Police reports
Continued from page 7
resident in their room over night, and he had grabbed their last few cigarettes. The complaint said they had been heavily medicated from a recent surgery and were pretty loopy, but knew the male resident was the culprit. The complainant wasn’t too concerned about the stolen cigarettes and was mainly upset about the male resident taking their things. They asked that the officer talk with him about it.
The officer met with the male resident, who stated he did go into complainant’s room the night prior and asked them for their last two cigarettes. The other resident woke up and told him they were in the coat pocket. The male resident claimed he had permission and thought the complainant was possibly retaliating against him due to him declining their sexual advances. The officer advised him to avoid contact with the other resident and no longer go into their room. The male resident stated he would not do that anymore.
■ ■ Jan. 31 - An officer received a call from an individual regarding their ex’s refusal to participate in their scheduled child custody exchange. The complainant said the ex was supposed to meet them at the Marshfield Police Department, but had not shown. The complainant had texted the ex earlier in the day, and said that they would pick the kids up from school to save the ex a drive. The complainant called the school to inform them of their intentions and the ex did not respond to their message. The complainant later found out that the ex had picked the kids up just prior to school letting out.
The complainant was bothered by the ex not following the court order and asked what could be done. The officer advised it would be something they would have to take to family court. The complainant stated they had just filed paperwork with the court earlier that day about the ex violating the order.
The complainant stated they were not sure where they should be reporting the incident, as the exchange was supposed to occur in the Marshfield PD parking lot. The officer advised that incidents like this were typically reported in the jurisdiction the exchange is supposed to take place. The officer told the individual that since they already told the CAPD about the incident, the officer would type up the report and send it to Marshfield PD. The officer advised the individual to notify the local PD there in the future for issues concerning this specific matter.
■ ■ Feb. 1 - An officer received a complaint from someone in Abbotsford who witnessed a male subject exit his vehicle and urinate outside. The witness had video and pictures of the behavior if needed, and noted that children play near that area. The officer ran the license plate provided by the witness and found that the registered owner was on probation for drunk driving causing injury and had a warrant for failure to appear through Waupaca County.
The officer located the vehicle parked where it had been reported, and observed two males inside, with three cases of beer opened in the back seats. The officer met with the male in the driver’s seat, later identified as the owner, and the passenger. The officer explained the reason for the contact and asked if either of them had urinated outside the vehicle. Both males denied the act. The officer told them there was a witness with video of one of them peeing outside. The owner then admitted he had been the one that urinated outside.
The officer asked the male in the driver’s seat for his identifying information. He stated he did not have any form of ID on him, and wrote down a false ID. The passenger provided his accurate information. The officer checked the name written down by the driver, and it did not come back on file. The officer looked at the photo listed under the owner’s probation, and it appeared similar to the male in the driver’s seat. The officer requested a Clark County deputy identify the male with his fingerprints and asked dispatch for a booking photo for the owner.
While waiting for the requested information, the officer spoke with the witness, who provided a picture of the male urinating. It showed the passenger as being the suspect. The officer asked if the driver had gotten out to do the same. The witness stated they only observed the passenger do so. The officer then went back and issued a citation for urinating in public to the passenger, who admitted he had urinated outside the vehicle.
The officer then told the male in the driver’s seat they suspected he was lying about his name. The officer asked if he would tell them his real name. The male maintained his name was what he had written down. The officer received the booking photo, the subject of which appeared to be the same individual as the male in the driver’s seat. The Clark County deputy arrived and took the male’s fingerprints, which were a match to the prints on file for the owner.
The officer informed the owner of the warrant and placed him under arrest. The owner stated he knew he missed a court date and had attempted to call, but did not receive any calls back. The owner consented to a preliminary breath test, the result of which was 0.096. The officer called probation and parole to inform them of the incident. They advised that they would be placing a hold on the owner. The suspect was transported to the Clark County Jail. The officer requested a charge of obstruction.
