De-escalation

tenthings

tenthings2

I find it disturbing he was offended by it.

He wasn’t “offended” by it.  I have never spoken with the man, and I know he wasn’t “offended.”

He did a very reasonable thing in light of the situation that had occurred the year before when the youngest daughter ran away, and checked out as much as he could before going to that property to remove the children.

And yes, that’s why he went there.

He told Nicole that, over and over again.

Here’s the first clue:

Pate: Okay. How many of you all are here now?

Nicole: It’s me and my two teenage sons.

Pate: The other children are not here?

He went on from there.

Pate: You are standing the chance of having your children removed.

How much more direct did he have to be?

Pate: When there are allegations made, okay, they have an obligation to check that out. They can’t say, oh, we just don’t believe it, or oh, we went out there and the mother and father said you can’t speak to them. They can’t do that. I mean, whether they think that it’s BS or not– and a lot of times we get those type of calls – and there’s probably a decent chance that is this type of call, and there’s a decent chance that this thing could be resolved much simpler – but I’m telling you, the refusal, to say no you will not talk to my children or no you will not do that – the court is gonna step in and I think that they will remove your children, and they will talk to your children whether you like that or not.

That direct.

What was happening, I think, is that Sheriff Pate knew that CPS was in court as he spoke getting a removal order signed by a judge. He was basically waiting for the green light.

At that point, Nicole could have taken his advice. She could have said, “Okay, let me call Joe. We’ll bring the kids here and CPS can come out here and talk with them.”  I think that if she had done that, Pate would have called CPS and said, “Hold off. I think she’s coming around.”

But he didn’t really expect that to happen. He was hoping but he was also preparing.

As far as Facebook is concerned, he had every right to look at her Facebook page.  Anyone does. I do.  It’s public.

I doubt he even looked at the video. I know I didn’t.  He just looked at the tone of her Facebook posts.

It’s easy to do this. Everyone does it.

Let’s take Matthew Smithers as an example. He commented on a public page and said some dumb shit. Who is he?

smitherstrumper

He’s a Trumper.

smithersracist

He’s racist.  There’s more than one post of this sort of thing.

smitherssnakes

He’s a fundamentalist. And not just a little bit fundamentalist. He’s the snake-handling type.

There is enough further information to tell me that he’s married, it seems happily, he seems to be a parent, he’s a computer programmer (or something similar) and unhappy with his profession. He went to “Bible school” for a short time.

That took me about two minutes and it is not stalking.  Smithers chose to post that stuff publicly. Anyone can see it.  Don’t want people to see  your shit?  Don’t post it publicly.

That swift perusal of Smithers’ Facebook page tells me, though, that a black Democratic Jehovah’s Witness probably would not do very well on a home visit. I’m not implying that he’d do anything wrong or even be rude. I am saying that he probably wouldn’t convert.

And that’s what Pate was doing. He was simply looking to get the flavor of Nicole’s page, to better understand Nicole. What he saw there disturbed him.  It disturbs me.  She’s hostile to the police, really hostile.

And when he was face-to-face with her, she added to that feeling with her remarks.

Pate: You have a right to do whatever, whatever, whatever, whatever, but here’s what I see coming down the pike. You can believe me or not believe me.

Nicole: I know what the state’s willing to do. I know what it’s allowed to do and I know what it’s willing to do.

And this:

Pate: but I know that there’s gunfire around here and I see things that are posted such as – how am I supposed to take something that says you picked the wrong person to fight with now and . . .

Nicole: Yes, I was referring to the woman who reported

Pate: I mean, are you saying that there is potential gunfire on you all’s part

Nicole: I didn’t say anything. You can read into it however you want to, but I will protect my family.

Pate: But do you understand where I might read into it that?

The man is trying to explain to her that what she’s saying, that her overall attitude, coupled with her Facebook posts, gives him reason to proceed with extreme caution.

Nicole: I am protecting my children from the state.

Pate: They are getting ready to go into state custody.

Nicole: No, they’re not. No, they’re not.

Pate: Okay.

Nicole: They’re not.

Pate: Okay.

Nicole: Mark my words, they will not.

Pate: They will not. Do you have them prepared to do something?

Nicole: I don’t have them prepared to do anything.

This sounds like a threat.  It just does. If I had been Pate, I certainly would have taken it as a threat to do physical harm if necessary to stop Pate from taking those kids.

Remember, this man has been doing what he does for more than twenty years. Nicole and Joe Naugler weren’t his first rodeo. He’s had training in how to deal with people like them and end up with everyone alive and well.

At this point, after she’s threatened him over and over again, he asks her to let him see the boys.

Of course he was “sizing them up.”  Naturally he was. For all he knew, they were hiding in the bushes ready to pick him off.  The situation was potentially very volatile.  He did not want to deal with the Kanes, and I don’t blame him.

So he got her to let him see the boys. It served a couple of purposes. The boys got to see that he wasn’t hurting their mother, that they were simply having a conversation, that there was no imminent threat.  He got to eyeball them, to more or less “meet” them.  That makes it a bit harder for a kid who has never shot a human being to do that.

And then he allowed them to leave the property.

Of course he did.

He wanted them away from any stashed weapons.  He wanted to make sure that anything they had was confined to that vehicle.

I have no idea if Nicole or Jacob or the other boy had/have the idiocy required to actually have gotten into a fire fight with the police (their chances of survival would have been slim had they done so), but Sheriff Pate couldn’t take a chance on it.

Pate: and I don’t use, and I don’t use the resources that are available to me, you know. And if I don’t, you know, and you know, I have to use those resources to find out about threats against my officers and other people. My goal at the end of the day is to go home, to see my family.

See? He told her. His goal was to survive the encounter.  That’s his primary goal.  It always is. It always should be. His second goal was that all three of the Nauglers present should survive the encounter as well.

Sheriff Pate had a removal order signed by a judge. It was completely legal. It was his job to take custody of those minor children.  It was up to him to use his training and the “resources available to him” to accomplish that in a way that ensured everyone’s safety.

He did a fine job, an exemplary job.  He gave her every chance in the world to back down. He was honest and straight with her.  He didn’t stop her on some bogus traffic thing. He told her he wouldn’t do that. He stopped her and executed the removal order, exactly as he’d already told her he was going to do.

She is extremely fortunate that Sheriff Pate is the police officer she dealt with that day.