Police Blotter

Drunken futon defilement and odor leads to drug diversion

Lea Kopke

More stories from Lea Kopke


Photo by Submitted

The following information was obtained from UW-Eau Claire Police Department records.

Drunken futon defilement

At 12:28 a.m. on Oct 18 a campus officer was dispatched to Sutherland Hall to handle a case of a subject who had entered another resident’s room and urinated on several items. The officer was assisted by another campus officer.

Upon arrival, the officer met with a Sutherland resident assistant and the residents of the fouled room. Resident 1 told the officer that at approximately 12:15 a.m. he was awoken to the sound of something “water-like” hitting the floor. He then sat up from his lofted bed, still somewhat asleep, and noticed a shirtless male subject urinating on Resident 2’s black futon.

Resident 1 told the officer he said “excuse me” to the subject, who then incoherently mumbled about being lost and left the room. The resident recognized the subject as they lived on the same floor.

When asked about how the subject got into the room, Resident 1 responded the lock to his room sometimes opened without the combination being entered. He had not reported this issue.

The officer then spoke with Resident 2, who said he was awoken by his roommate talking to the subject. Resident 2 was unable to determine what was said between the two as he was still somewhat asleep.

After the subject left the room, with the door still open, Resident 2 noticed a large wet mark on his futon. Upon further questioning, the officer was told the futon cost approximately $200, the three pillows and pillowcases $75, and the rug beneath the futon $250. Resident 2 decided not to pursue criminal damage charges in regards to the aforementioned items as he wanted to work out covering the cost with the subject civilly in the morning.

After speaking with both the residents, both officers went to the subject’s room to attempt to get in contact with him. His roommate answered the door and told the officer the subject was sleeping. The officer asked him to wake the subject. Once he was awake, the roommate was unable to convince the subject to come down from his loft bed. Upon receiving consent to enter the room from both residents, the officers entered.

The officer observed the subject to be laying on his stomach in his lofted bed without a shirt on. His appearance matched the description given by Resident 1. The officer explained his reason for contact, and in doing so observed that the subject would not move or look at him when he spoke.

After the subject got down from his bed, the officer noticed his eyes were red and glossy and he smelled of alcoholic beverages. Upon questioning, the subject told the officer he consumed “hard liquor” on the third floor but could not remember exactly where he was or how much alcohol he had consumed.

The officer explained to the subject that he was seen urinating all over a futon in another resident’s room. The subject could not recall doing so, but stated it “could have been possible.” The subject requested to go apologize to the residents of the room several times. The officer recommended he wait until morning due to his intoxication level.

The subject then consented to a preliminary breath test, but after three times was unable to successfully gain a reading as he failed to follow the instructions the officer had given.

The officer then conducted a records check on the subject through The Communication Center and found the subject was without wants. The officer told the subject he would be citing him $263.50 for Underage Drinking (first offense) and $295.00 for Disorderly Conduct, both with non-mandatory court dates. The officer also advised the subject that he was eligible for the Eau Claire County Alcohol Offender program.

The subject again mentioned wanting to go to the other residents’ room to apologize and offer to pay for the damages. He stated he did not have any questions for the officers, so they cleared the room.

The officer then made contact with the residents of the soiled room and explained to them that the subject wanted to meet with them in the morning, The residents also confirmed they felt the officer’s enforcement action was appropriate.

Before leaving the residence hall, the officers then made contact with the Sutherland Hall Director and provided her with details regarding the case. She told the officers she would complete a work order for the malfunctioning lock, which would be fixed in the morning, and follow up with the subject regarding his behavior.

Odor leads to drug diversion

At 8:43 p.m. on Oct 20 a campus officer was dispatched to Putnam Hall for a complaint regarding the smell of marijuana on the second floor.

Upon entering the building, the officer spoke with a Resident Assistant who stated the resident who complained about the odor saw two female subjects enter a dorm room laughing. The RA checked the area and also noticed the scent of marijuana but did not determine which room it was coming from.

The officer went to the second floor and checked the area. He could smell a strong odor of marijuana near the door the resident had mentioned and could not detect the odor coming from any other rooms in the area. Inside that room he could hear two people laughing and coughing

After knocking on the door, a female subject answered. The officer identified himself and asked for consent to enter the room and speak with her. The subject consented and the officer identified a second person in the room. The first subject stated her roommate was not currently present.

The officer could smell a strong odor of marijuana in the room and it was hazy. He explained to the subjects he had received a complaint about the odor of marijuana near the room. He told them he had stood outside several for several minutes and it sounded like they were smoking in the room. The first subject admitted to that being true.

The officer asked the subject if they had any marijuana or other items in the room. The subject retrieved a glass pipe and a bag of marijuana. The officer took possession of the items, along with a black grinder he saw atop the subject’s desk. After asking for consent to search the subject’s portion of the room, the officer searched but did not locate any other items.

The officer learned from the Communication Center that both subjects were without wants. The officer explained the Eau Claire County diversion program to the first subject, who agreed to participate and signed up for a date.

The officer answered the subject’s remaining questions and then cleared the scene.

Kopke can be reached at [email protected]