Velvet Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 B.C. dad arrested after baby dials 911 from grow-opLast Updated: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 | 2:49 AM PT Comments108Recommend89The Canadian Press A B.C. man probably wishes he had given his 11-month-old son a set of keys to play with instead of a phone, after the infant accidentally dialed 911 and brought police to his dad's marijuana grow-op.Mounties say a 911 call came in from a residence in White Rock, B.C., on Friday morning, but whoever was on the other end of the line hung up.Officers arrived at the residence, and after numerous knocks on the door went unanswered, they entered the home."The gentleman was quite surprised," said White Rock RCMP Const. Janelle Canning.She said the 29-year-old man, startled by the sudden sight of police, insisted he hadn't made the call.When it was suggested a child might have dialled, the father objected and said his son was far too young.That's when police spotted the baby boy, phone in hand."We saw him playing with the cordless phone and just pressing all the buttons, so evidently he had called 911," Canning said.With that mystery solved, officers began inspecting the residence and soon discovered a 500-plant marijuana grow-op.The father was arrested and will appear in court in early April on charges of production of a controlled substance and mischief.The boy was removed from the home by the Ministry of Children and Family Development, though he was later released into his mother's custody.The mother does not live in the residence and had no idea what was going on at the home, Canning said.http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/01/21/police-call.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basher Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Stupid baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 baby narc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattm Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 (edited) I guess he should have been keeping track of his baby...and the phone. Edited January 21, 2009 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattm Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 (edited) The previous message was Steph posting as me. What I wonder about is:With that mystery solved, officers began inspecting the residence and soon discovered a 500-plant marijuana grow-op.Don't police need a search warrant to start searching the premises or is it different if there's been a 911 call (even one that was plainly and obviously the child, though in that statement, plainly might not mean factually and assumptions do make an arse our of U and Me...) Edited January 21, 2009 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afro poppa Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 I think you can also have probable cause, and they maybe smelled something or saw something which I am pretty sure is probable cause...Also calling the cops and letting them into your house maybe negates the search warrant thing....I dunno though that is all just a guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basher Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 The mystery wasn't solved, that's bad writing on the part of the reporter.A 911 call from a premises is probable cause to search the entire house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattm Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 A 911 call from a premises is probable cause to search the entire house.I kinda thought that but wanted someone else to say it as the phone could have been given to the child to make it LOOK like it was the fault of the child...I'm always paranoid of little Trey calling 911 since if he sees the phone, he immediately goes after it and I think it's designed that holding down 9 will dial 911... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal Johnson Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 The mystery wasn't solved, that's bad writing on the part of the reporter..The mystery of who called the cops was solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booche Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 The only way to catch a doper is when you yourself become a smoker. The surest way to make them bleed is when you bust their ass and steal their weed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phishtaper Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Isn't it simply obvious that if a 911 call comes from a residence by someone who was unable to speak into the phone for an unknown reason, it is prudent for the police to take a look around the place to make sure there isn't someone tied up in the basement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Isn't it simply obvious that if a 911 call comes from a residence by someone who was unable to speak into the phone for an unknown reason, it is prudent for the police to take a look around the place to make sure there isn't someone tied up in the basement? That's entirely obvious. But is it similarly obvious that the police should be able to lay charges (that have nothing to do with the reason 911 was called) as a result of what they see while they're looking around? (I'm not sure it is.)Aloha,Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoneMtn Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Of course it is. It is entirely dependent on the degree of the search, such that it wouldn't infringe Charter rights. It would be different if they searched someone's pockets or drawers, but if they look in each room to make sure people are okay, and then see a crime in progress, they are paid to lay charges. They are hired to charge people for committing crimes in the event that they have evidence of a crime obtained within Constitutional limits.Incidentally, what was the reason for the call? No one said anything on the other end. Does that mean they can't lay charges for anything?People need to be realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booche Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 People need to be realistic.Totally. I couldnt agree more. I would also use like to add people should try and always employ common sense. The cops did what they had to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now