Police Blotter

The Pickle strikes and suspicious smells persevere

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Lauren Spierings

More stories from Lauren Spierings

The Tator
September 18, 2019
Back to Article
Back to Article

Police Blotter

Photo by Submitted

Photo by Submitted

Photo by Submitted

Advertisement

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

Grunge in Governors

The campus police received a call from a Governors Hall resident assistant on Feb. 25 at about 7:39 p.m. regarding the smell of marijuana coming from a room. The resident assistant agreed to wait in the hall director’s office to meet with the two officers who responded.

Upon arriving, the two officers made contact with the resident assistant, who indicated which room she had detected the odor of marijuana coming from. The resident assistant said she had smelled around several other door frames in the area, but did not detect the smell of marijuana from any other doors.

The resident assistant stated she had detected the odor of marijuana about 10 minutes before the officers arrived at Governors. She agreed to wait near the hall director’s office as the officers investigated.

The officers went to the area of the complaint, at which they smelled several door frames within the immediate and surrounding area. However, upon smelling around the door frame that the resident assistant indicated, Officer 1 was able to detect a faint odor of marijuana along with an overwhelming smell of cologne. Officer 1 was also able to hear several voices within the room.

After knocking, a male subject answered the door to the room. After verbally identifying himself, Subject 1 said his roommate and his friend were also within the room. Subject 1 identified Subject 2 as his roommate and Subject 3 as a friend. Officer 1 asked for consent to enter the room, which both Subjects 1 and 2 granted the officers.

After entering, Officer 1 introduced himself and explained the reason for contact. Officer 1 noticed that Subject 1’s eyes were very red and bloodshot, and was also able to detect the smell of burnt marijuana within the room.

Subjects 1 and 2 both claimed they had not been smoking marijuana within the room. Subject 2 said he had recently been diverted regarding marijuana last semester and had been clean since. Subject 1 said he had been contacted by the police before regarding marijuana, which resulted in no enforcement action being taken against him.

Officer 1 asked if Subject 1 had been smoking marijuana outside, to which he responded affirmatively. Subject 1 stated he had smoked a little marijuana while walking along the 800 block of University Drive, near Chancellors Hall. He said he had smoked marijuana while walking to the roundabout, at which point he walked back to Governors. He also said he had been smoking marijuana with several friends, and Subject 2 was not present at the time.

Officer 1 asked how Subject 1 had been smoking the marijuana. Subject 1 replied that he had purchased a single joint off of a friend and he had smoked the entire joint while walking. He said he had no drug paraphernalia on him or in the room; however, he did not give the officers consent to search the room.

After that, Officer 1 asked Subject 2 if he had been smoking marijuana with Subject 1. Subject 2 said he had not smoked marijuana since he had been diverted. Subject 2 denied the officers consent to search his items within the room, as well.

Subject 3 said she had just walked into the room prior to the officers knocking on the door, which Subjects 1 and 2 confirmed. Officer 1 then advised Subject 3 to leave the scene and return after the investigation was complete. Subject 3 indicated her understanding and left the room.

Officer 2 conducted a records check on Subjects 1 and 2, which confirmed that both the subjects were valid with no wants, were not on probation and that neither had any previous drug-related offenses on their records.

Officer 1 completed an Eau Claire Law Enforcement Proxy form for Subject 1. Subject 1 scored a three, which is classified as a “medium risk” for reoffending. Officer 1 then told Subject 1 about the Eau Claire County Diversion Program, and Subject 1 said he wanted to participate. After Officer 1 read the agreement form verbatim to Subject 1, Subject 1 selected his class date and signed the form.

After asking if either of the two remaining subjects had any more question or concerns, the officers cleared from the room and met back up with the resident assistant in the Hall Director’s office. Officer 1 provided an update to the resident assistant, after which the two officers left the building.

Priory Pickle Passout

Two officers were dispatched to Priory Hall on Feb. 23 at about 6:10 p.m. to check on an intoxicated person. A caller had contacted the police because she was concerned about a male subject who had been drinking heavily that day and that she believed to be too intoxicated.

Officer 1 asked the caller why she thought this, to which she stated she had picked him up from Water St. and the subject had been throwing up — reportedly twice with his friends and once after she had picked him up.

The caller also said the subject was having difficulty walking. Officer 1 asked if the caller was still with the subject, which the caller was, and asked about the subject’s condition. The caller reported the subject was coherent, but she was still concerned. Officer 1 said he would arrive and check on the condition of the subject.

Once the officers arrived, they made contact with the caller and followed her to where the subject was laying. Officer 2 was able to wake up the subject and asked the subject about his day. The subject reported that he had been drinking at the Pickle since 8 a.m., and with prompting from Officer 2, the subject revealed that he could not remember how much he had to drink.

Officer 2 asked the subject a series of basic questions that he was able to answer accurately. Officer 1 obtained a preliminary breath test from the subject, with a .151 result. The officers did not believe the subject needed to receive a detox.

The subject said he would stay with the caller for the night, to which she agreed when the officers asked. After checking if the two had any questions, the officers left the scene.

Officer 1 performed a records check for both the caller and the subject, to which he found that neither had any wants and were not on probation.

Spierings can be reached at [email protected]

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email