Snack attack
ASPEN PARK – Munchie slouched into the mini-mart on the morning of Jan. 19 and tossed a bag of chips on the counter in front of Clerk. Efficiently ringing up the salty snack, Clerk asked if Munchie “needs anything else?” Munchie apparently missed the question, and he certainly missed the helpful spirit in which it was posed. “I can’t hear anything you say over that (funky) music!” Munchie complained. When Clerk told Munchie that there was no call for “that type of language,” Munchie tried his hand at non-verbal communication, driving his fist through Clerk’s protective plexiglass shield and storming out without his chips. Clerk reported the intemperate transaction to JCSO, telling deputies that he didn’t want to press charges, but did want the incident documented.
It’s complicated
CONIFER – Tom said he’d asked his ex-wife, Katie, to leave after she started getting on him about his dating habits, but she’d refused to go. Katie said she and Tom “shouldn’t have been divorced in the first place, but that’s a long story,” and that Tom has been helping her study for her Real Estate exam for the last three weeks. Sometimes those late-night tutorials end with a pop-quiz in biology, wink-wink, and that the argument wasn’t really all that bad, and that Tom had only asked her to leave once before calling the cops, and that anyway she had a contract. While the bulk of Katie’s recitation may have been interesting in a biographical sense, it was the referenced contract that caught the officers’ attention. Continuing, Katie explained that the iron-clad divorce contract she and Tom both signed provided for both to possess keys to the other’s residence, which meant she had a legal right to remain. Given that information, plus the fact that Katie’s name was still on Tom’s lease and that a lot of her stuff was still there, deputies determined that she was not trespassing. They also determined that somebody should probably leave before things got … er … complicated. Katie grudgingly departed for the evening and took her key with her.
The bigger man
EL RANCHO – Deputies had been to the address so often they probably could’ve driven there in their sleep. And they’d heard so many complaints from the feuding neighbors, they probably could’ve written their report of Jan. 22 without bothering to drive out there at all. According to Hatfield’s latest beef, somebody had removed a bunch of “No Trespassing” signs from the fence separating his and McCoy’s properties, and stolen “three colorful flags” that had very recently waved above that disputed frontier. Hatfield had little doubt who was behind the thefts, and deputies couldn’t help but share his suspicions. Contacted for comment, McCoy freely admitted stealing the signs and filching the flags, explaining that the fence was “shared” and he “didn’t want to look at them anymore.” McCoy also objected to Hatfield’s sign reading “Trespassers Will Be Shot, Survivors Will Be Shot Again” because he feared it would discourage his children from playing outdoors. Lastly, McCoy told the officers that he fully intended to “drop” the missing materials “near the property line” at his first opportunity. Informed of McCoy’s confession, Hatfield vowed to press charges. Beginning to lose patience, deputies asked Hatfield exactly how long he intended to keep stoking his petty and unproductive war with McCoy. Hearing it put that way, Hatfield agreed that endless backyard bickering was getting him nowhere and withdrew the complaint. Henceforth, he assured officers, he would stop dialing 911 and start conducting hostilities in the more dignified setting of civil court.
No flag on the play
EVERGREEN – Summoned to referee a family dispute, deputies learned that Dad and Daughter had been arguing. Pushed back to her own 20 with the clock running out on a fourth down and fresh out of timeouts, Daughter attempted a bold “Hail Mary” gambit, hurling a 19-inch Toshiba flat-screen through a six-panel hollow-core door. Dad said he didn’t want Daughter charged with a crime, but would like the officers to explain to her why acting out in that fashion is “inappropriate.” The deputies detailed “the implications of these actions and what affect criminal charges could have on her future.” Satisfied with the lesson, Dad said he’d take the cost of a new TV and door out of Daughter’s anticipated “cheerleading expenses.”