BRENHAM MAN ARRESTED ON INTOXICATION & WEAPONS CHARGES
(Washington Co. Jail)
A Brenham man faces several charges after his arrest Friday night.
Around 7 p.m., Officer Ashley Burns responded to the 1400 block of Wyandotte in reference to a suspicious person.
Upon arrival, she 47-year old James Patrick Bozeman of Brenham, who Burns says, appeared to be intoxicated.
Burns administered a field sobriety test, which she says Bozeman failed.
At the Washington County Jail, jailers discovered two box cutter knives in Bozeman’s pocket.
He is charged with Public Intoxication and Possession of a deadly weapon in a penal institution.
What’s your Reaction?
+1
+1
+1
I have known Patrick for 20 years. He likes his beer and is a harmless human being. He is a painter who uses masking tape for trim work so box cutters are essential to his job. He probably doesn’t consider them weapons. Please don’t make him into a criminal by adding these serious offenses to his record.
Our Public Safety Officers work in a “catch 22” job. “Darned if they do” and the person is harmless and “darned if they don’t” and the person is dangerous. The officers lives are on the line. Unfortunatley there is no Mayberry USA. There are good and bad officers as there are good and bad in all areas of life. The bad in all areas just get more media attention and public sensationalism.
I am behind our PD 100%. I am surprised a quick frisk before putting him in the patrol car didn’t uncover these tools.
Oh, there’s at least one ‘Mayberry’ still out there — my family lives there — but nobody tells outsiders about it. Haven’t had a murder in nearly 100 years, and the crime rate is nearly nonexistent. Nobody locks their homes or cars, and hardly anyone can remember where their house keys are. One law enforcement officer on duty during the day, and none at night. DWIs are nearly nonexistent, churches outnumber bars 10 to 1, and 99% of kids graduate on time and with excellent records, and typically all go on to do great things. It’s the most beautiful place I’ve ever lived, and the most boring. Mayberry does exist, but I’ll never tell you where it is.
This is what is called stacking charges so that if one gets dismissed them u ha e others that eventually he will get convicted of one. This is also what happens when u ha e a dept full of rookie officers a veteran officer who knows his job well would not do this (stack charges)!!!!!
two charges from 2 different people, 1 from the officer and the other from the jailor.
Just saying…cops typically don’t mess with public intoxication subjects if they can find a responsible, sober adult to take care of the intoxicated person. In fact, the public intoxication law is written in a manner so that the officer can release the intoxicated subject to a responsible adult to avoid having to take the subject to jail. Taking someone to jail for public intoxication is a last resort for the officer, and a safety measure for the intoxicated subject, because it takes up valuable time that the officer could be using for other proactive law enforcement. That said, and you can fuss at me all you want for saying this, the subject more than likely would have been released if A) there had been a responsible, sober adult whom agreed to take custody of the subject, or B) the subject had cooperated with the officer. Nine times out of ten, the intoxicated subject gets agitated and argumentative with the officer and talks his way right into a trip to jail. Drunks unusually don’t know when to shut up. Now, the officer missing two box cutters is a totally different story and greatly concerns me for the officer’s safety but we also don’t know where her was hiding the box cutters, either. And, he was given the opportunity to admit they were in his possession before entering the jail, so you can blame the cop all you want but ultimately, he made the decisions that led to his arrest that night and subsequent charge of bringing a weapon into a penal facility. I bet the charges stick.
The problem I have is that unless this guy pulled the box cutter and threatened the officer, I really don’t see a crime (i.e. intent, as Mrs. Clinton has stated, without intent there can be no crime, even if one was committed). If they were simply in his pocket and he was transported to the jail, he did nothing more than become publically intoxicated which as someone pointed out, is a VERY common occurrence in this county, (i.e. the reference to the fair below). There appears to be no real common sense being used here unless this arrest is truly about the revenue it can produce for this very minor offense. We as citizens have allowed our law enforcement to become to much about the revenue made through arrest and less about preventing and stopping crime. When are we going to learn? It is time we expect better from law enforcement.
A quick story, several years ago I had co-worker the sheriff’s dept. wanted to arrest (for a charge that did not stick), they called to confirm the employee was at work and was asked not to come to the facility, but instead allow the employee to turn themselves in (they agreed). The employee was driven to the jail by a manager and me. When we got there you should have seen how disappointed they (the deputies) were the employee did not drive themselves because they wanted to impound the employees car which would have made the arrest even more painful and expensive for what turned out to be an innocent person. The were actually angry the employee was driven to the jail and turned themselves in, thus avoiding an embarrassing arrest at work, an then a very expensive impounding of he car. Where is our sense of fairness and justice?
I am a strong supporter of law enforcement and appreciate what they do, but I think we have allowed their mission to become to focused on revenue, and we have not held them accountable when they behave in ways not becoming of the office they hold.
The DA can file the charge or not, it’s her call. Keep an eye out and see if he ever gets indicted or pleas guilty. If you don’t, pretty safe to assume she didn’t like the charge either and refused to pursue it.
More charges, more $, accurate or not. In this town, a prominent business person can be arrested, charged with a felony, and if they know the right people in the local judicial system, and have enough bucks, it just goes away. And if public intoxication is a crime in this town, then 20 percent of beer consumers at the local fairgrounds at 11 pm on Saturday night belong in jail. And if the officer determined the person can or cannot follow field sobriety tests instructions, then he should have been searched before arriving at jail. Additional training may be required here.
To GET REAL FOLKS and DB-Get all the information before you comment. Before entering the jail a person under arrest is asked a series of questions that are required by the Commission on Jail Standards. One of the questions is do you have a knife, box cutter, or anything else that can cut me. If the person states they have a knife, box cutter, etc., in the sally port which is outside the secure area the item is taken from them and no charges filed (unless the knife, etc., is illegal).
If the person fails to state they have a knife, box cutter, etc., or lies when they enter the secure area of the jail it becomes a crime. This crime is setout to protect the persons in the jail both law enforcement and inmates from having an offensive weapon taken into the secure jail. These charges were not trumped up, if the person had told the truth, or admitted to having a box cutter (which is not in itself illegal) then they would have not received the additional charge.
Just playing devil’s advocate here. I understand what the law says. But if someone is intoxicated enough to be arrested, how can you trust them to answer correctly at the jail. I guess that’s why we have judges.,to sort that out.
Voluntary intoxication is NEVER defense to any crime, at least not that I’ve heard of in Texas. If being drunk were a defense to a crime, I’m pretty sure everyone in the jail and in prison would claim (or would actually be) drunk at the time of the commission of the crime. Right?
That’s exactly my point. Well said sir.
An that is assuming that whoever was responsible to ask the questions you mention did it exactly as they were supposed to according to the law, maybe it is video recorded but you are assuming much in your statement. It seems much ado about nothing to me.
Oh so I guess the officer isn’t to blame for him bringing in box cutters? After he is in custody it’s the officer’s job to search him in the sally port or wherever he is. It’s 100% the officers fault that he wasn’t searched properly, who else is to blame? Wake up.
So if the officer didnt property search him and they found box cutters when he arrived to the jail, he gets charged? Smh
it’s not a crime to carry box cutters, its a crime to take them in the jail.
You know, I hate reading stuff like this. Possession of box cutter s not illegal (some jobs even require it) and he would not have been in a penal institution but for his arrest for public intoxication which by itself is a somewhat minor crime. That seems like a trumped up charge just to make it worse than the PI. Did he threaten the officers with the box cutters or did he simply have them in his pocket like the article states. If they were just in his pocket this is a ridiculous charge.
I know this guy , he does construction and painting. He will always have box cutters on or near him. I always see him walking in Brenham. Cut him some slack please.