In the course of my job as a deputy sheriff, serving civil papers was an unpleasant necessity. I often visited the various small US Post Offices in the county to inquire about folks I couldn't find. One such visit with the postmaster resulted in a shocked expression on her face when she explained, "That's my son-in-law!"
After getting her calmed down, I explained I wasn't there to arrest him, but only to serve him notice to appear in court in a civil suit. She told me where he lived, so I thanked her and went looking for him. He either wasn't at home or he refused to come to the door, so the next day I went back to the post office to ask her where he worked or if there was anywhere else I might find him. She said he was a good man who just had some troubles, and I should leave him alone. Well, when the court issues papers, I have to deliver them. I told her I'd be as gentle as I could, but I needed to find him.
Several attempts later, I found him and served the papers. I gave him no more thought until a call came in a couple of months later saying a man had been shot by his neighbor. I was one of the responding officers. We found the postmaster's son-in-law in his back yard bleeding from a wound to his abdomen. A .22 semi-automatic rifle was on the ground with a broken stock. While waiting for the ambulance, we asked him who shot him and where was that person now. He said the neighbor had taken his dog to the vet to be treated for a gunshot wound. And how did the dog come to have that wound? He said the dog came to his house on a regular basis and got into his trash, so he shot it with the .22 rifle.
The ambulance arrived and loaded him for transport, and I went to the nearby vet's office to find the suspect. The man with the dog told me his neighbor had shot the dog while he was out walking the dog, and he saw the man shoot it. I asked what happened then. He said he yelled at the man, they exchanged words, he grabbed up his dog and transported the dog to the vet. "So how did your neighbor get shot?"
"HE GOT SHOT?"
"Yes, in the abdomen. He said you were upset about your dog and you shot him."
"He's lying. I didn't even have a gun with me. I have no idea how he got shot."
I got his statement in writing, then went back to the house. The rifle was lying on the back porch of the house, its stock in two pieces. A live round was in the chamber, and several more were in the tubular magazine. I noticed a fresh indentation in the cedar roof support post near the rifle, about 18" above the ground. The shape of the indentation matched the shape of the top of the broken stock on the rifle.
I went to the hospital and waited for the doctor to finish with the man, then interviewed him again about what happened. He went back through the same story again, claiming the guy with the dog shot him before taking the dog to the vet. I showed him photos of the broken stock on his rifle and the matching dent in the post. I told him I believed I'd find his fingerprints on the barrel of the rifle where he gripped it and swung it against the post, resulting in the rifle firing into his abdomen. He finally admitted he was angry because the man had told him he would bring the vet bill to him to pay, and he broke the rifle in a fit of rage.
Several more months rocked on, and we got a call reporting an accidental drowning at the pond behind that same house. He claimed he had come home from work and didn't find his wife in the house, so he walked down to the pond where he saw her floating face down. He dragged her out and tried to revive her before calling for help, but it was too late. Our investigator did a routine investigation, resulting in calling it an accidental drowning.
By this time the postmaster, mother of the victim, was no longer convinced her son-in-law was an upstanding, misunderstood, innocent man. She contacted our investigator frequently, urging him to reopen the investigation, but he was steadfast in his refusal. That didn't stop her, though. Getting no sympathy at the sheriff's office, she went to the local police. The drowning had occurred outside the city, so they were not part of the original investigation. One of their investigators took an interest in the case and began working on it on his own time. He reviewed the autopsy findings and talked with the medical examiner, who said there were some marks on the victim's neck, but he attributed them to the husband's revival attempt. They also could be attributed to someone holding her head underwater. The investigator also did an intensive study of drownings and came up with a fact that everyone else had missed. Drowning victims sink as their lungs fill with water. They don't float until decay creates gasses that bloat the body. After lining up expert witnesses to testify to those facts, he was able to convince the DA to impanel a grand jury, and they returned an indictment. He was convicted and is still in prison.
After getting her calmed down, I explained I wasn't there to arrest him, but only to serve him notice to appear in court in a civil suit. She told me where he lived, so I thanked her and went looking for him. He either wasn't at home or he refused to come to the door, so the next day I went back to the post office to ask her where he worked or if there was anywhere else I might find him. She said he was a good man who just had some troubles, and I should leave him alone. Well, when the court issues papers, I have to deliver them. I told her I'd be as gentle as I could, but I needed to find him.
Several attempts later, I found him and served the papers. I gave him no more thought until a call came in a couple of months later saying a man had been shot by his neighbor. I was one of the responding officers. We found the postmaster's son-in-law in his back yard bleeding from a wound to his abdomen. A .22 semi-automatic rifle was on the ground with a broken stock. While waiting for the ambulance, we asked him who shot him and where was that person now. He said the neighbor had taken his dog to the vet to be treated for a gunshot wound. And how did the dog come to have that wound? He said the dog came to his house on a regular basis and got into his trash, so he shot it with the .22 rifle.
The ambulance arrived and loaded him for transport, and I went to the nearby vet's office to find the suspect. The man with the dog told me his neighbor had shot the dog while he was out walking the dog, and he saw the man shoot it. I asked what happened then. He said he yelled at the man, they exchanged words, he grabbed up his dog and transported the dog to the vet. "So how did your neighbor get shot?"
"HE GOT SHOT?"
"Yes, in the abdomen. He said you were upset about your dog and you shot him."
"He's lying. I didn't even have a gun with me. I have no idea how he got shot."
I got his statement in writing, then went back to the house. The rifle was lying on the back porch of the house, its stock in two pieces. A live round was in the chamber, and several more were in the tubular magazine. I noticed a fresh indentation in the cedar roof support post near the rifle, about 18" above the ground. The shape of the indentation matched the shape of the top of the broken stock on the rifle.
I went to the hospital and waited for the doctor to finish with the man, then interviewed him again about what happened. He went back through the same story again, claiming the guy with the dog shot him before taking the dog to the vet. I showed him photos of the broken stock on his rifle and the matching dent in the post. I told him I believed I'd find his fingerprints on the barrel of the rifle where he gripped it and swung it against the post, resulting in the rifle firing into his abdomen. He finally admitted he was angry because the man had told him he would bring the vet bill to him to pay, and he broke the rifle in a fit of rage.
Several more months rocked on, and we got a call reporting an accidental drowning at the pond behind that same house. He claimed he had come home from work and didn't find his wife in the house, so he walked down to the pond where he saw her floating face down. He dragged her out and tried to revive her before calling for help, but it was too late. Our investigator did a routine investigation, resulting in calling it an accidental drowning.
By this time the postmaster, mother of the victim, was no longer convinced her son-in-law was an upstanding, misunderstood, innocent man. She contacted our investigator frequently, urging him to reopen the investigation, but he was steadfast in his refusal. That didn't stop her, though. Getting no sympathy at the sheriff's office, she went to the local police. The drowning had occurred outside the city, so they were not part of the original investigation. One of their investigators took an interest in the case and began working on it on his own time. He reviewed the autopsy findings and talked with the medical examiner, who said there were some marks on the victim's neck, but he attributed them to the husband's revival attempt. They also could be attributed to someone holding her head underwater. The investigator also did an intensive study of drownings and came up with a fact that everyone else had missed. Drowning victims sink as their lungs fill with water. They don't float until decay creates gasses that bloat the body. After lining up expert witnesses to testify to those facts, he was able to convince the DA to impanel a grand jury, and they returned an indictment. He was convicted and is still in prison.
