mr wildes stated to officer craig that the city was going to put him on sick leave and mr wildes wanted to know if craig had any sick time... craig stated no he did not and mr wildes replied that craig should not worry that the city would take care of it...____________________________________
Wow. It is pretty specific in area departments policy on the use of sick leave. I dont see how this could be a justifiable use until after his trial and if found innocent and ordered to anger management classes and psych eval prior to return to full duty. I think it would be on the City's behalf and Officer Craig's, a fraudulent and misuse of earned sick time that the citizens of the City of Struthers has paid for through taxes.
June 29, 2010 at 7:49 a.m.
Craig’s wife told police that her husband had been drinking since 1 p.m. the previous day.
Arguments over family matters began during the day and, after 9 p.m., began to arise again, the report says.Craig’s wife left the house and went to a relative’s, where her husband contacted her on her cell phone and threatened to “put a bullet in [the relative’s] head,” the report says.
Eventually, her parents arrived, and her father told her to go to the police to get help in taking her three children out of the house, the report said.
-------------------------------------------------------------It appears in the report she left the kids with him even though he was drunk. She later went to the PD to get help in retrieving them @ 4.07am.-------------------------------------------------------------These poor kids are getting screwed all the way around. What mother would have left them with that kind of person and then with how he acted and later passed out drunk on his bed. These kids are going to need help.
June 20, 2010 at 4:36 p.m.
Ohio has it too. Most all states have this now.
June 19, 2010 at 2:51 p.m.
@shortIt says right in the story.
Four officers, including the canine officer, went with her to the house to remove the children.
Craig slept through their arrival, and the children were removed, the report says.
- now the D.V. affidavit should have been signed and the arrest should have taken place, all weapons should have been removed by a responsible party before the officers left. Instead they left the drunk sleeping. Oh I know that will be the new getaway for a suspect. "Officers did not arrest the suspect as the suspect was passed out drunk on his bed". What the he** is that?
P.S.sorry for the earlier post with the caps on. Doing some other work forgot that was left on.
June 19, 2010 at 7:49 a.m.
She came to the station. Sign the D.V. when she is there the first time like any other citizen. Not pull an uh-oh and call her down hours later to sign the d.v. papers. "Everything has an order that it must be handled in to protect everyone involved. " . I don't believe police do everything wrong. I think some higher up the food chain caught this and corrected the officer in charge's mishandling. Thats all I have to say as I dont want to come off as bashing the police. It was just this initial contact probably should have been handled differently.
June 18, 2010 at 5:06 p.m.
I'll retract the agg.menacing comment and say that on that part of the threat he would have been in violation of violation of division (C) of the D.V. section which is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. All of this evidence of violence. If he was intoxicated and these D.V. threats I'm not sure why they wouldn't have taken him into custody that night so he wouldn't hurt someone or himself. Why did the arrest come later. Just very puzzling. Sounds like someone is covering their backside on what should have been done when the kids were removed.
June 18, 2010 at 4 p.m.
I believe that the revised code does not cover under d.v. extended family members that do not live together. This would be the agg.menacing charge for any extended family that does not live with the person.
June 18, 2010 at 3:47 p.m.
LIFES2SHORT THE POLICE WERE AT HER HOUSE THE NIGHT BEFORE IS THE POINT. WHY WHAT WAS REPORTED THE NEXT DAY WAS AFTER HIS WIFE WAS CALLED AND ASKED TO COME DOWN TO THE PD. THERE IS MORE TO THIS THAN MEETS THE EYE.
June 18, 2010 at 3:43 p.m.
So my question is who were the officers that responded to this call the night before when all of this allegedly took place. And why didnt they place him under arrest at that time. State law says they should have additionally with agg.menacing charges of a threat to shoot someone.
June 18, 2010 at 9:54 a.m.
What was left out was the fact that Struthers Police had responded to their house the night before.
June 18, 2010 at 9:48 a.m.