INDIANAPOLIS – The Indianapolis senior provincial prosecutor said Monday that his office never wanted to pass a law that could stop Brandon Hole from buying two firearms before he shot dead eight people in a FedEx warehouse last week.
In a news conference, Marion County prosecutor Ryan Mears said his office decided last year not to use Indiana’s so-called red flag law, despite warnings from Mr. Hole’s mother over the mental instability of her son, the police led a shotgun from him.
The strict deadlines and restrictions on the collection of evidence built into the state’s 16-year statute have given prosecutors too little time to address a convincing case before a judge, Mr. Mears said. He added that the loss could fall back in court.
“If we continue the process, and we lose, you guess what happens: that firearm goes back to that person,” he said. “We were not prepared to take it.”
The tragedy of the mass shooting last week, and the questions about missed opportunities in the months leading up to it, highlighted some shortcomings in the red flag laws, which have been passed in more than a dozen states, which are one of the little arms control were measures to which both political parties could agree.
Under such laws, the authorities can take weapons from people who are considered by a judge to be a danger to themselves or others, and can prevent those people from buying guns for a period of time. As mnr. Hole was subjected to such determination after his mother contacted the authorities in March 2020, he would not be able to legally buy two rifles, a Ruger AR-556 and an HM Defense HM15F, a few months later – the semi-automatic weapons he would shoot at the workers in a packing warehouse on Thursday night before fatally shooting himself.
But just as effective as the laws of the red flag can be in certain respects, such as the prevention of gun killings, the new revelations on the handling of the case of Mr. Hole last year that the laws may fall short of preventing the most heinous acts of gun violence.
“I think people hear ‘red flag’ and they think it’s the panacea for all these issues,” he said. Mears said at the news conference. “It is not. What it is is a good start,” he said, adding that due to a number of loopholes in the practical application of this law, the authorities “do not always” have the necessary tools to make the most informed decisions. to take. ”
In the case of mr. Hole considers prosecutors his immediate mental health crisis – his mother told them he spoke out to kill himself – as the priority, and after his gun was taken away, they regarded the crisis as averted. Research has shown that laws on red flags prevent gun killings, and some of those who have studied gun violence say that suicide prevention should be considered the primary purpose of such laws.
Kendra Parris, a Florida attorney who fought against the protection of risk orders, as legally described by red flag laws, said law enforcement had little success in predicting who was capable of mass violence. .
“The idea that we are going to rectify this with state-level RPOs,” she said. Parris said, “it strikes me as foolishness.”
Even when authorities or individuals went to court to stop someone from holding or acquiring weapons, the attempts were not always successful. In some cases, the courts have denied their petitions. In other cases where authorities initially received restrictions, the targets later regained their ability to possess weapons during follow-up hearings. One man in the Seattle area who wrote violent messages online – one of them was “Kill All Women” – got his guns back after arguing in front of a judge that the messages were jokes.
Jeffrey Swanson, a professor of psychiatry at Duke University School of Medicine who has researched risk protection legislation in various states, said Indiana’s version is not an example of a star, and it is affected by which he regards as shortcomings in the right process and effectiveness. But he stressed that any law should be part of a larger legal framework needed to prevent gun violence.
People say, ‘Well, what is the only thing you need to do to stop gun violence? ‘, He said. “Well, it’s not a one-thing problem, nor is it a one-thing solution. In our country it is a whole puzzle with many different legal instruments that can work together. ‘
Indiana’s red flag law, named after Timothy Laird, an officer known as Jake, who was killed in duty in 2004, is one of the oldest such laws in the country. Under the law, a person is considered dangerous if he or she poses “an imminent risk” to yourself or others, or poses a more general risk, but meets certain other criteria, including non-medical mental illness or a documented tendency to violence.
Mears said his office has filed eight petitions on Laird lawsuits this year; everyone is still hanging. Indianapolis police said Monday they recovered 191 rifles last year through Laird cases.
Law enforcers heard from Mr. Hole on March 3, 2020 when his mother and sister arrived at the police station according to a police call. The mother told officers that her son had suicidal thoughts and would possibly “attempt to commit suicide by a police officer,” said Randal Taylor, Indianapolis police chief. Several officers came to her house and Mr. Hole taken to a hospital for temporary mental health.
According to Mr. Mears is mr. Hole’s hospital stay “measured in hours and not days” and “no follow-up medication is prescribed.”
If he had been involuntarily committed after a trial according to the order of a judge, he would have had a firearm under federal law.
Dr. Swanson said nearly two dozen states have laws that automatically impose temporary arms restrictions, even after shorter mental health commitments. These kinds of statutes – rather than the more well-known red flag laws, which usually require a full court hearing and a court order – could possibly be a more useful tool to Mr. To prevent holes from buying more guns, he said. It is not entirely clear whether this type of legislation in the case of Mr. Hole would not apply, but Indiana does not have such a law anyway.
Along with taking mr. Hole to the hospital, Indianapolis police seized a gun he had recently purchased. The gun was never returned; Mears said the family agreed to forfeit it.
As Mr. Mears explained it, with the grip of the gun, “we have already reached our goal.”
Mears noted several challenges that a filing under the state’s red flag law would pose if prosecutors chose to stand trial. Most important among them were the short, 14-day prosecutors who had to submit a petition and the limited investigative tools at their disposal. Although it may take months for a judge to give a final verdict on a petition with red flags, the law orders the court to try a weapons trial within 14 days of the seizure.
“We would have liked the opportunity to sue his medical records,” he said as part of what would be needed to make a ‘clear and convincing’ case. In these types of proceedings, the warrants were not permitted under Indiana law. And there is a window of 30 days to comply with a subpoena. “We have a 14-day time window,” he said. “And we just did not have the time to do that.”
According to him, the police would return the shotgun they seized, although the family voluntarily forfeited it.
Bradley Keffer, an Indianapolis lawyer who has handled red flag cases – called Laird hearings in Indiana – said prosecutors’ decision in this case is understandable.
“Most of Laird’s hearings usually come from the natural interaction of law enforcers with an armed member of the public,” he said. Police may encounter people who were involved in domestic violence or who threatened themselves or others. In that case, the authorities already have the most important evidence – the danger of danger – for a trial in Laird.
But the case of Mr. Hole was apparently led alone by the concerns of his family. Chief Taylor said it was her, not Mr. Hole not, what the police told of his suicidal thoughts, and that the officers responding to it ‘feel that she is credible enough’ to act immediately. In police records it appears that Mr. Hole completes his suicide goals. The proof of a judge that Hole poses a serious risk in the future would have been difficult, Mr. Keffer said. “There’s a lot to overcome,” he said.
There were other parts of the law that Mr. Mears described as loopholes, although not in the case of Mr. Hole did not apply. In 2018, prosecutors filed a Laird request after police seized a woman’s gun. While her case was being brought before a judge, she legally bought another gun and shot her neighbor.
Finally, Mr. Mears said the law needs to be ‘improved’ before it can be a truly effective tool against gun violence. “I think it’s a good start,” he said, “but it’s far from perfect.”
Mike Baker contribution made.