). 8 hours from the time the victim was reported missing. 2 hours from when deputies heard scream inside house, which is about the right amount of time for SWAT to arrive, plan, and deploy with a Search Warrant.

First linked article was extremely bias, jumping on the anti-police bandwagon. Second had a good time line and much more useful information.

What changed between 7:30 and 9:30, what created the exigency?

They probably got a search warrant, as that is about the time it takes to get an emergency one. They also pinged the victim's phone and it was showing in another county. They probably pinged the suspect's phone to try and determine his location, all the type of stuff that would have gone into search warrant affidavit. They may have also deployed FLIR (Thermal Imaging showing two people in the house) along with any type of listening devices. These are that types of toys that a very well equipped SWAT team will have. I have used the Fire Department's Thermal Imaging in similar circumstances.

Potential barricaded subject with hostage, the 3 "Cs" kick in:
1. Contain
2. Control
3. Communicate-a good hostage negotiator will try and get everyone out alive. Their other duties are gathering intell and sometimes putting the suspect in a position so a sniper or entry team can take them out with decreased risk to the hostage(s).

With no communication, they will make entry sooner rather than later. Barring active shooting, it will almost always be with a search warrant. Remember without a search warrant, if the suspect and victim aren't there, any evidence found would probably be considered tainted (fruit of the poisonous tree) and excluded from any criminal case against the suspect.

Re-reading the first article, everything in it seems to be from her boss, co-workers, and girlfriend. You know the same ones who had her do home visits alone with a sex offender. Sounds like there was no plan or policy in place (phone calls or text messages with "I'm safe" code words).

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:

quote:

Originally posted by jsbcody:
So at 4:15 am deputies responded to the house and did not see or hear anything other than victim's car in driveway. Please note in the second article, the suspect had covered all the windows so no one could see in.

At 7:32 am deputies returned to the house and heard a scream. At this time the suspect dragged victim into a closet where the suspect hid with victim with a knife to her throat. At the same time, the victim's phone was pinging elsewhere. At this point, for deputies this is a potentially a classic barricaded suspect with a hostage. I say potentially because at this point there is no visuals on suspect or hostage or contact with suspect or hostage.

At 9:35 hours SWAT enters, searches the house, finds suspect and victim hiding in closet, and shoots suspect in the head (who was holding knife at victim's throat). 8 hours from the time the victim was reported missing. 2 hours from when deputies heard scream inside house, which is about the right amount of time for SWAT to arrive, plan, and deploy with a Search Warrant.

First linked article was extremely bias, jumping on the anti-police bandwagon. Second had a good time line and much more useful information.

What changed between 7:30 and 9:30, what created the exigency?

Legally, “Exigency” isn’t defined in a timeline…it just means there’s not time to go get a warrant…they could have been waiting on resources, and when the resources were ready they entered.

Thanks guys, for adding more context. I have no clue what the fine lines are with rules/laws/regulations, in my mind I'm thinking how I would act vs what police can actually do.

What are the consequences for 'mis-hearing' a scream and entering?

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Thanks guys, for adding more context. I have no clue what the fine lines are with rules/laws/regulations, in my mind I'm thinking how I would act vs what police can actually do.

What are the consequences for 'mis-hearing' a scream and entering?

Demanding on where you are and what happened:
1. Unpaid days off aka suspension
2. Fired
3. Lawsuit
4. Charged
5. Convicted
6. Evidence found but is excluded at the suspect's trial and a really bad person gets off and back on the streets to do it again.

That's a shitty position to be in. To 'know' what's going on then have to choose between what's right and what's allowed. Especially when considering all the life long consequences. Must be hard to be an officer and decide what's right vs what's allowed. Glade I'm not in that position.

God bless the law, I could never do your calling. Thank you folks all for everything you do day, in & day out! Thank you, God protect you!

quote:

Re-reading the first article, everything in it seems to be from her boss, co-workers, and girlfriend. You know the same ones who had her do home visits alone with a sex offender. Sounds like there was no plan or policy in place (phone calls or text messages with "I'm safe" code words).

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The plan should be DO NOT make home visits with known sex offenders. How simple is that? Would have elimninated the necessity for the police and prevented another sexual assault. There are clearly a lot of untrained people in the field.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:

quote:

Re-reading the first article, everything in it seems to be from her boss, co-workers, and girlfriend. You know the same ones who had her do home visits alone with a sex offender. Sounds like there was no plan or policy in place (phone calls or text messages with "I'm safe" code words).

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The plan should be DO NOT make home visits with known sex offenders. How simple is that? Would have elimninated the necessity for the police and prevented another sexual assault. There are clearly a lot of untrained people in the field.

Mrs. Flash spent the last 11 years of her career working for County Behavioral Health (Mental Health) and worked daily with Social Workers.

They're almost totally untrained and tend to be a little on the unbalanced side according to her.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:

Mrs. Flash spent the last 11 years of her career working for County Behavioral Health (Mental Health) and worked daily with Social Workers.

They're almost totally untrained and tend to be a little on the unbalanced side according to her.

"Totally untrained and tend to be a little on the unbalanced side?"

That's painting with a pretty broad brush.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:

Mrs. Flash spent the last 11 years of her career working for County Behavioral Health (Mental Health) and worked daily with Social Workers.

They're almost totally untrained and tend to be a little on the unbalanced side according to her.

"Totally untrained and tend to be a little on the unbalanced side?"

That's painting with a pretty broad brush.

True, but then again she only worked with them on a daily basis for 11 years, so she could be mistaken.

I could give you all sorts of stories, but I'll only give you one and then I'll move on.

One of the Social workers "went native" meaning he went out on the street and lived in a tent with the homeless mental patients. When he'd come into the office, once a week or so, the B.O. was heavy and security was usually called as he acted a bit unbalanced all the time.

He was only one, there were others. I met a bunch of them over the years and there were only a couple that I would even allow into my house.

There are some facts to add in here but I wanted to clarify a few things for people. The girl was warned not to do home visits with this person by her boss due to his prior for a sexual misconduct/assault charge. She had done them in the past but there were always other people present. I believe she was unaware that he was going to be alone until she got there.

Also, this seems like where I would want an officer to say something along the lines of "hey I can't go in there because there are no signs of entry, but if that window over there were broken that would give me cause to enter, hey look a brick. I need to go to my cruiser for a minute...." I know this sounds like shit from a movie but I am just saying what causes the exigent circumstances.

At no point have I see the police say they got a search warrant. I would assume that if they had one they would say hey we got a warrant at 905 and entered at 930. So they either had a warrant earlier and don't want to report the delay in execution of the warrant or they acted on exigent circumstances, but there don't seem to be any changes in circumstances since first notification around 2am.

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Flash-LB:

Mrs. Flash spent the last 11 years of her career working for County Behavioral Health (Mental Health) and worked daily with Social Workers.

They're almost totally untrained and tend to be a little on the unbalanced side according to her.

"Totally untrained and tend to be a little on the unbalanced side?"

That's painting with a pretty broad brush.

True, but then again she only worked with them on a daily basis for 11 years, so she could be mistaken.

I could give you all sorts of stories, but I'll only give you one and then I'll move on.

One of the Social workers "went native" meaning he went out on the street and lived in a tent with the homeless mental patients. When he'd come into the office, once a week or so, the B.O. was heavy and security was usually called as he acted a bit unbalanced all the time.

He was only one, there were others. I met a bunch of them over the years and there were only a couple that I would even allow into my house.

My direct knowledge goes back a bit further than eleven years.

Mrs. V-Tail earned a BSW (Bachelor Social Work), cum laude, in 1980 and MSW with high honors a few years later. In order to be eligible for license renewal, she must meet the requirements for Continuing Education.

The Florida licensing for LCSW -- Licensed Clinical Social Worker -- is not an easy path, but she earned that, and later went on to become certified to supervise applicants for LCSW.

Her past included running a county substance abuse center, a stint as Director of a day care program for autistic kids, many years as the lead psychiatric Social Worker in the mental health section of a large hospital here in Central Florida, and many more years in private practice. She is now winding down, semi-retired with a small number of private clients.

I would say that she is pretty far from "totally untrained," and as far as "a little on the unbalanced side," those who know her, including some other SIGforum members, would likely state that she is one of the calmest, stable, people you could hope to meet.

Yes, there are some social workers who would meet your wife's description, but there are also many like my wife, so as I said, they should not all be painted with the same brush.

Just as there are software designers (I'm retired from that) who really have their heads on straight, as well as those who are completely wacky. You could probably say the same about most professions.

Re allowing people into the house, you and I are probably on the same page. We have been in this house since it was built in 1986, and other than a few workers who came in to do maintenance type things, I can probably count other people who have been invited into the house without running out of fingers. Might have to take my shoes off to finish the count, but maybe not.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Thanks guys, for adding more context. I have no clue what the fine lines are with rules/laws/regulations, in my mind I'm thinking how I would act vs what police can actually do.

What are the consequences for 'mis-hearing' a scream and entering?

Most folks have ZERO clue how many hoops and hurdles be in legal, administrative, bad information officers have to sift through when it comes to making decisions on what to do and many times something has to be done in a split second.

Let’s take this scenario and twist it slightly. Granted we already know what went on and what happened however that luxury is not granted to the officers while it is going on.

So lets change this story ever so slightly and see what sort of outcome could be at hand for the officers. We will keep everything the same to include the phone was pinging in another county (which multiple article state). But we will change one thing this dude has already killed the victim and dumped her body in another county.
Officers hear what they believe to be a scream but it is muffled from inside the house. They make entry to only find the suspect and he has a knife or a weapon and they end up shooting the guy. The victim is nowhere to be found. What was the scream they thought they heard. Maybe it was the TV, maybe it was the radio.
Things settle down body camera footage gets pulled and guess what being that it was a muffled scream coming from inside the body camera picks up nothing resembling that scream. (I tell you this from experience that body camera does not do a good job of picking up muffled sounds through walls and in today’s world if it is not on the body camera it did not happen. Benefit of the doubt for officers is about zero anymore).
So given that scenario which is not a far fetched idea those officers are in Deep Shit!!! Any evidence of the crime if it happened in that residence is pretty much inadmissible, those officers have unlawfully entered a residence and severely injured or killed someone.
And this is just one scenario change of hundreds as to why officers don’t just go in willy nilly that their exigency or cause to enter must absolutely be rock solid!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Timdogg6:
Also, this seems like where I would want an officer to say something along the lines of "hey I can't go in there because there are no signs of entry, but if that window over there were broken that would give me cause to enter, hey look a brick. I need to go to my cruiser for a minute...." I know this sounds like shit from a movie but I am just saying what causes the exigent circumstances.

You can want an officer to do something all you want but the courts have already deemed on many occasions that the police can’t create the exigency.
On top of that there are body cameras all over the scene and also personal cameras rolling. That stunt right there would get one fired rather quickly then put in prison for violation the suspects rights.
Yes, even though the dude is a criminal and everyone has a pretty good idea of what is going on he still gets all of his rights. An officer intentionally takes away any of those rights it is going to be a very dark future for that officer.

I thought it was pretty obvious I wasn't talking about your wife, who I had no idea was in the business, but I'll stand by what I said about the County Social Workers. They were, by and large, totally untrained and on their own and yes, a bit unbalanced.

I knew and talked to a lot of them over the years at lunches and retirement things and whatnot and I stand 100% behind my statements. And the reason I wouldn't let them in my house is their mental health, or more accurately their lack of mental health, no other reason.

I'm sure there are some somewhere that are trained and normal, but they sure didn't work for the County Mental Health System.

Sort of a Dirty Harry moment, specifically the scene with the federal judge in Dirty Harry from 1971, 50+ years later, song remains the same...

quote:

Originally posted by Timdogg6: but there don't seem to be any changes in circumstances since first notification around 2am.

Did you read the article you posted even once? In the article you posted, there are two changes that took place between the mother reporting the girl missing at 1:00am and 9:30am when the police broke into the house.

1. Somewhere around 3:00am to 4:00am, police where informed of an address the girl might be at and they went to the address, attempted to make make contact, then left because they didn’t find anything amiss.

2. At 7:30, officers heard a woman scream from inside the house.

From a third article to explain what police did from hearing the scream at 7:30am:

“Additional units and assets were requested to the residence and once the appropriate personnel were on scene, the front door was breached at 9:35 a.m. Entry was made into the residence at 9:39 a.m. and was systematically checked for people and when they reached the master bedroom door, it was also locked. This door was breached at 9:45 a.m. and at 9:46 a.m. they located Tzvi holding [the victim] hostage by a knife to her throat inside the master closet. At 9:47 a.m., Sgt. William Norgueras shot Tzvi once in the head and EMS was immediately requested to enter the home and treat Tzvi for his injury. Tzvi was transported to [the hospital] and was taken immediately into surgery. He is expected to survive his injury.”

Link

From PBSO:

“July 2, 2022

Shortly before 6:30 am, deputies responded to a welfare check in the 22000 block of Larkspur Trail in unincorporated Boca Raton. Upon arrival, deputies heard a female victim screaming for help. Deputies made forced entry into the residence and located a female victim who was being against her will at knife point by an adult male suspect. The suspect refused commands to drop the knife, fearing for the safety of the victim, a PBSO deputy discharged his department assigned firearm striking the suspect once in the head.“

Link

So your claim that PBSO changed it’s story is also bullshit. They didn’t put the timeline in their summary update. So what?

None of this was hard to find. Google the suspect’s name and the three links I provided are on the first page.

“I am as Pro Cop as the next guy around here” A pro cop member here wouldn’t posted a biased article and make a bunch of bullshit easily refutable claims about the events that happened.

The woman is alive, the suspect is in custody. Job well done.