maybe some of the law enforcement folks in here could give me some answers.the other night 3 bounty hunters came to my house looking for someone who is in jail in another state .now this fella did use my address as a permanent address since he worked for me and just needed aplace to get all his mail,,anyway i told the bounty hunters he was not here and was in fact he was in jail.they pulled there weapons out and demanded that il let them in.i did not let them in and in fact had to call the police to get rid of them.at one time i went outside to see where they were ,and my dogs ran around back and started barking,then they were led up the driveway at gunpoint by the bounty hunters,who told me to call them off.what kind of laws do bounty hunters have to adhere to and who holds them responsible for abuse of their power.
bounty hunter rules please
- Thread starter lipripper
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
sheriffoconee
Member
Look at this link
Howstuffworks
The Georgia section is accurate...and I have no idea what state you are in...so you may want to research it and come back here...but in GEORGIA, they can enter private property ONLY IF THEY ARE CERTAIN THE SURETY IS THERE.....Georgia has no specific statutes regarding what they can do and can't do, so they are limited to what peace officers can do....
Howstuffworks
The Georgia section is accurate...and I have no idea what state you are in...so you may want to research it and come back here...but in GEORGIA, they can enter private property ONLY IF THEY ARE CERTAIN THE SURETY IS THERE.....Georgia has no specific statutes regarding what they can do and can't do, so they are limited to what peace officers can do....
We had a bounty hunter here arrested last week for illegal use of a firearm and I believe, attempted homicide. He shot a fleeing person without cause.
Then a local attorney is suing two bounty hunters for going into the wrong apartment by force, throwing a crippled man to the floor and handcuffing him even though he did not look anything like the person being sought. The subject they were looking for did not even live on that floor.
Apparently it does not take much training to become a bounty hunter these days. What I have ran across lacked common sense and intelligence.
Then a local attorney is suing two bounty hunters for going into the wrong apartment by force, throwing a crippled man to the floor and handcuffing him even though he did not look anything like the person being sought. The subject they were looking for did not even live on that floor.
Apparently it does not take much training to become a bounty hunter these days. What I have ran across lacked common sense and intelligence.
Snowbandit
Member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2007
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 54
The "bounty hunter law" is generally considered to be Taylor v. Taintor, a US Supreme Court case from 1872 (83 US 366) that is still valid today. Bail Enforcements Agents generally have authority to go anywhere a suspect is to recover one who has skipped bail. The authority for this comes from the person who signed the bail in the first place. They operate under a whole different set of rules from law enforcement officers. I would be very careful who I allowed to use my address.
When bail is given, the principal is regarded as delivered to the custody of his sureties. Their dominion is a continuance of the original imprisonment. Whenever they choose to do so, they may seize him and deliver him up in their discharge; and if that cannot be done at once, they may imprison him until it can be done. They may exercise their rights in person or by agent. They may pursue him into another State; may arrest him on the Sabbath; and if necessary, may break and enter his house for that purpose. The seizure is not made by virtue of new process. None is needed. It is likened to the rearrest by the sheriff of an escaping prisoner. In 6 Modern it is said: "The bail have their principal on a string, and may pull the string whenever they please, and render him in their discharge." The rights of the bail in civil and criminal cases are the same. They may doubtless permit him to go beyond the limits of the State within which he is to answer, but it is unwise and imprudent to do so; and if any evil ensue, they must bear the burden of the consequences, and cannot cast them upon the obligee. [internal footnotes deleted]
When bail is given, the principal is regarded as delivered to the custody of his sureties. Their dominion is a continuance of the original imprisonment. Whenever they choose to do so, they may seize him and deliver him up in their discharge; and if that cannot be done at once, they may imprison him until it can be done. They may exercise their rights in person or by agent. They may pursue him into another State; may arrest him on the Sabbath; and if necessary, may break and enter his house for that purpose. The seizure is not made by virtue of new process. None is needed. It is likened to the rearrest by the sheriff of an escaping prisoner. In 6 Modern it is said: "The bail have their principal on a string, and may pull the string whenever they please, and render him in their discharge." The rights of the bail in civil and criminal cases are the same. They may doubtless permit him to go beyond the limits of the State within which he is to answer, but it is unwise and imprudent to do so; and if any evil ensue, they must bear the burden of the consequences, and cannot cast them upon the obligee. [internal footnotes deleted]
lagavulin62
Member
please explain this. are you saying the bounty hunters led your dogs around at gunpoint? then they needed your assistance to call the dogs off? the only time I ever heard of a dog stopping for a gun was after getting shot. maybe dogs are smarter than I think? but more than likely you are either quite poor with your english or this whole thread is just malarcky. just my opinion. i have been wrong before.
well there mr malarcky,i will explain it for you,if you have any sense of ,then you might understand.my dogs ran around back and started barking at the bounty hunter(lets just say goon).i started to go around there to see what was going on,and the goon had his shotgun pointed at my dog while he was walking to the front of my house.my dog continued barking at him,walking backwards,keeping his distance,but nonetheless barking.i told the goon to put his gun up,and he would not,saying that i needed to call my dog off.i asked the goon if it was his policy to shoot first,and his reply was that he was not going to get bit.the other goon came around and took his handcuffs off of his belt and told me he would arrest me if i did not call my dog off. icould go on for a while,but now maybe you can get the picture. by the way malarcky,dogs are smarter than you think,and if i needed my english graded,i would be on a different forum.thanks to everyone else for your input.
Snowbandit
Member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2007
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 54
Knowing the state your in is helpful. This is the law for Tennessee:
A bounty hunter cannot have a criminal record, must notify the local police of defendant’s location, and present to the police a copy of the warrant, a copy of the bond, and evidence that the bounty hunter has been hired by the bond agent. (TC 40-11-3). The surety may arrest the defendant on a certified copy of the undertaking in any place in the state and by written authority on such a copy empower another to make the arrest (TC 40-11-133) The surety is also entitled to the assistance of the sheriff of any county to make the arrest. The certified copy of the undertaking must be exhibited to the principal upon arrest. (40-11-134) UCEA
From this information I would suspect you may have had a law enforcement officer on scene also but that's just a guess.
A bounty hunter cannot have a criminal record, must notify the local police of defendant’s location, and present to the police a copy of the warrant, a copy of the bond, and evidence that the bounty hunter has been hired by the bond agent. (TC 40-11-3). The surety may arrest the defendant on a certified copy of the undertaking in any place in the state and by written authority on such a copy empower another to make the arrest (TC 40-11-133) The surety is also entitled to the assistance of the sheriff of any county to make the arrest. The certified copy of the undertaking must be exhibited to the principal upon arrest. (40-11-134) UCEA
From this information I would suspect you may have had a law enforcement officer on scene also but that's just a guess.
Last edited:
[
A bounty hunter cannot have a criminal record, must notify the local police of defendant’s location, and present to the police a copy of the warrant, a copy of the bond, and evidence that the bounty hunter has been hired by the bond agent. (TC 40-11-3). [/QUOTE]
thanks.so when the police got there,you are saying that they should have alllready been notified that the bounty hunters would be there?i did see the warrant,and it was addresed to "an officer of the law"these guys had their guns drawn when i opened the door for the first time,to which i promptly shut.after several minutes of thru the door talking and realizing what they were there for,i opened the door to see some credentials.i asked them to id themselves and to which jurisdiction they belonged to,to which they told me they were "fugitive recovery agents' and were above the jurisdiction of anyone in the state. some more arguing took place and that is when my dogs went around back and i realized there were two more goons around back,i guess watching for a backdoor exit.when i called the law,they got off of my property and waited for the police to arrive.i guess the police should have all ready knew they were there, but they did not./
A bounty hunter cannot have a criminal record, must notify the local police of defendant’s location, and present to the police a copy of the warrant, a copy of the bond, and evidence that the bounty hunter has been hired by the bond agent. (TC 40-11-3). [/QUOTE]
thanks.so when the police got there,you are saying that they should have alllready been notified that the bounty hunters would be there?i did see the warrant,and it was addresed to "an officer of the law"these guys had their guns drawn when i opened the door for the first time,to which i promptly shut.after several minutes of thru the door talking and realizing what they were there for,i opened the door to see some credentials.i asked them to id themselves and to which jurisdiction they belonged to,to which they told me they were "fugitive recovery agents' and were above the jurisdiction of anyone in the state. some more arguing took place and that is when my dogs went around back and i realized there were two more goons around back,i guess watching for a backdoor exit.when i called the law,they got off of my property and waited for the police to arrive.i guess the police should have all ready knew they were there, but they did not./
lagavulin62
Member
dogs are surely not dumb animals. it's just when it sounds like they are behaving like humans I begin to have my doubts. thanks for the clarification. it makes sense now.
Snowbandit
Member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2007
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 54
Each jurisdiction likely handles the notification procedure differently. Some are probably happy to be informed after a suspect is picked up, although that doesn't appear to be in the spirit of the law. As the suspect used your address, apparently with your permission, there seems little doubt they had a right to come and see if he was there. That's why I suggest you be a bit more careful about who you give permission to use your address. A smart attorney could make a case against you for conspiracy to commit fraud or even aiding escape.
well sorry for the unclarity??if you noticed my picture,i am a dog!!!!!!!!!!!no just kidding,but my dog does take on the personality of a human,and sometimes i describe him as such,which ,im sure,is a whole nuther forum
[ A smart attorney could make a case against you for conspiracy to commit fraud or even aiding escape.[/QUOTE]
well that does not make sense at all.i guess i left something out.the guy they were trying to apprehend is in jail,and has been since nov 2010,and will be in for awhile.so how could they not tell THAT was his address,and i sure as heck could not help someone "escape" when they are already locked up
well that does not make sense at all.i guess i left something out.the guy they were trying to apprehend is in jail,and has been since nov 2010,and will be in for awhile.so how could they not tell THAT was his address,and i sure as heck could not help someone "escape" when they are already locked up
i do realize they had a right to come see if he was there or not,but after i told them he was in jail,they should have left,end of story.but instead they demanded entrance to my house,and were waving there guns around at my pets.any smart attorney could have them arrested for aggravated assualt and reckless endangerment, in my opinion. i feel the bounty hunters should be allowed to hunt bondskippers,but not abuse their priveleges of being able to carry firearms.if you scared of dogs,DO NOT BECOME A BOUNTY HUNTER OR A POSTMAN!!
Snowbandit
Member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2007
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 54
Yeah....... that was kind of important information. Hope it didn't take you that long to inform the guys at your door where their fugitive was. They may have been from another jurisdiction, even another state, and not have known. A very quick bit of cooperation from you, which they could confirm by telephone, and they would have been happy campers. More importantly, they would have been gone. All they wanted was the fugitive which you now know they have a right to.
the informatiomn that he was in jail was the first thing i told them,and had they done their job,and checked in with the local sheriff's dept. before they came trouncing around,they would have known that.anyway,they did not,and they made fools of themselves .i guess i havent painted the picture the way i intended.kind of hard to see how it really went down unless you were there.in my opinion,these guys have been watching too much tv
lagavulin62
Member
well your original post did mention that the guy was in jail so we got the picture there. but forget about the guns aimed recklessly at the dogs, you also said they pulled their guns on YOU after informing them their man was not at your place and you even gave them a location that could easily be verified. yet they don't believe you and pull their guns YOU. now based on your story you need to be filing charges on these guys asap. never mind if it wins or not but that is just plain reckless and there was never a threat posed for that action. based on what you have written that is how I see it. also lets don't forget that apparently you can be an ex con to do this job. isn't the thug of all bounty hunters(dog) an ex con from huntsville(tx). press charges on these guys or at the very least consult an attorney. this really smells nasty to me.
LoboGunLeather
US Veteran
Those engaged in the "bail enforcement" (aka: fugitive apprehension, etc) business are acting as agents of the bailee (the surety on the bond posted for bail). As such, they have all of the authority of the bailee when acting on his behalf. The agency agreement will spell out what compensation the agent is entitled to if successful in apprehending the fugitive bailor, and is typically a percentage of the amount that the bailee (surety) will have to surrender to the court in the event that the fugitive cannot be produced.
Surety bonds posted to secure bail are essentially a form of insurance policy. The bailor makes certain promises, such as appearing at court appearances as ordered, and grants to the bailee (surety) certain levels of control over his person and permitted activities (such as requirements not to change addresses without notification/permission, not to leave the state, checking in with the surety on certain days and times, etc). Any violation of any of the terms and conditions can be cause for the surety to take physical custody of the bailor, deliver him to the court (or sheriff), and discharge the bond.
These agents are typically free-lance operators who receive no compensation whatsoever unless they successfully produce the fugitive (or directly cause the apprehension). All expenses incurred in the investigation to locate the fugitive are typically paid by the agent (travel, lodging, meals, document fees, public records fees, etc). This contributes to a situation in which the agent knows that he is burning his own money in hopes of collecting a larger sum upon apprehension of the fugitive. Adding in the fact that the friends and relatives of fugitives are not always forthcoming or helpful, and you may experience situations in which the bail enforcement agents stretch the envelope, or step over the line.
Each state is different, but usually the business activities of bail bondsmen will be regulated by a state agency, such as an insurance commissioner or similar office. You should be able to find a means to file complaints to the oversight agency controlling the licensing and activities of bail bondsmen. Since the men that came to your home were acting as agents of the surety, that surety is responsible for their acts as a simple application of the laws of agency in general (subject to limitations based upon whether or not the agent was acting in accordance with the instructions of his principal).
A complaint to the appropriate oversight agency in your state should, at a minimum, put the surety (bail bondsman) on notice that he is rather exposed to sanctions (license suspension, revocation, etc) by retaining the services of agents that are behaving in the manner described. There may also be other legal remedies that could be applied.
In cases such as this I would expect the bail bondsman might reply to complaints with comments like: "No, I never told them to carry guns", "No, I never told them to go at night", "No, I didn't tell them to go to that house", etc. You might also find that his agreement with the agents provided specific instructions and/or restrictions of their actions, in which case the agents may have been acting outside of the authority of the surety, thus exposed to criminal or civil sanctions. Or you may find that the surety provided little or nothing in the way of instructions or restrictions, thus opening an argument of negligence in selecting and retaining the agents, failure to properly supervise the agents, or other impropriety.
Again, all states are different in their laws and regulations of such businesses. Since you seem to have suffered no measurable or quantifiable injury (property damage, personal injury, loss of work, etc) you may find that you have little upon which to base a civil claim (lawsuit). In that case, your best hope for redress would be civil or administrative action by the agency that licenses and regulates bail bondsmen and/or bondsmens' agents.
Surety bonds posted to secure bail are essentially a form of insurance policy. The bailor makes certain promises, such as appearing at court appearances as ordered, and grants to the bailee (surety) certain levels of control over his person and permitted activities (such as requirements not to change addresses without notification/permission, not to leave the state, checking in with the surety on certain days and times, etc). Any violation of any of the terms and conditions can be cause for the surety to take physical custody of the bailor, deliver him to the court (or sheriff), and discharge the bond.
These agents are typically free-lance operators who receive no compensation whatsoever unless they successfully produce the fugitive (or directly cause the apprehension). All expenses incurred in the investigation to locate the fugitive are typically paid by the agent (travel, lodging, meals, document fees, public records fees, etc). This contributes to a situation in which the agent knows that he is burning his own money in hopes of collecting a larger sum upon apprehension of the fugitive. Adding in the fact that the friends and relatives of fugitives are not always forthcoming or helpful, and you may experience situations in which the bail enforcement agents stretch the envelope, or step over the line.
Each state is different, but usually the business activities of bail bondsmen will be regulated by a state agency, such as an insurance commissioner or similar office. You should be able to find a means to file complaints to the oversight agency controlling the licensing and activities of bail bondsmen. Since the men that came to your home were acting as agents of the surety, that surety is responsible for their acts as a simple application of the laws of agency in general (subject to limitations based upon whether or not the agent was acting in accordance with the instructions of his principal).
A complaint to the appropriate oversight agency in your state should, at a minimum, put the surety (bail bondsman) on notice that he is rather exposed to sanctions (license suspension, revocation, etc) by retaining the services of agents that are behaving in the manner described. There may also be other legal remedies that could be applied.
In cases such as this I would expect the bail bondsman might reply to complaints with comments like: "No, I never told them to carry guns", "No, I never told them to go at night", "No, I didn't tell them to go to that house", etc. You might also find that his agreement with the agents provided specific instructions and/or restrictions of their actions, in which case the agents may have been acting outside of the authority of the surety, thus exposed to criminal or civil sanctions. Or you may find that the surety provided little or nothing in the way of instructions or restrictions, thus opening an argument of negligence in selecting and retaining the agents, failure to properly supervise the agents, or other impropriety.
Again, all states are different in their laws and regulations of such businesses. Since you seem to have suffered no measurable or quantifiable injury (property damage, personal injury, loss of work, etc) you may find that you have little upon which to base a civil claim (lawsuit). In that case, your best hope for redress would be civil or administrative action by the agency that licenses and regulates bail bondsmen and/or bondsmens' agents.
Last edited:
Steve in Vermont
Member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
- Messages
- 1,969
- Reaction score
- 1,379
Just looking at this from an unbiased viewpoint, I ask myself about the qualifications of these "Bounty Hunters". Sure, no criminal record, etc. But we can say that about 90% of the population. What about training in arrest procedure? Firearms? Use of force? All the skills we require of a LEO. Are they required to carry liability insurance? I've know a few people who called themselves "Bounty Hunters" and several of them I wouldn't have trusted with a sling shot. Just the thought of some of these folks armed and engaged in this business makes me shudder.
scooter123
Member
I think that Lobogunleather put it pretty well and that reporting of these fools to the proper state agencies is very much in order. I also suspect at some point these fools will try this at the wrong house, if someone came to my door with guns in hand they'd better be wearing a uniform. Otherwise they face the very real possibility of getting shot because armed pushins are much too common and becoming more common as the local economy continues to stagnate.
I can speak with some certainty only about these issues here in Iowa. Fugitive Recovery Agents must be licensed by the Iowa Department of Public Safety. This is the same agency that licenses Security companies and Private Investigators. I know this because I have both licenses. A licensee must pass a criminal background check and be bonded and carry liability insurance. I have no interest in obtaining the Fugitive Recovery license, but I have been told the liability insurance is prohibitively expensive. Mine is quite expensive now with the other two licenses, and that's with no claims. I can't say for sure, but I suspect a lot of people set themselves up in these businesses without licenses or insurance. They watch "Dog" and think it's exciting.
It's the same way in the PI business. People think if Jim Rockford could do that for "$200 a day plus expenses"
it must be pretty easy. I have to explain reality to them all the time. Unfortunately when these people harm somebody, there is no insurance company to pay any claims, and of course they don't usually have any money, so nobody gets made whole. Those of us who play by the rules get really irritated by those folks.
It's the same way in the PI business. People think if Jim Rockford could do that for "$200 a day plus expenses"
it must be pretty easy. I have to explain reality to them all the time. Unfortunately when these people harm somebody, there is no insurance company to pay any claims, and of course they don't usually have any money, so nobody gets made whole. Those of us who play by the rules get really irritated by those folks.
