Bibb County Sheriff’s Office deputies responding to a disturbance call found a 2-year-old boy and 4-year-old girl with injuries.
The sheriff’s office said it got a call from a witness who reported that children at a residence in Del Park were “in danger.” After responding to the home, deputies found a 2-year-old boy and 4-year-old girl with injuries.
“Paramedics responded to the scene and transported the children to a medical facility for treatment,” the sheriff’s office said Friday. “According to medical staff, the two-year-old male is listed in stable but critical condition. The four-year-old female is listed in stable condition.”
Deputies arrested the children’s 30-year-old father. He was taken to the Bibb County Law Enforcement Center and charged with aggravated battery, aggravated assault, two counts of cruelty to children, battery and terroristic threatening. He was being held without bond Friday.
Informer Tips
Usually, accuracy is the focus in criminal cases (accurate tests, accurate testimony, etc.). Informer tips are different. To a Marietta criminal defense lawyer, tip reliability is all that matters. Informer tips come in all shapes and sizes, but they usually fall into one of three categories.
Anonymous Tips
We’ll spend the most time on these kinds of tips because they’re very common in criminal cases, and very controversial.
For many years, as far as most courts were concerned, anonymous tips were presumptively unreliable. Most judges wouldn’t even consider them without some independent corroborating evidence.
A Marietta criminal defense lawyer cannot cross-examine an anonymous tipster under oath, to help the jury assess the witness’ credibility. More importantly, anonymous witnesses may violate the Sixth Amendment (“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right. . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him”).
However, no one wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater. A few anonymous tips are reliable, according to the Supreme Court’s four-point anonymous tip reliability grading system:
- The anonymous caller personally saw the incident,
- The call immediately followed the incident,
- The call came through a 911 system, which tracks caller identification and other data to deter false reports, and
- The caller described an ongoing and dangerous crime.
How does the anonymous tip in the above story measure up to this standard? Severe child abuse is certainly a dangerous crime, and we’ll assume the narc called 911. But the other two prongs are questionable at best.
Confidential Informer
CIs are paid informers. Typical examples include jailhouse informers, lower-level conspirators who provide higher-level names, undercover officers, and professional witnesses who infiltrate criminal organizations.
Reliability is usually an issue in these situations. Many people will say almost anything for love or money. Jailhouse informers and turncoat co-conspirators often furnish information for selfish reasons, so they tell officers what they think they want to hear. Undercover police officers often have a similar motivation. Paid informers often receive significant sums of money.
Officer-Provided
These tips are on the opposite end of the scale from anonymous tips. Officers always give their names and they’re always, or at least almost always, available for cross-examination.
The virtual speed trap may be the best example of an officer-provided tip. Officer A sees a speeder and radios a description to Officer B. Officer B pulls over the vehicle even if Officer B didn’t witness a traffic or other offense.
A Marietta criminal defense lawyer can still challenge an officer’s credibility. Back in the day, these attacks where always a waste of time and often counterproductive, because most people held police officers in such high esteem. The environment is different now. Police officers had a 28 percent favorable rating in a July 2024 poll. The really bad news, unless you’re a criminal defense lawyer, is that this abysmal rate was higher than the 2023 figure.
Warrantless Entry
The above story also highlights another common issue in criminal cases, which is a warrantless intrusion. That intrusion could be walking into a house, unzipping a backpack, or scrolling through a phone.
Under the Fourth Amendment, officers must obtain search warrants prior to such intrusions, unless a listed exception applies.
The exigent circumstances exception usually covers child abuse and other such possible emergencies, like gas leaks. If police officers reasonably believe someone is in danger, they may enter property without a warrant and perform a safety check. The same principle applies to a suspicious backpack or a suspicious parked car.
Any search must be as narrow as possible. Officers can sweep through the area but they cannot look in every nook and cranny. Furthermore, if they’re checking on people, they cannot open cabinets and drawers.
Consent, which is a voluntary act, may be the most common search warrant exception. Consent is usually not 100 percent voluntary or 100 percent involuntary.
Assume Officer Brown wants to search Maria’s purse. She initially refuses. After Officer Brown bullies her (if you don’t agree I’ll get a warrant or take you downtown), she agrees. Her consent was not purely voluntary, and Officer Brown’s bullying may or may not have crossed the line.
Incidentally, don’t fall for these two common enticements. If Officer Brown had probable cause to get a warrant, he wouldn’t ask for consent. The arrest threat is an empty threat as well. Furthermore, if Officer Brown accosts Maria in this matter, he’ll almost certainly arrest her, no matter what he finds, or doesn’t find, in her purse.
Civil/Criminal Crossover Cases
We touch on this point a lot because it’s very common in these matters as well. Severe child abuse is a felony in criminal court. Battery of a child could also have consequences in juvenile and family court.
In severe cases, authorities often launch removal proceedings. A judge will remove a child if there’s clear and convincing evidence that the child is in danger.
Clear and convincing is a standard of proof between more likely than not (civil court) and beyond a reasonable doubt (criminal court). Significantly, there’s also a difference between “is” and “was” in danger.
If possible, authorities often place children with relatives until their parents complete parenting programs and jump through other hoops.
Battery of a child could affect a current or future divorce or other family law case. In a current case, severe battery is probably a custody dealbreaker. In fact, the judge might sharply limit visitation as well. In a future case, battery isn’t a dealbreaker, but it is a big black mark.
Possible child abuse is not just a family dispute. For a free consultation with an experienced Marietta criminal defense lawyer, contact The Phillips Law Firm, LLC. We routinely handle matters in Cobb County and nearby jurisdictions.
