Speaker Identification

Speaker 1 - Host: Chip DeBlock. The host identifies himself by name at the opening and leads the program, sponsor reads, story introductions, and interview questions.

Speaker 2 - Guest: Chief Ralph. The guest is introduced as a chief joining from California. His surname is rendered inconsistently in the automated transcript and should be verified.

Speaker 3 - Prerecorded Advertisement Voice: A separate promotional voice used in the Galls commercial.

Speaker 1 - Host: Welcome to LEO Round Table at LEORoundTable.com. My name is Chip DeBlock and I'm your host for Group of Law Enforcement Professionals to talk about today's news and issues, but we do it from a law enforcement perspective. You recognize that we've got Chief Ralph on the show all the way from California, so thank you so much for being on the show Chief. And guys, shout out to our sponsors, police supporters, sponsors that go to the great links to bring this good quality content to you. We have our title sponsor, Galls.com, also Comply Technologies, our satellite sponsor. We have GunLearn.com, MyMedicare.live, and Tobell's.com, they've built a new online store at LEORoundTable.com. Please check that out. You get cool shirts like the one I'm wearing or the mug behind me. Also, a shout out to Brian Burns for the Tampa Free Press at TampaFP.com. Thanks for carrying our content. Brian, Ray Dietrich, also with FormerLawman.com and Travis Yates with LawOfficer.com. Thanks to all of these supporters for helping make the show happen. And guys, if you want to watch the show, we are on every podcast outlet known to man, including Spotify and Apple Podcasts, two of the largest. Also, our social media, we're on Rumble and YouTube, we're on Facebook and X, formerly Twitter and Truth Social. And even during the live show, we're streaming, I think, to like five Facebook pages right now. We also have several additional streams supported by one of our longtime supporters. So on Saturday, my wife and I were on phone call with family. I've got a lot of family up in the Georgia area. One of my nephews, I've got from the same sister, I've got six nieces and nephews. They finally stopped when they had the girl. She was number six, right? So one of the ones in the middle, a boy, six years ago, a little over six years ago, diagnosed with a glioblastoma, which is brain cancer. And I don't know of anyone that's ever survived it. And usually it moves rather quickly. So God has blessed him with over six years of being alive with that diagnosis. That diagnosis changes the way you look at life. When you deal with stuff like this, much to my surprise and a lot of family members when he got diagnosed, he had a girlfriend at the time and they got married three months later. Their wedding was probably the best one I have ever attended. It was at I think it was a Yonah Mountain Vineyards. It was a winery. Oh my gosh, it was absolutely beautiful. They got married and so they've been together ever since. So he just came and visited me about two months ago. And he's been doing good. He's been on trials and treatments and all kinds of stuff. And he's been functioning very, very well. Had some eyesight issues. Again, remember we're talking brain cancer. So things like that can happen. And he's had some brain surgeries and stuff, but I found out Saturday that it had turned for the worse and he was placed under hospice care. It happened that quickly. And if I wanted to be able to communicate with him before he passes, I needed to get up there. So I hope everybody understands. I'm sure you guys do. My wife and I frantically made plans to go through on Monday and we got back late yesterday, Wednesday. And so that's why with no notice, our producer had to put some material together and we had some other content airing. We still had the show, but that's what happened. So I appreciate the support of a lot of you guys, including Chief Ralph and reaching out to me and praying for us. I ask you, please keep the family in your prayers. The chief and I have been around a lot of stuff like this, a lot of a lot of death in our careers and our lives. And it doesn't necessarily affect us as much as it does other people. I view myself as being in more of a supportive role in all this stuff. It's part of life. And let me just also mention that as a Christian, it's a game changer. I remember when I lost my dad, which was pretty brutal for me, but I had the assurance that I will see him again. So it wasn't saying goodbye, it was just like, see you later. And I had that conversation with my dad before he passed from a mesothelioma, an aggressive cancer affecting the lining around the lungs. So, so anyhow, pray for the family. They are not used to this. For some of them, this is the first time, this is the first time that some of the nieces and nephews have dealt with something like this. They never lost, you know, they haven't lost a parent or sibling. And so keep the family in your prayers. I will be going back up more than likely relatively soon because of what comes next. And then I'm going to be spending Thanksgiving up there with the family. So hopefully all that will work out and some good things will come out of this, but keep the family in your prayers. I hope that sufficiently explains why I've been absent this week, but we are live today and Friday. So did I cover that? Good enough. Chief Ralph.

Speaker 2 - Guest: Yeah, you did. And in my prayers for your family and your nephew, because I went through this, especially with glioblastoma with my mother and a good friend of mine last year passed away in August. What can I say? I mean, prayers for him and the family, you know, his siblings and his mother and father, and for you, Chip and also for you and your wife, Patricia.

Speaker 1 - Host: Well, thank you. You know, it's so funny that you go, you go from, I mean, look, even if you're not a Christian, I mean, you know, there are no atheists and foxholes, right? I mean, even non-Christians, they're praying that God, when they have a loved one or someone they care about who is suffering, you know, that's a God, please say, God - the one I may never have talked to before, please save them, right? But then you reach the point when it gets bad enough and becomes quality-of-life issues. You say, God, please take them quickly. You know, we're no longer praying for them to be saved. You want them taken quickly because you don't like to see them in pain. And of course, as Christians, we know that there's a life after death that is a beautiful thing. And with that eternal body, you never, you are never in pain, hungry, tired, all that stuff. So, so, so yeah, it's pretty amazing that you go, you go in those stages, you know, so yeah, so now we're, you know, we're, we're hoping that he's, you know, not going to suffer. And I don't really don't think he's suffering or anything right now, but it's, you know, you know, you don't want that process to be too long, you know, so. Chip, may I say something? My father died of mesothelioma also. Seriously? Yes. My dad worked around asbestos way before they knew anything like that, you know, existed, you know, and, and, and sure, and sure enough. That's tough. That's tough.

Speaker 2 - Guest: My father ran the Bronx Iron and Metal Corporation in South Bronx for years. I mean, 45 years before he was diagnosed with that. In running that business, he was exposed through the crushing and processing of metals. You know, it's, it's, it's a, fortunately he got five or more years, you know, of living because of a surgery they performed in Boston.

Speaker 1 - Host: Yeah, my dad was only given six months to a year and a half and he lived for about five and a half years after being diagnosed. So that was a meaningful extension of his life. Yeah.

Speaker 2 - Guest: God bless your father.

Speaker 1 - Host: Well, thanks. Thank you. It's funny. We didn't know we had all this commonality, this common ground here. So, so let me run through the stories real quick that we're going to be talking about guys to give you an idea of what is ahead our first story is the main topic, federal appeals court in Georgia upends an Alabama family restriction for convicted parents. This is a difficult issue that requires careful thought. We're going to talk about whether if you have, if you have a conviction for, I want to be careful how this is involving pornography, but let's just say you have a conviction for something involving children and you've got some states that will prohibit you from being able to have contact or certain kinds of contact with your own children or spend the night with them or whatever. So, you know, is that right? Is that wrong? And we've got a court that has made a ruling on that might surprise you. So we're going to cover that. I think it's going to be an interesting exercise of the, of the, of the brain. We've got disgraced former Milwaukee judge. Her name is Hannah Dugan. She's the one that let the illegal out the back door when ICE was waiting for him and she was actively pulling ICE in different directions so they could pull this off and stuff. So she was sentenced and it's being called a miscarriage of justice. We're going to talk about that. We got body cam. She was deputy shooting a knife-wielding suspect during a mental-health call. We also have a dash cam released after an inspector general found that a trooper using a PIT maneuver was not justified in the, in the, in the troop or issue initiated By my count, the trooper attempted three PIT maneuvers on the same car, but they're saying he wasn't justified. We're going to talk about whether they're going to prosecute him or not. Then we got a court rules that a family cannot sue an officer who fired fatal shots in a Harding Street raid. It was a no-knock warrant. And then if we have time to get to a body cam show suspect being injured in a shoot out during a foot chase. So that's kind of the way we're going to roll. So if you do not mind, we will start with the heavy one first, the main one. Tampa Free Press at TampaFP.com. We got a couple of minutes before first commercial break. We have federal appeals court in Georgia upends a Alabama family restriction for convicted parents. So I kind of find this fascinating because it really is an exercise of the brain. It involves all kinds of like ethics and morals and so take us all the consideration. Guys, as you guys consider this, the United States Court of Appeals, this is for the 11th circuit. The issued a major ruling on Monday, declaring that the fundamental right of a parent to live with their children, it extends to all parents, including those with past convictions for child pornography. So think about that for a minute. So in an en banc decision, the court tackled the challenge. And this is dealing with the Alabama. Now they do things differently in Alabama. All right. And so the Alabama sex offender registration and community notification act, the 2011 state law and permanently bars certain adult sex offenders. Remember, this is considered part of a sex offender charge, you know, the pornography. So at bars, adult sex offenders convicted of offenses involving a child from residing or staying overnight with any minor, including their own, because the loss definition of a sex offense involving a child includes child pornography. The restriction applies directly to plaintiff, a guy named Bruce Henry permanently, permanently preventing him from living with his young son. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Robin Rosenbaum emphasized that the right of a parent to establish a home and raise their children is perhaps the oldest fundamental liberty that exists and is secured by the Fourteenth Amendment. So I'm going to stop there. We've got a judge that feels differently. That's going to chime in a cheap judge coming up. But we are going to start the music here. We're going to go to our first commercial break. So guys, this is a deep one. We'll be coming right back to it right after commercial break. Here we go.

Speaker 3 - Prerecorded Advertisement Voice: My family only cares about one thing that I come home safe and golf. Every order begins with a promise made with purpose. Stitched for support. Back with pride. Answered by dedicated hands. Delivering the standard. You have sworn to help. We serve more than the mission. We serve the person. Each piece is engineered to help get our first responders through the shift. Back home safe.

Speaker 1 - Host:

Speaker 1 - Host: Welcome back. LEO Round Table at LEORoundTable.com. The law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBlock and I'm your host. And we're talking about a main topic. It's going to get you thinking here. We've got a federal appeals court in Georgia and it kind of up ends the Alabama family restriction for convicted parent. Now we're talking about this guy named Bruce Henry. And he is a convicted sex offender, but involving child pornography. OK, so that I think that's an important distinction to make. I mean, I know that we're talking about some stuff that people heavily frown on and I think that we all should. But there is a distinction between, let's just say, having. Sex with children and looking at pornography and the water can be kind of muddy and stuff. But in Alabama, there are sex offender registration and community notification act. It encompasses these people involving these types of crimes, including pornography. And so as a result of that, it prevents Bruce Henry permanently from living with this with this young son. And I believe, if I remember reading correctly, that he got married and he had a son after the conviction of him, not mistaken. So writing for the majority, we've got the circuit judge Robin Rosenbaum emphasized that the right of a parent to establish a home and raise their children is it's the quote, perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interest, unquote, secured by the 14th amendment. Now, the state of Alabama urged or argued that the certain classes of parents forfeit these fundamental rights entirely due to past misconduct committed years before the children were born. And the court directly rejected that sweeping approach. So listen to this quote, but the Supreme Court and our history and tradition have spoken unambiguously parents, even those who have committed state defined misconduct, enjoy the fundamental right to live with their children according to the judge Rosenbaum. Now, Henry pleaded guilty back in 2013 to knowingly possessing child pornography after federal authorities discovered he had two videotapes and 348 photos on the computer. He served five years in prison and he then entered supervised release. So this is releasing completed sex offender treatment program, maintain steady employment, intended support groups. His supervised release was extended to March of 2026 because he had two lapses. There was some probation that they found pornography on his computer. It looks like adult and teen pornography when they did searches back in 2019, but he has had no further violations. And so that's been like for several years. In August of 2021, Henry and his wife had a son. So under Alabama's law, he faced a lifetime restriction with no option for administrative relief, meaning that he could never live under the same roof as his child or stay past 10 30 p. m. The federal appeals court noted that recognizing the fundamental right, it does not mean the state can regulate it. They ultimately remanded the case to the lower court to make that specific determination. And I told you about a dissent. So we've got a dissent from Chief Judge, William Pryor. And he was joined by three other judges and they argued that the majority improperly framed the issue by ignoring Henry or the man's criminal status. So that was that was their counter to this. Chief Ralph, you know, you said it right from the beginning about human this nature and how do you address these issues? But I, you know, I always when I used to work with the Department of Children and Family Services going into gangs, homes and evaluations of child abuse or pornography, I always side with protecting the child protecting the child. You know, and you know, what bothers me is that you mentioned something and I read it the fact that he did violate probation twice, I believe. And it can that concerns me. So I mean, if they're Goines at this Rosenbaum's decision stands, if I understand it correctly, you know, this man's got to be monitored very closely. I mean, and you know, we all we know, when you're involved in this and I used to work with some of the special victims detectives who share upon them, when you get into pornography, child pornography, they always need to tell me is that the gravitation of Goines from the videos to the touching in reality, the risk can increase because that risk can still be there. And that's what concerns me about this young son. You know, I pray to God that doesn't happen. I hope this man Henry has got a hold of himself and put himself in the right position mentally, you know, and going to counseling and everything. But I'm really perplexed by this, you know, the audience and also chip because I interviewed a gang member one time through an analytical interviewing class and they put me alone in a room that the trauma and damage to this young man is immense, is immense. So, you know, I don't know, I'm really perplexed on this one. I really am, Jim. Yeah, I you brought up, you brought counseling and I'm glad you went there because I mean, I mean, look, these guys look, this is a, you know, it's wrong, but these guys reaches the point where it really becomes a sickness. I mean, in the in the in the cheap is correct in being concerned. And that's why you really need professionals involved. When I see professionals, I'm talking about mental health professionals because there are, there's different reasons why these things happen. And guys, I know enough to get my to get myself hurt on this topic, but I do know that some of these guys are or have been abused growing up in their life, like the cheap was just talking about a man that he talked to in the jails and stuff. And they actually end up doing some of the same things that were done to them. It doesn't make any sense, but that's where this mental component comes in. There's just a lot of stuff they need when I say professional, they need professional help. And that is if, you know, we're going to get them back in society where they can function at least some level. The court remanded it back to lower court to figure out what the restrictions were going to be because they didn't say that it should be unbridled right that you should have all kinds of contact without any restrictions or anything like that. And you're right. You know, he slipped up and had the pornography on his computer, what seven, maybe up to seven years ago. They haven't had any further instances, but I think it's fairly safe to say that they haven't had any further instances that they know about. You know, so it's an it's an interesting conundrum. You know, when you've got you've got you've got maybe inherent rights as a parent, but some actions that you've taken in your past now can influence, you know, whether you have those rights or not, or if you have restrictions on those rights. You know, you know, Chip, I know, I know, I know you don't want it. We got all the tops and top, but I have to address this. This young gang member was sexually abused by his father as uncle. And you know what this gang member told me? He said, Lieutenant, he goes, I committed two murders because of the damage my uncle and my father put on it.

Speaker 1 - Host: Well, perfect time. And yep, a deep topic. We could we could spend a while talking about this, but we're going back to commercial break. Guys, this is our second one. We'll be right back.

Speaker 1 - Host / Advertisement Read: All right, guys, it's time to talk about Comply Technologies at Comply Technologies. com. And they are committed to providing non lethal solutions to help officers gain the upper hand safely and rapidly in a humane low-optic manner, utilizing what they're called their CD3, which stands for Conductive Distraction and De-escalation Device technology. Now, their flagship product we all know by now is called the glove. It's not only helped officers tens of thousands of times, but they've actually had over 250,000 deployments. And guess what? No injuries, no deaths. It's an amazing status actually helped them achieve non lethal status in an arena that predominantly can only offer less lethal results. And when it comes to weapons retention, transitioning to a sidearm or a conducted-energy weapon, the glove of Comply Technologies. com, they virtually eliminated weapons confusion. So stay ahead of the game. We'll Comply Technologies and the revolutionary CD3, the hundreds of agencies have already turned to nationwide. And friends, take it from me. When it comes to safety, this is one of those common sense hands on solutions has ever come along. Go to Comply Technologies. com today. Welcome back. LEO Round Table at LEORoundTable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBlock and I'm your host for joined by Chief Ralph Rannellis all the way from California. Wow, we've had a doozy. The first topic took up half the show, Chief talking about how they're doing things in Alabama with people that are that are involved in sex crimes with like children, including pornography and even though parents might have an inherent right to live with their and be around their children and stuff, you know, Alabama permanently, you know, kind of forbids it. And now we've got a, you know, appellate court that changed that. So it was an interesting story. So thanks for taking that. We're going to jump to our next one. It's at townhall. com. And this judge is pretty famous now. Um, disgraced former Milwaukee judge Hannah Dugan was sentenced and they're calling it a miscarriage of justice. So yeah, we're Milwaukee County judge, Hannah Dugan was found guilty back in December of one felony obstruction charge for a role in aiding in an illegal alien named Eduardo Flores-Ruiz to he she aided him in evading ICE because they're trying to take him into custody at the courthouse after he appeared in her courtroom on a domestic violence charge. In fact, it's domestic violence charges. There was more than one before trial. The judge had argued that she enjoyed judicial immunity for her actions. So this is not with the trial with the illegal alien, but before her trial where she lost in December, she thought that she had judicial immunity. So as I say this, and as we're coming up on another case that involves qualified immunity, the judge is talking about something that's called absolute immunity. And judges get it absolutely. They don't have to qualify for it. They get it automatically. Whereas with cops, we have to qualify for it in order to get it at all. So she's claiming, judicial immunity, which is essentially, um, absolute immunity. And after she's convicted, her defense team later tried to get the verdict thrown out when they argued that she deserved another trial or dismissal of the guilty verdict. Now federal judge Lynn Adelman denied both of those motions and rescheduled Judge Dugan's June 3rd sentencing for July the 8th. Now, uh, yesterday. So Judge Dugan faced five years behind bars and a fine up to $250,000. So she faced up the five years in jail and a quarter of a million dollars and fine. But yesterday she was given a $5,000 fine. So yeah, not 250,000, but 5,000. And that's it. No prison time, no five years in jail. No, no one day in jail, nothing. No prison time and no probation. No probation either. Judge Dugan reportedly spoke about her sentencing remained defiant that she maintained that she had done nothing wrong. And yeah, that's just the kind of person you don't want to send a message to apparently judge Alderman said that prison was not necessary for Judge Dugan. So the only silver lining according to her article is that the felony conviction means that she will never be able to serve as a judge again. Although she is not entirely barred from practicing law.

Speaker 2 - Guest: Chief Ralph, you know, it didn't surprise me, you know, and especially with this judge Lynn Adelman. I believe that, you know, she gave a light sentence. I liked sentenced to Judge Dugan. Was that a Freudian? Was that a Freudian slip? Do you really want her to get a life sentence, Chief? I said light. I know, but did you want her? Was that a Freudian slip? No, would your mind think in that? No, you know, like in prison for that? No, you know, I believe she deserves more than a $5,000 fine. I mean, I would have rather seen her get a $250,000 fine. And what she did because it was Goines against federal law and helping an illegal alien who committed crimes in our country get out of the back door and she facilitated that. So, you know, I'm not pleased by that. And I'll tell you something else. You mentioned something very interesting. It's going to be in our next story that here she gets, you know, a judicial immunity, right? You know, and she still keeps her bar, you know, a bar membership. Well, you know, we're going to talk about a decision about a search warrant where you and I know judges sign warrants and even if it turns out bad, nothing, there's no ramifications on them. But there's always ramifications on, you know, law enforcement and the counties or the cities that serve those warrants, you know. And so it's a very interesting dynamics, if I may say.

Speaker 1 - Host: No, you're right. And perfect segue. So I'll tell you what, I'm going to skip over the video component stories and we will jump into that one because it's probably the proper time to cover it. ABC13. com. So remember, we've been talking about a judge that has absolute immunity and boy, is she claiming it, trying, you know, trying to get away? She was still convicted, but then we had another judge who went soft on her. But in this particular case, we are talking about police officers. So ABC13. com court rules that a family cannot sue officer who fired fatal shots in a Harding Street raid. So look, this one is going to put a lot of a lot more. It's more challenging for me as the host because there's a lot of moving parts. And this is almost like watching a soap opera. There's a lot of there's a lot of moving parts and a lot of people here. So I will try to keep it straight for everybody that's listening. So we're going to Houston, Texas for starters. And this is from a KTRK. So in appeals court ruled that the families of Rhogena Nicholas and Dennis Tuttle that they cannot pursue a civil lawsuit against a former Houston police officer who fired shots during the raid that killed them both during a botched Harding Street raid. So Rhogena Nicholas and Dennis Tuttle, they're both deceased. They got killed during a police raid. And this is Houston police. So the decision comes more than seven years. Now that's quite some time cheap, but more than seven years after both of them, Nicholas and Tuttle were killed inside their southeast Houston home during January 2019. No knock drug raid that was based on false information. So that's all it says initially. So we have a former officer, Gerald Goines. He is the lead officer on this case, currently residing in prison, by the way. He obtained a search warrant. He's already serving a 60 year prison sentence for using false information to obtain a no-knock warrant. So he wouldn't be sentenced to jail if he was not a bad actor in this, in my opinion. So bad cop doesn't happen a lot. When it does, I love the fact that justice is done and that it works for the most part. So we've got this former officer, who is serving a 60 year prison sentence, but he was the lead officer on a no-knock warrant, which created this mess in the first place. The latest ruling focuses instead on whether a former officer, Felipe Gallegos can be held financially liable for the shooting. So officer Felipe Gallegos was one of the officers executing the warrant with the officer that was the case agent Goines. So going to prison, bad warrant, bad information apparently knew about it. And this other officer is executing that warrant for the other officer. In fact, a bunch of officers are, which is typical. So officer Gallegos has maintained throughout the case that he acted appropriately, argued that he had no way of knowing that no-knock warrant was based on false statements made by the other officer Goines, which is a plausible position. A three judge panel at the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, they actually agreed with him and they ruled that he acted like an objectively reasonable officer and that the court would not second guess his training and judgment, which required split second decisions during the exchange of gunfire. So just to reiterate, this guy's not in jail. The guy that drafted the author of the search warrant and was the bad actor, that bad cop, he is in jail. But this guy was not he's one of the officers that helped execute the warrant. And now he's being sued by surviving family and the judges saying, you know, this guy didn't know that I believe this guy didn't know anything was bad about it. He's just doing his job. So officer Gallegos attorney Rusty Hardin said that the ruling reinforces the purpose of qualified immunity. And this is what we say a lot on the show and it's good to make note of this attorney Hardin argued that without qualified immunity, officers would be facing personal financial risk every time someone challenged their actions, discouraging people from becoming police officers. And that's true. They came up with qualified immunity to stop frivolous lawsuits. And it you know, it works that way. So people that don't like it, you got to have it. Now attorneys representing the family surviving family, they strongly disagreed with the ruling in a statement. Attorney Mike Doyle said that Felipe Gallegos deliberately killed an unarmed woman on her couch. and then changed his account in an effort to justify something that is never justifiable. We believe that Judge Bennett was dead right when he confirmed a jury needed to make the decision about his honesty and the real facts. Doyle said the family plans to appeal the decision, hoping that ultimately present the case before a jury instead of a judge to determine who should be responsible for the deaths of Nicholas and Tuttle. So when I read this, and the surviving family's attorney saying that this cop who is qualified under qualified immunity, and this is civil from civil litigation, right? But when he shoots a woman on the couch, this unarmed, raises a lot of questions. So before the show started, the chief and I did a little research. And so here's the skinny on this. This was a cluster, this warrant. And I think that you see the chief shaking has said, you know, it was a cluster. So when officers entered, they carried M4-style or AR-15 rifles that shoot a.223 round or a 5.56. And these two people that are living in the house, they're sleeping and stuff. They've got, you know, the guys got a 357 or I can't remember, it's a 357, a.357 Magnum, but a very powerful hand gun. And so when the cops go in, we've got one cop that is shot, cops are shot, what in the chest in the arm and the neck and all the place. But they thought that the bad guy had shot the cop. But it looks like it was a friendly-fire incident where he was shot by one of his own. And then cops see a muzzle flash because this guy, they say this guy wakes up and said, no, knock warrants, all the sudden doors kicked in his dog shot and killed. And he responds with gunfire. And then it's like the okay, chaos, with rounds being fired in multiple directions. Now look, we have to go to a commercial break. You want to hear the rest of us stick with us to be right back.

Speaker 1 - Host / Advertisement Read: All right, let's talk about GunLearn at GunLearn.com and guys, there have there has been some new stuff going on with GunLearn. So pay attention, in case you haven't heard, now GunLearn for starters is the first and only company that offer a step by step program that takes you from your present and knowledge level, they become a safe, accurate and competent certified firearm specialist. Now here's the deal that certified firearm specialist. Now that is worth college credits because GunLearn.com, they have partnered with smarter degree in the university partners in order to get college attached to it. So even if you got it five years ago, and they've been doing this practice 1996, they've been teaching everything that Leo's which is law enforcement officers need to know about both firearms and ammunition to all factions of law enforcement. Now you can start the day with online training or you can sign up to a attend a live seminar. And if you have your own agency, you can even host a seminar for absolutely no cost. It's an amazing opportunity. You go to GunLearn.com to get more information, hook up with the founder, Dan O'Kellie. Again, that is GunLearn.com. Go there the day, you'll be very glad that you did. Welcome back. LEO Round Table at LEORoundTable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBlock and I'm your host for joined by Chief Ralph Reynolds all the way from California. We've been talking about a court ruling that a family cannot sue an officer with fired fatal shots in a Harding Street raid involving a and no-knock warrant. We had a cop that all that the warrant that ended up being a bad actor. He's currently serving a 60 year prison sentence and he's a former Houston police officer. We've got some other cops involved that were executing the warrant. And when we read that, the family surviving family, these two people, the male and female, that ended up getting killed, they're suing a cop that fired, I guess, a fatal shot. And the judge says, hey, he qualifies for qualified immunity because he didn't know that it was a bad warrant. But a lot of the sudden makes sense when they said that people were unarmed and they said that the woman was unarmed. But the article failed to say that the guy that she's with is got a 357, you know,.357-caliber revolver. Not sure if it was a Magnum or not. It doesn't really matter. He's firing at the police. So that's how all this stuff ends up happening. And I'm going to go and meet your mic real quick, you're cheap. But that's how all this stuff ends up happening. So the cops are they doing no-knock warrant, which is permissible in a lot of jurisdictions for what if you're law enforcement, there's obvious reasons why they're important for destruction of evidence and stuff you want to prevent. But they go in and kick in the door. And the it's the warrant is based off of bad information. So that's all we know, at least at this time. I don't know if these are good people, bad people that are in the house, but it's based off of a bad warrant. That's what landed the lead detective, you know, in jail on a 60 year sentence. And but one of the one of the people in the house has got a gun far into the police. So we know that some of the cops end up getting shot from the guy with the revolver. And then we know that they're returning fire and that the woman and the guy they both end up getting shot and killed. So it was a cluster, but it wasn't a cop rolling in there and shooting an unarmed woman on a couch. That's absolutely not what happened. And desPITe the way that was written by ABC 13 calm. So I want to make that perfectly clear. Chief Ralph, you want to take this one from here?

Speaker 2 - Guest: Yeah, you know, first of all, you know, this gun is the investigator. What was the sergeant's lieutenant's reviews of these warrants? Number one, what was the reviews and checks and balance of policy if you use the informant? You know, so that's that's number one. Number two, you know, as you well stated, a shooting takes place inside the interior between the husband title. I think his name was. Is that right? Chip, the husband who got who had a gun,.357 title, I think. Yeah. Yeah. So he shoots and then as you articulated earlier when you did more research, thank you. There's a friendly fire where, you know, officers at rounds are Goines off and maybe shot each other. Well, Gallegos goes in just think about this. He might have been on outer containment sees that he sees it. I'm only assuming here he goes running in. He sees this lady maybe grabbing a weapon. You know, he's thinking, he may already have two officers down. You know, he's trying to save his partners lives inside there. So, you know, you brought up a good point because part of that said that he they said that he changed the story. And there was an officer that was slumped over the couch that it got shot the couch that she's on. And he said he's so we're Goines for the officer's rifle that I think a sling over him. And he changed they said he changed his story from her grabbing the rifle to that she didn't actually touch it. But they didn't say whether he said that she was grabbing the sling and stood to the rifle. And all that stuff is very plausible explanations for all that stuff. Right. So.

Speaker 2 - Guest: Yeah, I say this to you because, you know, just I don't know the planning of how they plan. But I mean, I've been part of over thousands of search warrants. And you know, that is something that's got to be really truly drilled down about how you're going to serve the one in the entry team. And the people on the outside contained the back-end team on the three-four side and stuff like that. So I mean, you know, it's really strategic. And you know, officers that on maybe outside holding the front outside the building, not going into the entry team, I've been there with it goes, it goes, it could go shooting. You guess what? He's going to go run in there, try to help his partners. You know, and he sees what he believes is a threat to his partner who's down, maybe this lady grabbing the weapon. So, you know, it's, it's sad all around, but he does deserve qualified immunity. And I'm glad his attorney articulated that. And also, also, I think it's terrible that KTRK, station that lady who did the report, she never mentions any officers being shot. See, that's that's the problem about ethics. It's all about ethics about cops. Ethics about media. Yeah, it's about media. You know, and I'll tell you something, that's where that's where we'll lose it. That's why public loses confidence in law enforcement, not knowing the whole story of what transpire that day on, I forgot, on January 2019. I mean, it's just, or I think it was January 2019, you're correct. No, no, no, no, great. Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, hey, listen, narcotics warrants, as you know, Chip, and I know people watching this in law enforcement, those are tough warrants because we're trying to go in quickly to try to prevent destruction of evidence. No, but a toilet flushing going on. Even if you disconnect, even if you turn it off, water shut it down, you get you get you get a flush in, you know, but, but you can still, but you can, if you do it the right way, you can grab it before it gets too forward down the line. But yeah, but you know, I gotta say something though, this, this, this, you know, this has got 60 years. Yeah, I gotta be honest with you. If I bet it's not just for this case, after this case, there might have been previous case they look back into on guaranteed. Yeah. So the sad thing is that everybody ABC13.com, you know, now I just wonder people, they watch news sources and they take, they believe this gospel will come out of these people's mouths. And this one is Miya Shay as the reporter on this story at ABC13.com. It's just kind of sad. And this is, it just, it's just sad because people are believing this stuff and they're not going to vet the information. At least we knew there were enough flags in the, in the story that didn't make sense. And we said, we're going to look to this doesn't make any sense. Cup rolling in and shooting a, you know, innocent female unarmed, you know, and that was not the case, you know, so, um, yeah. I'm glad Gallegos is attorney. I think his name is Hardin, the way he articulated and also the, one of the judges saying, Hey, you know, we, how do we challenge the judgment and training of Gallegos, what he saw in seconds and how he has to respond to that? And I liked his attorney, what he said, he's, you know, oh, is that, you know, it's happened to here in Los Angeles, you know, it's happened in New York. My nephews have detected. They've removed qualified immunity. Well, we had a roll in and thanks, Chief. We got time for just barely for this one, two minutes. Rumble.com. This is better. Dash cam revealed, uh, after a release, after a inspector general found that using a PIT maneuver was not justified. The dashcam footage got behind it. The dashcam footage showed the pursuit continuing at high speed. So this makes me laugh. So this, I'll let you talk about the inspector general. I have some serious suspicions about him, but they're not going to prosecute the trooper. In Norwich, Connecticut, a Connecticut State Trooper, intentionally rammed a suspect's vehicle in Norwich the previous fall. This guy saying it's not justified in using that kind of force according to the state inspector general. So trooper Wilfred Blanchette used his cruiser to ram the speeding Honda Accord. The host joked about the speed attributed to the Honda Accord. It must have been a tailwind Goines downhill, but they saying it was speeding on November the 24th, 2025, according to the inspector general. His name is Robert Devlin. Remember the name. Now the inspector general said that no charges would be pursued, even though he said it wasn't justified. It happened on Route 2, Norwich. Look, this guy painted this car. It took three times to get the magic done, right? Even slammed to a guardrail, the dude drove out of it. I got to admit, other than not being impressed by the condition of the car he was driving, I was impressed with the driving ability, but authorities identified the occupants in the Accord as Jesus Santiago and Tylone Reddick. And trooper Blanchett said that Santiago was going between 89 miles per hour and swerving in and out of a lane downhill with a backwind. By the way, I just throw that in myself. As a result of the speeding, he believed he had probable cause to initiate a traffic stop. He activates his lights and siren and Santiago takes off trooper pursues. The pursuit reached approximately 120 miles per hour. That must have been a pretty big tailwind on Route 2. Another trooper deploys stop sticks. The dude keeps running. The car continued even after losing a wheel, reportedly still traveling roughly 70 to 80 miles per hour while the trooper attempted PIT maneuvers and all that stuff. The third attempt finally stopped the car. And he concludes the inspector general, the IG. I further conclude the use of deadly force was not legally justified under the totality of the circumstances. However, I've decided not to pursue criminal charges against the trooper, which I just, you know, whatever. We have only seconds left, so let us wrap this up for Chief Ralph.

Speaker 2 - Guest: Well, first of all, I love the trooper asking permission to the sergeant. Okay. So, so, so guess what? The reason he is not pursuing prosecution because this inspector general doesn't want to get the sergeant in trouble with the trooper. But I got to tell you, I review a lot of force. I thought, Hey, listen, that was not over the top use of force. Agreed. bona fide bad guy taking off. Again, how the how the Honda would they say 120 dude is that even possible. We got 14 seconds out. Chief Ralph. Thank you so much for being on the show. We appreciate it. Chief and a shout out to our sponsors, Galls.com. Don't forget discount code RADIO15. Comply Technologies.com. GunLearn.com, MyMedicare.live in Tobell's.com. We'll see you tomorrow. 12 noon Eastern. We'll see you tomorrow.